Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 16 Dec 1997

Vol. 485 No. 2

Private Members' Business. - Racial Discrimination: Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
That Dáil Éireann—
1. affirms, in accordance with the principles of international human rights law, the right of everyone to live free of violence, discrimination or harassment on the basis of race, colour, national or ethnic origin or membership of the traveller community;
2. condemns sentiments and manifestations of racism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism as inimical to respect for the dignity of all human beings and particularly deplores hostile statements or acts directed against those from other countries seeking refuge in the State;
3. supports all appropriate efforts to promote harmonious relations between different groups characterised by reference to race and related factors;
4. notes
(i) that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, building on the work of his predecessors, has initiated the Employment Equality Bill which would,inter alia, make provision for the promotion of equality and the prohibition of discrimination and harassment in employment and related areas on the basis of factors including race, colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin or membership of the traveller community, and
(ii) the Government's stated commitment to bring forward an Equal Status Bill which would have a similar effect in relation to non-employment areas;
5. requests the Government, following enactment of the legislation referred to in paragraph 4, to take steps for the ratification of the International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on the 21st day of December, 1965;
6. notes the measures taken in Ireland resulting from the Resolution of the European Union Council of Ministers designating 1997 as European Year against Racism;
7. commends the efforts of voluntary groups who have taken initiatives to combat racism and xenophobia;
8. urges the earliest possible implementation of the Refugee Act 1996.
—(Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform)

I am glad to support this important motion in the names of Members of all parties, including myself. I hope it will be regarded as something more than a ritual repetition of nice-sounding words. Racism in Ireland deserves closer attention than we have given it up to now because it is more serious than we realise. One weakness of this country is its homogeneity, the fact that so many of us are similar in background and historical and ethnic approach. The lack of diversity has weakened our society and given rise to some easily identifiable problems.

It is opportune that today sees the publication of A Part of Ireland Now: Ten Refugee Stories, which features interviews conducted by Mr. Andy Pollak. It appears to be an official publication because it has a foreword by the Taoiseach. The booklet gives details of ten refugees, some of whom have lived here for a long time and others who have arrived more recently. Unlike most official publications it is not exclusively laudatory. The earlier arrivees appear to have got on well in Ireland but some of the more recent arrivees have not. If I may I will quote briefly from the experiences in Ireland of two of these refugees.

One story concerns Mr. Luyindula and his wife, Mrs. Bikembo, who are described as the first Zairean political refugees to arrive in Ireland. The booklet states:

their experience of Ireland has not been a happy one. Two years ago he was beaten up by a group of youths in broad daylight in a street in Temple Bar, with passers-by failing to intervene to help him.

They received an anonymous racist hate letter sent to ‘The African' at their new flat. Both Catholics, they attend the local church every Sunday. Recently a man started insulting Mrs. Bikembo in the middle of Mass, and she had to be rescued by concerned parishioners. They have lost count of the times people in the street have told them to go back to Africa.

These people are recent refugees, unlike many of the others in the book who have been here for a long time. The husband is quoted as saying:

Since the attack I have started to see Irish people in a new light. Many of them think it's all right to have one or two black people living in Ireland. However, more than that irritates them. Older people are usually nice, but younger people are often nasty, and become particularly aggressive when they are drunk.

Mrs. Bikembo says:

I don't feel comfortable here . Although we are free, we feel like prisoners. I am afraid to walk in the street by myself now and my husband doesn't go out at night. The kind of racism we have experienced here does not exist in Zaire. There all foreigners, European and African, are made to feel welcome and are offered hospitality.

Another refugee featured in the booklet is Mr. Abdullah Hersi, a 40 year old Somali living in Dublin with his wife and six children. He has been here for six and a half years and has received a masters degree in financial services from UCD. The booklet states: He has sent out about 200 CVs to banks, financial services and insurance companies. Only two even bothered to reply. An Irish friend got him two months work as a security guard, the only job he has had in six and a half years in Ireland.

This makes sorry reading. I invite Members to look through this booklet, which they will have received today. Of these ten refugees, eight seem to have done well, to varying degrees, but the two who have done badly are the only two who are black. The others gained acceptance, the two who are black did not. The others came from diverse countries and backgrounds but what they have in common is that they are white. This says a lot about attitudes to race in Ireland. I congratulate the Refugee Agency for producing this worthwhile publication, from which people can learn a great deal. I hope we do, because the booklet is not the typical Bord Fáilte gush about Ireland and the Irish. It is closer to reality, and the reality is sometimes painful.

In terms of welcoming people from other countries and admitting refugees, no country in the world has a greater obligation than this one. Over two and a half centuries we sent our people to an enormous number of countries, particularly the United States, Britain, Australia and New Zealand. They were rarely turned away and were able to make a considerable contribution to those countries as a result of their admission either as refugees or as economic emigrants which, technically, is what most emigrants are nowadays.

The earliest of our emigrants of this kind were Protestant dissenters leaving Ulster because of religious persecution and going to North America, principally to what is now the United States. They were accepted and thrived there. There has been a succession of others since, particularly the Southern Catholic Gaelic emigration in the 19th century. Compare the facility with which so many people who were born on this island were admitted elsewhere with how selective we are today.

The Irish Refugee Council today sent me statistics which I do not need to read out because the Minister is probably aware of them. We think we are overwhelmed with refugees and asylum seekers. Even with the big increase in numbers in the past few years, the numbers are minute, and we have not been able to evolve a system that can deal with them.

We always welcomed rich foreigners to this country, but for a long time there seems to have been an unspoken assumption that we did not welcome poor foreigners. In the early 1980s I received anecdotal evidence of happenings at Shannon Airport that disturbed me greatly. I was told of Cuban refugees trying to escape when a Cuban or Russian plane was refuelling at Shannon on a flight between Moscow and Havana, of which there were a great many every day at that time. They tried to hide in toilets at Shannon Airport, climb out through toilet windows, hide in cupboards and behind panels in rooms, and were hauled out of their hiding places and dragged kicking and screaming back onto the plane. When I inquired about this at the Department of Justice I was told that they were trying to come in here in breach of the law and therefore it was right to put them out. I was told they were not being deported, that they were being refused entry, and there was a great distinction between the two. Some of those people unquestionably went to their deaths after they were put back on the plane at Shannon. That is something of which this country should be ashamed. It is something that we should remember now when we look at the increased but still tiny number of people who want to come to this country and who are not welcome.

I welcome the decision of the Government to agree to an all-party motion on racism and to allocate Government time to allow a debate on it. I also thank the Government and the other parties for agreeing to a number of amendments Democratic Left proposed. This has considerably strengthened the motion.

However, I am deeply disappointed with the speech made by the Minister on this issue. It has no sense of purpose other than a mechanistic one which seeks to impose law virtually to the exclusion of everything else. It seeks to identify what it claims to be illegal immigrants versus refugees. There is no such thing as an illegal immigrant until the procedures of this State establish that fact. To create in the mind of the public the idea that there are two separate kinds of people walking our streets, legal and illegal, is wrong and leads to the attitudes expressed by Deputy Callely. The Minister said that one of the factors which could contribute towards the emergence of racist attitudes here was the confusion which currently exists on the subject of illegal immigration, in particular confusion concerning the distinction between an illegal immigrant and a refugee. I am not aware of any illegal immigrants in this State. An illegal immigrant is a person who has been defined by the Department of Justice as somebody who is not entitled to be here but finds some way of remaining here. There is no such thing otherwise. I have yet to hear any figure put on any such category of person. It is wrong and damaging to the cohesion of Irish society to make this distinction which is grossly improper, particularly coming from a Minister of this State.

This debate takes place against the background of an unexpected increase in the number of people from abroad seeking refuge in the country and a significant, and worrying, increase in racial tension in parts of Dublin. It is important therefore that the Dáil should speak with one voice in asserting the right of everyone to live free from the threat of racial discrimination, deploring manifestations of racism and xenophobia, and committing the State to deal in a fair and humane way with those seeking refuge in this country.

Over the years Irish society has tended to collectively pat itself on the back and reassure itself that there was little if any racism in Ireland and that the ugly manifestations of racism which we have seen in other countries could not occur here. It was relatively easy to assert our freedom from the evils of racism because, up to recently, we had not been confronted by any significant degree of immigration.

A more dispassionate look at our record shows that we are probably no better and no worse than most other European states when it came to racism. The Louis Lentin documentary shown on RTÉ last week shone a light on a dark passage in our history and showed that there were very few of the traditional hundred thousand welcomes for Jews seeking refuge from the Nazi holocaust. In addition, the evidence suggests that when Irish people go abroad, especially to countries with significant racial minorities, we are not free from the taint of racism.

The nearest thing we have had to a racial minority within this State is the traveller community, and again we can draw no comfort from our treatment of travellers who, despite significant efforts in terms of housing and facilities and their inclusion as a specific category in the Prohibition of Incitement to Racial Hatred Act, 1989, are still on the margins of society and subject to prejudice, hostility and abuse. We have had our own local variation on xenophobia — religious sectarianism which has wrought bitterness, division, death and destruction on the people of this island. We still see it manifested in its most ugly form in Northern Ireland through, for example, the sectarian murder of Gerry Devlin in North Belfast ten days ago and clashes over marches and demonstrations. However, it also continues to exist in this State, albeit in a more subtle form.

One person who has probably done more than anyone else to try to measure the level of racist attitudes among people has been Fr. Micheál MacGreil. He published a major study in 1977 entitled "Prejudice and Tolerance in Ireland" which confirmed there was no room for complacency and found that racial intolerance was not very far beneath the surface. The survey was updated in 1996 and we can perhaps draw some encouragement from the significant and substantial reduction in racist attitudes since the early 1970s.

We are becoming a multi-cultural and to some extent a multi-racial society. This trend is likely to continue. I hope it continues as it can only do good in terms of the general well-being of society. The time when one could assume that a black person walking along a street in Dublin was foreign is long gone. People like Paul McGrath and Phil Lynott whose achievements in different fields inspired so many people are as Irish as am I, the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, Deputy John Bruton or even Gerry Adams.

We have all had to face up to the spectre of racism because of the increase in the number of refugees from an annual average of approximately 60 a few years ago to more than 2,000 per year. Unlike most European countries which had problems of immigration arising from their colonial histories, Ireland never had to face anything other than a trickle of refugees. There has been a very significant increase in the numbers seeking refugee status in recent years, but despite what some people have tried to suggest the trickle has not turned into a flood of immigrants. The numbers coming to Ireland have been relatively small compared to the scale of the problem faced by many other countries, for example, Germany which, according to the newsletter published by the national co-ordination committee for the European Year Against Racism, had 129,000 applications for refugee status last year. To say the paltry few hundred people who seek refugee status here is a major threat to society is nonsensical. The evidence in recent weeks suggests the numbers are declining.

While the absence of facilities to deal with applications for refugee status on this scale has created problems, it should not put an undue strain on our financial or social resources to deal in a fair and humane way with those seeking refuge here. The vast majority of citizens and Members of this House agree with this principle. Unfortunately a tiny minority of people have used the refugee problem to give vent to racist attitudes and they have been aided and abetted in this by a small number of public representatives seeking electoral advantage.

There is an obligation on Members of this House and public representatives in general to ensure that nothing they say or do could in any way encourage racism or hostility to refugees. I have already deplored in the House and elsewhere the inflammatory and intolerant comments made recently by Deputy Ivor Callely. However, there was an even worse example during the general election when a Fianna Fáil candidate in Dublin South-West, Colm McGrath, circulated a leaflet which must have come close to breaching the terms of the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act. Under the masthead "McGrath demands action on illegal immigrants" Councillor McGrath demanded an urgent review of the allocation of houses to illegal immigrants — one must bear in mind my earlier comments about what is illegal and what is not — and claimed that many refugees were here to milk our social welfare system, before going on to peddle urban myths about a slaughtered lamb being hung on a clothes line to drip dry after having its throat cut and up to 30 refugees sleeping in one house. Not only was Councillor McGrath not prosecuted but——

It is not the practice to refer to persons outside the House who cannot defend themselves.

I appreciate that but this man stood in the general election and sought to become a TD. This is the way he sought to win votes on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party.

The Deputy should move on from that.

These sentiments were echoed by Deputy Ivor Callely in The Irish Times some weeks ago. He now says he did not make these remarks but the journalist has stated that his notes show he said them.

Remember Eamon Dunphy.

The Deputy has the same option, take The Irish Times and Paul Cullen to court. I won my case but the Deputy will not win a case.

There are no missing days in my case.

Deputy De Rossa will appreciate that Deputy Callely said he was misquoted in the media and that it is usual for a Deputy to accept this.

I do, but the journalist stated in The Irish Times that he does not accept Deputy Callely's denial.

In this House Members accept such assurances by a Deputy.

Deputy Callely can pursue this if he wishes.

It is not just the crude attitudes expressed by Deputy Callely or Councillor McGrath that can fuel hostile attitudes towards refugees. How the institutions of the State deal with them can also be a major influence on public opinion. If the State is seen to treat those seeking refuge in a fair, humane, sympathetic and understanding way then there is every chance the community in general will take its lead from this example.

When did the perceived problem arise?

However, if the State is seen to be uncaring, unsympathetic, bureaucratic and inflexible then this will also encourage a more hostile approach by the community in general.

The decision of the Minister for Justice to effectively scrap the Refugee Act is particularly deplorable and sends out all the wrong messages. The legislative anti-racism package stands on four pillars: the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act, the Employment and Equal Status Acts and the Refugee Act. The Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act has been a paper tiger, with not even a single prosecution arising, the Employment and Equal Status Acts have been delayed interminably and the Refugee Act has been effectively torn up by the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue.

It is difficult to believe the Minister is the same person who in Opposition was a fearless champion of the rights of refugees, who lavished praise on Amnesty International and who in October 1995 — this is an important point in view of the guidelines introduced by the Minister during the past week — said: "The status of refugees is an issue which should strike a chord with every man, woman and child here who has any grasp of Irish history, our history books being littered with the names and deeds of those driven from our country out of fear of persecution".

It is no secret the Department of Justice establishment was, to put it mildly, lukewarm about the Refugee Act and that Ministers in the last Government had to fight a major battle to have it enacted. A few weeks ago the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, boasted that he was very much in charge of his Department. The evidence in regard to the Refugee Act, and, in particular, the Minister's speech point very much to the contrary and suggest the Minister is a prisoner of the Department.

The Refugee Act provided certain basic legal protections and guarantees of fair procedures for applicants for asylum. Yet it now seems we are to revert to a series of secret hearings by faceless officials, when the freedom and, in some cases, the lives and safety of refugees is at stake. The reality of the new so-called fast-track procedures introduced by the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, is that life and death decisions will be made by bureaucrats behind closed doors.

What did the Deputy preside over for two and a half years?

Contrary to what the Minister sought to imply, this is not an attack on the integrity of the officials: it is a criticism of the secret, private procedures the Minister has put in place.

The concept of a fair, independent and transparent procedure which was at the heart of the Refugee Act has been discarded in favour of yellow-pack justice. Rather than having their claims submitted to an independent body, the fate of asylum seekers will now be decided by "a person appointed by the Minister" according to guidelines which may be issued from time to time by the Department. According to the Department's letter of 10 December, current as well as future applications will be dealt with under this abbreviated procedure — a clear case of retroactive justice.

This motion, at the request of Democratic Left, includes a clause urging "the earliest possible implementation of the Refugee Act, 1996". When this motion is passed it will reflect the solemn view of the House that the Act should be implemented at the earliest possible time. The Government cannot ignore the views of the House expressed in this way. It cannot, on the one hand, agree that the earliest possible implementation of the Act is desirable while, at the same time, introducing procedures which negate the whole ethos and approach of the Refugee Act. This will be a real test of the Government's bona fides and will determine how seriously it takes the fine sentiments expressed in this motion.

This matter will not be dealt with effectively by law alone. There are other areas we must look at. We must look again at the school curriculum to see what changes need to be made to prepare our children for the increasingly multicultural and multiracial nature of our society. We must look again at the provision of adequate finance for the many voluntary organisations which help to combat racism through sporting, cultural or other activities. I welcome the Minister's statement that he is agreeable to providing money to voluntary organisations dealing with this issue. I ask him to look again at the application from the Soccer Against Racism in Ireland group which has applied to his Department, the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs and the Department of the Taoiseach for a small amount of money to run a major event next year on this issue. They have big names for this event but have failed to get money from any Department for it.

I wish to share my time with Deputies Joe Higgins and Ó Caoláin.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I support Deputy De Rossa in his call for SARI, Soccer Against Racism in Ireland, to be provided with funding. In 1994, when I was Lord Mayor of this great city, one of my ambitions was to give the freedom of the city to the Dalai Lama, who I thought was very deserving of that great honour. He is an international figure who has received the Nobel Peace Prize among many awards. Above all, he symbolises the ongoing plight of asylum seekers and refugees.

In order to confer the freedom of the city one traditionally needs consensus on the city council. I was glad to get the support of all parties, except for Fianna Fáil. One of the people most implacably opposed——

The Deputy went on a solo run. He should not try to blame us.

——to this proposal was Deputy Callely.

Deputy Gormley must be allowed speak.

This is the same Deputy whose remarks in The Irish Times gave rise to tonight's debate, the same Deputy whom the Taoiseach resolutely refused to criticise.

The second point of the motion states that the House "condemns sentiments and manifestations of racism". There is no point in having a resolution on paper or a Refugee Act if we do not act, which is what I am asking the Taoiseach and the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, to do by condemning racist remarks and giving the House a commitment that the Act will be fully implemented. Deputy Callely has said his remarks were not racist but I do not see how they could have been interpreted otherwise. At best, they were small minded and a cheap shot.

That is unfair.

There is a ready market for such sentiments. As Deputy Callely knows, a deep seated prejudice exists in which there is votes. Any of us who operate advice centres in this city are well aware of the prejudice which exists. People say to us all the time that refugees are taking our houses and availing of social welfare. However, a responsible Deputy should counter those arguments and outline the real situation.

I believe this Government has decided to pander to these prejudices. We are tired of raising the question of the Refugee Act on the Order of Business. It is now clear, from the letter from the assistant secretary in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to the UNHCR, that they have decided to cherrypick sections of the Refugee Act, to accept the sections they like and abandon the rest, probably in a skip along with the rest of the PD files.

Will the Deputy give way under Standing Order 47?

Unfortunately, I cannot because I must share my time but I would be quite happy——

Under Standing Order 47, the Member has referred to something which is totally incorrect in relation to my position on the freedom of the city and——

Acting Chairman

I am informed that if Deputy Gormley does not give way Deputy Callely does not have the right to interrupt.

The Deputy is cherrypicking and taking cheap shots.

Deputy Callely's was the cheapest shot of all.

What Deputy Gormley has just said is off the wall and a cheap shot. He has embarrassed himself.

The way in which we have handled the Refugee Act is an affront to the UNHCR, to the human rights NGOs, many of which are represented in the Visitors Gallery, to the elected Members of this House and to democracy.

(Interruptions.)

Deputy Callely does not like the truth.

Deputy Gormley knows the truth.

Acting Chairman

Deputy Callely must refrain from interrupting.

I have a number of questions for the Minister which I hope he will be able to answer. Are these new fast track procedures agreed with the UNHCR? For how long will these procedures operate? Is this an administrative attempt to undermine the legislation? Why did this House pass an Act if we were going to simply abandon it? That Act has been cited as one of the most progressive models of refugee legislation in Europe but the Government has dumped it.

The emphasis, under these new procedures, is on the Dublin Convention. It is regrettable that such discriminatory legislation is named after our great city from whence many Irishmen and Irishwomen went abroad. I asked the Taoiseach about the Dublin Convention last week but he was unable to answer my questions. It is clearly in contravention of much international refugee law where a refugee is not required to seek asylum in the country to which they first come. If the Dublin Convention had been in place, how many of the 1,500 people who have been processed would have been refused as a result? How many people will be refused on that basis in future?

The new fast track procedures state that "where necessary and possible" an interpreter shall be provided. It further states that in considering whether an applicant is to be deported " the applicant will be informed of the procedure to be followed and of these rights, where possible in a language which he or she understands". That is wonderful. It is very broad minded and civil of the Minister to inform someone who is going to be deported to a country where they will be possibly persecuted and killed of that fact in a language which they understand.

It seems key decisions will be placed in the hands of individuals appointed by the Minister. For example, the appeals authority is supposed to be independent of the Minister and his Department but will be appointed by the Minister. That is not independence. The Minister must address this issue. Amnesty, which the Minister supported, has asked for this time after time but apparently that request has also been put in the skip.

It is good that more money is being given to legal aid. However, until now we have been giving £120 to solicitors and barristers for appeals. We must act. It is not enough to produce documents, resolutions and Acts which are not acted upon. I call on the Minister to act on the clear will of this House.

The Deputy should act honestly.

Acting Chairman

Deputy Callely must refrain from interrupting.

Deputy Callely's party was the only one which objected to the Dalai Lama being given the freedom of the city.

(Interruptions.)

I find it astounding the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in addressing the Dáil, allegedly in support of a motion against racism, began his speech with a tirade against so-called illegal immigrants. The Minister referred to refugees and, in the same breath, to criminal elements, illegal trafficking and so on. That is a shameful approach by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, who represents a Kerry constituency. It is only ten years since Kerry politicians criss-crossed the Atlantic virtually on a monthly basis — perhaps the Minister was among them — begging the United States administration to give legal status to tens of thousands of Irish youth, including many from Kerry, who were forced out of the country by the failure of the same system and political structures that have allowed the entry of a few thousand refugees to be considered as a crisis.

I contrast the Minister's attitude with the recent actions of his party in handing out passports to millionaires in the infamous passports for sale scheme simply because they could purchase them. The Minister's attitude is no better than that of sections of the media which carry responsibility for irresponsible and hate-inducing headlines and articles designed to create false impressions and hysteria. Most revolting was the mass circulation of a paper last June with the banner headline "Refugee Rapist on the Rampage". The article stated that the Garda warned women to stay away from refugees after a spree of sex assaults. It alleged that Garda sources stated that prostitutes and minors were the main targets of rapacious Romanians and Somalians. The Garda later denied that there was any foundation to that scandalous report.

Why then is the Deputy quoting it?

(Dublin West): It is pathetic that two Governments in a row have presided over a position where a few thousand refugees are blamed for causing a crisis. Failure of the system to guarantee basics such as housing, decent health care and so on allows that perception. There are 30,000 people on the housing waiting list, but refugees are not the cause of that crisis because they are not entitled to local authority housing. Refugees are sometimes blamed because people are poor, but refugees are not responsible for poverty. That results from the failure of the political establishment. The Government has given more in the budget per annum to big corporations and the super rich than it would cost to maintain the refugees who are here at present — it would cost far less if they were allowed to work, which they should be, as the youth from Kerry and other counties were allowed to work when they went to the United States and elsewhere.

What hope of justice have a few thousand applicants when the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Minister of State said on public record that 90 per cent of applicants are illegal immigrants? That is a disgraceful prejudging of the position. According to the Minister, those so-called illegal immigrants should be deported. The new process will not provide justice. It will be a sham because there is no independent procedure or right of appeal. That process will be carried out by the Department that believes that 90 per cent of applicants are illegal immigrants. I ask the Minister even at this late hour to put in place just procedures. There should be legal representation for all applicants and an independent procedure so that we will appear to be just in dealing with those people.

We are witnessing an increase in racism and bigotry which is repugnant to the best democratic traditions of the people. We have suffered racist abuse in our country from colonial occupiers. We have been subjected to racial discrimination in other lands. It is not long ago that signs stating "No Irish, No blacks" were displayed on boarding house windows in England. That experience does not make Irish people immune from the virus of racism. That virus does not grow of its own accord. It has taken hold because unscrupulous people in politics and other spheres have nurtured it for their own cynical, short-term interests.

Disgracefully, there are politicians in this State who are guilty of condoning racism. That is not only manifest in public statements, it is present when politicians pander to the bigotry which places the blame for unemployment and lack of housing on immigrants and refugees or which scapegoats travellers and denies them their rights as Irish citizens. Responsibility for unemployment and poor housing lies with successive Governments which have failed to provide adequately for all our people. Let us make it clear we will not tolerate racism, that the Government will treat the poor of other ethnic origin who seek shelter here as warmly as it has treated those who availed of the passports for sale scheme. We live in a multicultural country that enriches us all. It is no threat to our native culture and heritage. On the contrary, it strengthens it, just as Irish people who moved to other countries have enriched and strengthened those cultures by their presence and contribution.

This motion will have little meaning if it is not immediately followed by measures to alleviate the plight of those at the receiving end of racism. It is urgent the Refugee Act is implemented in full. It is inexcusable that has not been done. Amnesty International stated that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform seems to have selected from an Act passed by the Oireachtas, the Refugee Act, those parts which suit departmental procedures and abandoned the rest. While this motion is welcome, until the Refugee Act is implemented in full the Government's commitment to anti-racism remains open to challenge.

Táim ag tacú leis an rún seo. Ba chóir dúinn uilig cur i gcoinne an chiníochais.

Question put and agreed to.
Barr
Roinn