Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 17 April 2008
5 Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the cost of the asylum direct provision accommodation centres in 2005, 2006 and 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14216/08]
View answerThe Reception and Integration Agency is responsible for the accommodation of asylum seekers in accordance with the Government policy of direct provision and dispersal. The information required by the Deputy regarding the cost of the asylum direct provision system in each of the past three years is: a total of €84.382 million in 2005, a total of €78.728 million in 2006 and a total of €83.262 million in 2007. A breakdown of this expenditure is set out in the following table.
The average number of people accommodated by the Reception and Integration Agency for the past three years is 6,784 in 2005, 5,036 in 2006 and 6,122 in 2007. The continued increase in the numbers availing of accommodation provided by the reception and integration agency is influenced by a number of factors, including delays associated with cases where judicial reviews and certain leave-to-remain applications are involved and other complex cases which of themselves take time to resolve, thus leading to a slowing-up of throughput within the direct provision system. Where judicial reviews are concerned, the time taken to discharge any proceedings is a matter for the courts.
The length of time taken to process asylum applications at the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner for prioritised cases is, on average, 17 to 20 working days from the date of application.
In respect of appeals to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, the average length of time to process and complete substantive appeals is 21 weeks and for prioritised cases the average is nine weeks. A large volume of the appeals outstanding for more than six months in the Refugee Appeals Tribunal is due to the delay in processing appeals pending the granting of access to tribunal decisions following the Supreme Court judgment on the matter in the Atanasov case. Following the judgment, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal set up a comprehensive data bank of previous decisions of the tribunal, suitably redacted, which is readily available for access by legal representatives of applicants.
Additional Information not given on the floor of the House.
This data bank, with other measures being applied by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal will be of considerable assistance in clearing the current backlog of cases.
The Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2008 comprehensively reforms and simplifies the current asylum system through the introduction of a single procedure for the investigation of all grounds, including protection ones, put forward by applicants for protection. The investigation of such an application shall also include whether, not being entitled to protection, an applicant should be otherwise permitted to remain in the State. This reform of the processing framework will lead to the removal of the existing multi-layered and sequential process which considers refugee matters first and then as part of a whole new process, issues associated with leave to remain in the State. It will allow an applicant to receive a final decision on their application in a more timely and efficient manner.
Spending in 2005 broken down as follows:
|
Type |
Explanation |
Spend |
|
€m |
||
|
Commercial |
60 Centres commercially owned |
63.022 |
|
State Owned |
9 centres owned by the State |
10.388 |
|
Self-Catering |
11 non-direct provision commercially owned centres |
6.025 |
|
Pre-School |
Payments for wages, consumables etc. in 10 pre schools |
0.133 |
|
Utilities (Gas) |
Direct spending by RIA on gas in State Owned Centres |
0.141 |
|
Transport |
Direct spending by RIA on transport of asylum seekers on dispersals around the country |
0.358 |
|
HSE |
Refund of accommodation costs to HSE for accommodation of Unaccompanied Minors |
4.273 |
|
Miscellaneous |
Payments for nappies, funeral expenses etc. |
0.042 |
|
84.382 |
Spending in 2006 broken down as follows:
|
Type |
Explanation |
Spend |
|
€m |
||
|
Commercial |
47 centres commercially owned |
57.303 |
|
State Owned |
7 centres owned by the State |
10.648 |
|
Self Catering |
9 non direct provision commercially owned centres |
5.176 |
|
Pre-School |
Payments for wages, consumables etc. in 9 pre-schools |
0.302 |
|
Utilities (Gas) |
Direct spending by RIA on gas in State Owned Centres |
0.136 |
|
Transport* |
Direct spending by RIA on transport of asylum seekers on dispersals around the Country |
0.255 |
|
HSE** |
Refund of accommodation costs to HSE for accommodation of Unaccompanied Minors |
4.841 |
|
Miscellaneous |
Payments for nappies, medical reports. |
0.067 |
|
Total |
78.728 |
Spending in 2007 broken down as follows:
|
Type |
Explanation |
Spend |
|
€m |
||
|
Commercial |
55 centres commercially owned |
64.876 |
|
State Owned |
7 centres owned by the State |
9.042 |
|
Self Catering |
9 non direct provision commercially owned centres |
5.166 |
|
Pre school |
Payments for wages, consumables etc. in 10 pre schools |
0.305 |
|
Utilities (Gas) |
Direct spending by RIA on gas in State Owned Centres |
0.128 |
|
Transport* |
Direct spending by RIA on transport of asylum seekers on dispersals around country |
0.163 |
|
HSE** |
Refund of accommodation costs to HSE for accommodation of Unaccompanied Minors |
3.486 |
|
Miscellaneous |
Payments for nappies, funeral expenses etc. |
0.096 |
|
Total |
83.262 |
*This represents direct spending by RIA on costs in relation to, transport to reception centres and, onwards on dispersal, to accommodation centres. Individual centres also provide transport, e.g. into local town or city, for resident asylum seekers but this cost is subsumed into the overall contract price.
**The HSE is solely responsible for the accommodation of separated children seeking asylum, SCSAs, otherwise known as unaccompanied minors. The procurement, contract and payment for these centres is the responsibility of the HSE but RIA is required to refund the costs incurred.
I thank the Minister for his reply. In recent years, the number of asylum applications has dropped by two thirds, yet there has not been a significant fall in the cost of providing accommodation. On average it is costing approximately €210 per asylum seeker per week. Will the Minister explain why this is the case? The reason the cost to the taxpayer has not fallen is that it is taking so long to bring these applications to completion. What is the length of time taken to deal with an asylum application and a leave-to-remain application? Is it not the case that some people are waiting nearly a decade for decisions?
The figures are set out in my reply to the Deputy's question. It takes on average 17 to 20 working days to determine an asylum application——
What is the time for leave-to-remain applications?
I do not have that information but I will furnish it to the Deputy if he wants it. A study of the numbers involved will show that the average number of persons which the Reception and Integration Agency catered for in the past three years was 6,784 persons in 2005; 5,036 persons in 2006; 6,122 persons in 2007. The courts are independent in the operation of their functions. In our consideration of the immigration legislation in select committee, we can examine how the large volume of judicial reviews in this area can be reduced.
It will give me the greatest pleasure to deal with it on Committee Stage but I want to focus on what is within the Minister's competency. The reality is that it is taking years for applications to be processed to completion.
What checks and balances are in place to ensure that these asylum centres are up to an acceptable standard of accommodation? I have visited some of these centres throughout the country and I am aware that there is a serious problem with depression and isolation among the people there. They have nothing to do and all day to do it for up to a decade while they are waiting for decisions to be made.
I refer to the comments made by a public health nurse about a facility in County Roscommon. She said that for babies learning to crawl and for toddlers learning to walk there is physically no room in the accommodation for them. Does the Minister stand over such a situation? Will he outline the reason only 60% of the target number of inspections of asylum accommodation centres are taking place?
I will examine the various matters which Deputy Naughten has raised, which certainly do not arise out of the question as put by him. I will have any specific matter of concern to him investigated and dealt with. It is the case that a person who seeks asylum in this jurisdiction is placed in direct provision and this is a Government policy decision.
The Minister has no answer in the case of his Department.
