Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 6 Nov 2008

Vol. 191 No. 18

Adjournment Matters.

Residency Permits.

Recent cases concerning delays in the processing of long-term residency permit applications have been brought to my attention. In one case, a girl from my area has been six years resident in Ireland which allows her to apply for a long-term residency permit. When she made her application, she was informed it would take two years to process. It is unacceptable that a person, as in this case, who has given a long-term commitment to the country and has resided in it for the 60 months necessary must then wait a further 24 months before her application is processed. It is unfair and unjust.

If the Government wants to be a little more fair, it could allow applicants to apply after three years of residency in order that the application could be processed in a timely manner. I urge the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to take whatever measures are necessary to ensure the backlog in this area is addressed as soon as possible. I assume it is down to a lack of manpower in the Department to deal with these applications. I hope whatever changes to staffing arrangements are needed will be made.

Those who have made the application legitimately and meet the criteria as laid down by the Department should have their applications for long-term residency permits dealt with in a speedy manner. After asking people to put their lives on hold for five years and be resident in the country in order to be eligible for a residency permit, it is unfair to ask them to do so for a further two years while their applications are being processed. This is disgraceful. It appears to come down to just the matter of resources. While I accept resources are scarce at this time, we are dealing with people's lives, not just the applicants but their friends, loved ones and families. Will the Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, inform the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform of the frustrations I, and many people in the process, are experiencing with the administrative backlog?

I am replying on behalf of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform who is otherwise occupied.

The current long-term residence scheme operates on an administrative basis. However, one of the most important proposals in the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2008 is the introduction of a new, enhanced and statutory long-term resident status. This status will be available to those who have completed at least five years satisfactory residence in the State and can meet certain conditions. These include the requirement the foreign national be of good character, tax compliant, can demonstrate a reasonable competence in the Irish or English language, has made reasonable efforts to integrate and has been supporting him or herself and any dependants without recourse to publicly-funded services.

The Bill also provides a mechanism for a fast track to long-term residence in certain circumstances. It is intended green card holders will be able to apply for long-term residence after two years, by any standards a very generous approach. Long-term resident status will confer rights that approach those of Irish nationals and bring with it access, for the foreign national and his or her qualifying dependants, to the employment market and State-funded services and benefits. The benefits enjoyed by holders of this status are an acknowledgement that, over time, those who migrate to Ireland contribute increasingly to society and to the economy and have earned this status and the stability it brings.

Long-term residency, as an administrative scheme, was introduced in May 2004. It is focused on persons who have been legally resident in the State for more than five years on the basis of work permit, work authorisation or work visa conditions. Such persons may apply to the immigration division of the Department for a five-year residency extension. In that context they may also apply to be exempt from employment permit requirements. The dependants of the aforementioned, who have been legally resident in the State for more than five years, may also apply for long-term residency. However, this long-term permission does not grant an exemption from employment permit requirements to any such dependants. Time spent in the State on student conditions cannot be counted towards long-term residency.

While applications for long-term residency are under consideration, the person concerned should ensure his or her permission to remain in the State is kept up to date. During processing, each application is examined to verify the applicant meets the residency criteria. Should an applicant meet this criteria, a character reference check is then carried out with the Garda Síochána to ascertain if the applicant can be deemed to be of good character. There also may be circumstances in individual cases which require a greater level of investigation than other cases.

The applications received by the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service are diverse in nature. Processing times vary considerably according to the nature and circumstances of the scheme in question. In all instances, processing arrangements are kept under ongoing review and steps are taken to reduce waiting times where this is feasible, having regard to available resources and overall priorities. I understand the Department is currently processing applications received in January 2007. This is primarily due to the significant increase in the volume of applications received in recent years.

INIS has allocated some additional resources to the processing of applications for long-term residency and, having regard to the many demands on the service, will keep the resource allocation under review. INIS has taken this step with a view to providing an improved customer service to applicants for long-term residency and, incrementally, an improvement in processing times. I am advised that there are no plans to offer an amnesty to existing applicants for long-term residency.

I understand from cases in my own constituency that there are delays such as this. Yet the number of staff in the Department has probably increased significantly in recent years. Many of them are working on asylum-related cases and perhaps when one section is less busy than another some people might be moved across. Some applicants might end up not qualifying because their initial years here were as students or they did not have qualifying years here. It can be frustrating. It is not a simple process; there is a lot of paperwork involved and it takes time and resources. I presume the Deputy has raised the particular case with the Department directly.

The specific case, yes. I thank the Minister of State for his response, which does not contain much by way of good news for me. In the specific instance to which I refer the person has waited for more than five years and is now being told the application will take at least two more years to process, which is unacceptable in this day and age. That is why I raised the issue on the Adjournment. I note the Minister's last sentence. I raised the idea of an amnesty for people in the system who meet the criteria. It is my understanding that the previous Minister was actively considering the idea of an amnesty for people who qualified. Obviously it would not work across the board but there could be an amnesty for people who met the criteria. The current Minister seems to have rejected the notion of an amnesty, based on what the Minister of State has said here. I would appreciate if the Minister of State would bring my concerns to the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern.

There might be some argument there about what is an amnesty.

The Senator stated that the previous Minister said he might provide an amnesty for people who qualified.

It was being considered at least.

However, by the time one has established that an applicant is qualified one probably has done 99% of the work. It might be just a play on words.

Support Services Grants.

I wish to share my time with Senator Ross.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, and thank the Cathaoirleach for allowing me to raise this matter regarding the budget cuts that will affect Protestant schools. As the Minister of State knows, many of our Protestant secondary schools are rural voluntary schools. I am talking about schools such as Bandon Grammar School and Midleton College in Cork. These have been specifically targeted by the mid-year withdrawal of the support services grant, which amounts to a smash-and-grab raid on our schools and their resources. Twenty-one schools are affected nationally by this cut of about €2.8 million, which is not an major amount in the overall budget of the Department.

When free education was introduced in 1968, the Government agreed that schools such as those I mentioned would not be included in the free scheme. This special grant was in recognition of the fact that we as a State could not provide an appropriate education for people of the Protestant faith, particularly as these children were few in number and the Protestant community was dispersed. It is important that we allow all children to be educated under an ethos of their choosing. This sum of €2.8 million annually is not a major amount in the overall scheme. Many of the schools are fee-paying and the grant is used as a step-up support grant to families who in some cases are unable to pay.

We are at a crossroads with these schools. Many of them will close. What will be the response of the State in this case? Will the State provide funding for schools under Protestant management such as those in Bandon and Midleton? The imposition of this cut was done without consultation, which is a regressive move. We are talking about a minority grouping of people with a distinct faith who are part of our State and who have a right to be educated in their own denomination. We need to take cognisance of that. This move also has implications for those who cannot afford to pay fees. What happens to them? Cuts in the budget have affected people across the board.

I ask the Minister in his reply to take note of what I said.

I thank Senator Buttimer for giving me some of his time to address this subject. It is a sensitive but important subject because it says a lot about the attitude of the State towards its minorities. I have had several representations from Protestant schools and schools with a Protestant ethos which are dumbstruck that the Minister would go to such trouble to retrieve €2.8 million, despite the difficulty it will cause to so many families.

The grant, as Senator Buttimer said, was a demonstration of the liberal tolerance of former Deputy Donogh O'Malley when he gave out, initially, two sets of grants to Protestant schools 40 years ago. The special services support grant, which the Minister has cut, amounts to only €2.8 million but its withdrawal will have a dramatic effect on certain Protestant schools. The effects are likely to be that, at the very least, one teacher will be lost in each of these schools in order to save money and, second, that fees will increase. The result of an increase in fees in schools such as these will be that certain parents of Protestant backgrounds will not be able to send their children to the schools of their choice. I am in favour of parents being able to educate their children together if that is what they want, or sending their children to Protestant schools, Roman Catholic schools or whatever they like. However, the withdrawal of this grant says the State no longer fosters that liberal ethos. It says that people should no longer be allowed to make that choice but that the State will in effect, by limiting the finances available, dictate to parents where their children go to school, and that the choice of ethos, whether it is Roman Catholic, Protestant, or any other, will be made by the State rather than by the parents.

It is important not just in terms of the €2.8 million — which is important to certain parents as it will force their hands if it is withdrawn — and not just in terms of education, but in terms of the ethos of people who want to pursue a particular minority way of life. This is not a denominational matter. It is a matter of the State's taking a liberal attitude and the Minister deciding that the €2.8 million remains the way it was. I heard the excuses being given in the debate in the Dáil, and the weakest of all was that the Attorney General had given some sort of advice that this is discriminatory. How in the name of God was this only mentioned at the time of the budget? If it is discriminatory now in favour of a minority religion, it has been discriminatory for 40 years.

I am pleased to be given the opportunity to clarify for the House the position with regard to the withdrawal of certain grants from Protestant fee-paying schools.

The 2009 budget required difficult choices to be made across all areas of public expenditure. Decisions were made in order to control expenditure and to ensure sustainability in the long term. In this respect, education, while protected to a much greater extent than most other areas of public expenditure, could not be entirely spared. The Minister, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, acknowledges the impact of funding restrictions in a number of areas, including at school level. However, these are the inevitable result of the challenging international economic environment and the need to manage Exchequer resources.

With regard to the removal of certain support services grants received by Protestant fee-charging schools, the Minister wishes to re-emphasise that the Protestant block grant remains in place. Protestant fee-charging schools receive, and will continue to receive, this grant which amounts to €6.25 million in the current school year. This payment covers capitation, tuition and boarding grants. It is distributed by the secondary education committee among needier Protestant children. Applications are made by parents to the Central Protestant Churches Authority, which, on the basis of a means test, distributes the funds to individual schools on the basis of pupil need. The retention of this grant demonstrates the importance the Government continues to attach to ensuring students of the Protestant faith can attend schools that reflect their denominational ethos.

In retaining this grant, the Government is being faithful to the separate arrangements that were agreed with the Protestant schools when the free scheme was introduced by Mr. Donagh O'Malley. At the time, it was the payment of the block grant in particular for Protestant fee-charging schools that distinguished them from those Catholic schools that chose to continue to charge fees. It is estimated that savings of €2.8 million will accrue to the Department as a result of the withdrawal of support services grants from Protestant fee-charging schools in 2009. It is important to note that the purpose of these grants was not to offset fees for disadvantaged Protestant students. Rather, they covered a range of support services.

The Minister has had to take decisions on a number of grants that have impacted on the funding of schools generally. With the Protestant block grant remaining in place, the Minister can see no justification for treating the Protestant fee-charging schools in a special way, especially given that Catholic fee-charging schools have not been in receipt of the grants in question at all. Once again, I thank the Senator for providing me with the opportunity to address the House on this matter and to outline the current position.

The Minister of State's reply is totally unsatisfactory. He is giving no credence to this special ethos. Will he ask the Minister for Education and Science what are the economic benefits of this €2.8 million saving. Economies of scale must enter the equation, particularly as some Protestant schools are very small and other schools are much larger.

I am reluctant to address the Senator's question. The Minister answered oral parliamentary questions on the matter in the Dáil this week. He said there is a constitutional issue and he is setting up a meeting with the Protestant Archbishop of Dublin.

I thank the Minister of State for his reply but it is disappointing. In meeting the Archbishop, would the Minister of State also include Bishop Colton of Cork? What happens to those who cannot afford to pay fees? What happens if a school loses a teacher? Will the State provide education? That has not been addressed.

I will forward the additional questions to the Minister. I am sure there will be further debate on the matter.

Top
Share