Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 6 Oct 2005

Vol. 607 No. 1

Citizenship Applications.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for permitting me to raise this issue. This case concerns a woman who is seeking Irish citizenship. She was born in England in December 1934, had no Irish parents or grandparents and, therefore, did not have an automatic entitlement to citizenship. She married in June 1967. Her husband was born in February 1916 and was entitled to become, and became, an Irish citizen. Unfortunately, he is now seriously ill.

At the time of their marriage the legislation governing nationality and citizenship was the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 which stated "a woman who is an alien at the date of her marriage to a person who is an Irish citizen (otherwise than by naturalisation) shall not become an Irish citizen merely by virtue of her marriage, but may do so by lodging a declaration in the prescribed manner with the Minister or with any Irish diplomatic mission or consular office, either before the marriage, or if lodged thereafter, then from the date of the lodgement."

This means that although the woman concerned had an entitlement to acquire Irish citizenship on the basis of her marriage, it would have been necessary for her to take the formal step of making a declaration to exercise that entitlement. As part of this process, her husband would have had to swear an affidavit to support the declaration. Unfortunately, her husband suffers from Alzheimer's and is not in a position to swear the affidavit.

The woman has been informed by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform that the only option open to her is to apply for a certificate of naturalisation for which there is a fee of €634.87. The woman's means are limited and it would cause financial difficulty for her to pay this sum. She asked the Minister to waive the fee but he stated he did not have discretion in the matter. This is one of the problems which occasionally arise in the administration of our affairs and where a degree of common sense needs to be applied. There seems to be no doubt but that the woman is entitled to citizenship. If the declaration could be made, she would get it automatically. I understand the Department's position is that if she pays the fee for a certificate of naturalisation, her case will be processed quite quickly.

We should look at this case in context. This is a country where in recent years people have arrived with lots of money and have, in effect, been able to buy citizenship. If one had a few million euro which one could put into a company or in an investment scheme, one could, effectively, buy citizenship. As we know, some of the citizenships and passports were purchased in rather doubtful circumstances.

However, this case involves a woman who is married to an Irish citizen, who has lived here most of her life, has contributed to Irish life and community and whose husband, who is now ill, contributed over his working life to the State. She is effectively being denied citizenship by a particularly rigid interpretation of the rules. I understand the difficulties civil servants have in administering the rules made and the legislation passed by this House. Will the Minister exercise some discretion in this area?

I suggest either of two ways to deal with this. One is to waive the fee for the certificate of naturalisation, which the Minister said he cannot do. The other is to accept medical certification in respect of the woman's husband explaining that he is not in a position to swear the affidavit required to make the declaration and on that basis to admit the application. There is no dispute about the facts of this particular case. On the basis of pure morality, the woman is entitled to, and should get, citizenship. It is unfair to her and, indeed, to her husband who is not in a position to deal with it to have it blocked on this technicality.

I would like the Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, to respond positively. I appreciate he has a script from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform which may well tell me what I already know but I ask him to ask the Minister and the Department to exercise a little common sense and to give this woman what she is perfectly entitled to, namely, an Irish passport and citizenship based on her marriage.

I will convey the suggestions and thoughts of Deputy Gilmore to the Minister, Deputy McDowell. Let me say at the outset on behalf of the Minister, who cannot be here this evening, that he is sympathetic to the situation of the person concerned and has, with his officials, examined all possible avenues to assist her in obtaining Irish citizenship.

Section 8 of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended, provides that a non-national who is married to an Irish citizen, who is Irish other than by naturalisation, post-nuptial citizenship or honorary citizenship, for a period of at least three years, may lodge a declaration with the Minister accepting Irish citizenship as post-nuptial citizenship. The marriage must be subsisting at the date of lodgement of the declaration. Furthermore, the couple must be living together as husband and wife and the Irish spouse has to submit an affidavit to that effect when the declaration is being lodged.

The person concerned has been married to an Irish citizen for almost 40 years and in the normal course would be entitled to make such a declaration. However, the medical condition of the person's Irish husband appears to rule out the possibility of him being able to make the affidavit that he and his wife are living together as husband and wife. The Deputy has confirmed this in correspondence to the Department. As a result, the person concerned cannot lodge her declaration of Irish citizenship. The Minister has asked me to emphasise that the requirement for the affidavit is set down in law and he does not have any discretionary powers to waive this requirement.

It appears, therefore, that the only option for the person concerned to obtain Irish citizenship is through the process of naturalisation. The Irish Nationality and Citizenship Acts specify a number of requirements with which an applicant for naturalisation has to comply, including having a period of residency in the State prior to applying, being of good character and having an intention to reside in the State once naturalised. The Minister is empowered to waive some or all of these statutory conditions in certain circumstances. One of these circumstances is where the applicant is of Irish descent or, as in the case concerned, Irish associations.

It is clear to the Minister that this is a case where he should exercise his discretionary powers to the fullest extent possible, notwithstanding the fact that the person concerned may, of course, qualify for naturalisation in her own right. He has already indicated to the Deputy that he is favourably disposed to grant an application for naturalisation and he will also ensure that any such application, because of the unusual circumstances in this case, will be prioritised.

However, the person concerned would have to apply in the normal way and her application would be assessed against the statutory provisions in place. Following formal approval of her application, she would be required to swear, in open court, an oath of fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State. She would also be required to pay a statutory fee of €634.87. The Irish Nationality and Citizenship (Fees) Regulations 1993, as amended, set out the fees for citizenship and the fee appropriate to the situation of the person concerned is €634.87. These regulations do not allow the Minister to waive the statutory fees under any circumstances.

He could amend the regulations.

The Minister appreciates that the person concerned has indicated that she is not in a financial position to pay this fee but he regrets he is unable to help in this regard. If the person concerned wishes to proceed with an application for naturalisation, she or the Deputy can contact the Minister's departmental office. The person concerned can then be put in touch with one of the Minister's officials from the citizenship section of the Department who will guide her through the application process. I have dealt before with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, on matters of this kind.

Will he consider amending the regulation?

I will urge the Minister to deal directly with Deputy Gilmore on this matter and I will convey to him the Deputy's view that the regulations must be changed. It is somewhat unreasonable that some resolution cannot be reached if the lady concerned does not have the means to submit the fee. I agree with the Deputy that it would be terrible if she could not get her citizenship because she could not pay the fee. I hope the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform sees it exactly as the Deputy does.

County Boundaries.

I thank the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for attending the Chamber to hear my views on this matter affecting the Carlow-Kilkenny constituency.

I have just noticed the word "terminate" in the Deputy's submission.

That word has been used many times this week.

I ask the Minister to terminate Waterford County Council's application for 6,000 acres in County Kilkenny that will change the administrative boundaries of south Kilkenny. This is causing much annoyance, anger and antagonism among the citizens of south Kilkenny. If this proposal goes ahead it will mean that Waterford not only gets 6,000 acres from Kilkenny, but also approximately 5,000 people with a projected population of 18,000 in the next ten years because of the infrastructural developments that have taken place there at the behest of Kilkenny County Council. Not only do people feel culturally——

At the behest of this Government.

Successive governments. County Kilkenny has not received as many facilities in several years.

Approximately 5,000 people do not want to move to a new county or province. The land in question is in County Kilkenny and within the Waterford city environs. The area includes Belview Port and the lands in the area that have been rezoned by Kilkenny County Council. The lands around Belview Port were purchased with the IDA, Waterford Harbour Commissioners and Kilkenny County Council while Waterford City Council decided it did not want to participate at the time. Numerous public meetings in opposition to the Waterford take-over of these lands have been held in Kilkenny, with more than 10,000 signatures opposing the take-over handed into Waterford City Council. I hope the Minister understands the complexities involved in Waterford City Council's proposal as emotions are running high on this issue.

Parish boundaries, not to talk of county boundaries, are a major issue in counties like Kilkenny and Waterford. These boundaries are the basis for what happens in rural areas especially in sport and ecclesiastical matters. If this proposal went through, Kilkenny GAA would lose a club and highly valuable property. Slieverue GAA club's pitch and clubhouse would become part of County Waterford. I do not want a situation arising where Eddie O'Connor, Willie O'Connor and Christy Heffernan would hurl for Waterford. Kilkenny GAA has set up a special committee to examine the matter and it is opposed to the proposal. It has been to the forefront, in addition to the confederation of south Kilkenny communities, in gathering signatures and mounting a campaign against this proposal. No one should be forced to abandon their cultural identity. We have learned this over many years. If the Minister allows this proposal to proceed, an atmosphere will be created that will take many generations to overcome.

The first step that needs to be taken by Kilkenny County Council is to bestow urban status on the area's largest inhabited area, namely Ferrybank. This would give the area the necessary recognition for it to develop all the services for the area. The next step is the development of the area through the planning, land use and transportation study plan, PLUTTS, following along the lines employed by Cork city in its LUTTS plan. The PLUTTS plan was recently established between Kilkenny County Council and Waterford City and County Councils to draw up a blueprint for the planning and development of Waterford city environs for the next 20 years. It is a co-operative approach to develop infrastructure and services for the most important asset in the area, the people. However, the ink was barely dry on the plan when Waterford City Council decided to make the application for the 6,000 acres. The people of south Kilkenny were not happy at this preliminary strike on the most valued rezoned land around Waterford Port.

A co-operative approach rather than a confrontational one is the best resolution to this matter. Kilkenny County Council and its people have always supported Waterford City Council. There were no objections to any plans or proposals Waterford had for the south Kilkenny area, such as the airport, the sewerage facilities for Waterford city and the attempts to upgrade the institute of technology to university status. Kilkenny is determined to ensure this application does not go ahead. The money that will have to be spent on consultants by local authorities and the Department should instead be channelled into better use for the people of Ferrybank and other affected areas. The nonsense must stop and the Minister must terminate the process as the submission date of 26 September has passed. It would be better to get on with the co-operative approach rather than the confrontational in this matter.

I had not noticed the use of the word "terminate" in the final sentence of the Deputy's submission. What is most interesting is that county boundaries were drawn in 1604 when the last county, Wicklow, was created. We have such a passionate interest in county boundaries. The Deputy was really winning up to the point where he pointed out that Kilkenny might lose some of its star hurlers. As a Wexford man, that tipped the argument for me. I understand the extraordinary passion that exists on this issue. Recently when in Limerick and Clare, I foolishly decided to be on a radio talk-in show to discuss a similar process occurring there. It is not a bad idea for Ministers to listen but in this case it was very much one-way traffic. One lady compared the process to Operation Barbarossa, suggesting bridges would be torn down to prevent this happening. I have a more anodyne response but I have listened to the points made by the Deputy. I agree that co-operative approaches resolve many problems.

Under Part V of the Local Government Act 1991 and associated regulations, a local authority may initiate a proposal for the alteration of its boundaries. A formal boundary alteration proposal must identify financial, organisational and other implications. It also involves invitation of public submissions and consultation with the other local authorities affected by the proposal, prior to submitting a formal application to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The initiative in the early stages lies, therefore, within the proposing authority.

While no boundary application from Waterford City Council is before the Department, I am aware a proposal for a boundary extension in accordance with Part V of the Local Government Act 1991 was agreed by Waterford City Council in July 2005. The proposal involves the inclusion of an area within the city boundary which is in County Kilkenny. Any subsequent boundary extension application would statutorily come before me and it would be inappropriate, therefore, at this juncture for me to comment on the proposal. However, I can outline the process to the House which will demonstrate that it will not take place for some time.

Under the current provisions, Waterford City Council has invited submissions from Kilkenny County Council and from the public. Kilkenny County Council is allowed up to six months to consider the proposal. During this time, Kilkenny County Council may make a formal statement of response adopted by the county council members to the proposal. Any such response would cover the financial, administrative and other implications the county council may wish to raise.Following consideration of the outcome of the public consultation process and KilkennyCounty Council's statement of response, Waterford City Council may decide to submit to me a formal application for a boundary alteration. As I have already stated, it has not yet done so. I am sure its members will read carefully the comments put on the record of this House by Deputy Hogan.

In the case of a disagreement, which I suspect exists, between the authorities concerned and before deciding on an application, there is a provision for the establishment of an independent boundary committee to examine all aspects of the proposal. Deputy Hogan knows me well enough to be familiar with my views as to who should make political decisions. However, that is the law. The committee may make such recommendations with respect to the boundary as it considers necessary in the interests of effective and convenient local government. Such a boundary committee must consult the local authorities concerned and where the proposal relates to a county or city boundary, must invite submissions from the public and may conduct an oral hearing if necessary.

On receipt of a boundary committee report — this is the position in law — the Minister may prepare a draft order altering the boundary and must have regard to the report in deciding whether to make the order. Significantly for this debate, any draft ministerial order to alter the boundary of any county or city would require a positive resolution by each House of the Oireachtas before coming into force. I can think of one or two other boundary issues that would cause some interesting and fractious debates in the House.

Therefore, the statutory process allows ample opportunity to hear and respond to the views of people affected by any proposed boundary alteration. The process is sufficiently robust and responsive to ensure an outcome that takes account of any such views. I note in particular and am inclined to underscore the comments about the necessity for people to sit down together. This should not be limited to discussing boundary change issues like this as other councils have issues where boundaries are contiguous and boundary changes are not proposed. A greater degree of co-operation would better serve the people in such administrations.

Barr
Roinn