Fine Gael And Direct Provision


Last night.

In Cork.

During the fourth and final Fine Gael leadership hustings, a man called Joseph (top) asked about direct provision. He said thousands of Irish people can see the direct provision system is an act of disrespect to humanity.

He then asked how either Simon Coveney or Leo Varadkar would address this, if they became Taoiseach.

He also said:

“The [Bryan] McMahon Report recommends safeguards to ensure that no one is left in the asylum system longer than five years. What are your intentions regarding the people who have been in the asylum system for over five years, especially those who are not eligible to have the single application accessed under the new single procedure or people who are on deportation orders?”

From their responses:

Simon Coveney said:

“First of all, in relation to people who’ve been here for many years and who are essentially in limbo, because they are, because for many people, it’s actually almost impossible for the Department of Justice to establish a number of the facts that they’re trying to establish around people who are here as to whether they should be eligible for asylum or not.

“And so people just are here in that state of unknowing what the future holds and I do think if we advocate, as we do, for undocumented Irish in the US, to have a path to be able to regularise their own position. I believe, also in Ireland, we should allow for an opportunity for people to regularise their position over time if they’ve been here for many years.

I also think that it is no way to actually cater for people who are waiting for asylum decisions here, beyond a certain period of time, for people to be in direct provision. People who want to make a contribution, people who are essentially living with very small amounts of money per week and with the State subsidising their lives, but really unable to make any positive contribution to society for various different reasons in terms of barriers that are put in place.

“And I do think we need to move away from that. In a way, of course those, that ensures that we make decisions firmly and fairly in relation to asylum applications and of applications in relation to refugees.

“But I do think what we have at the moment is a system that takes far too long to make decisions and therefore we’re asking families and individuals to stay in conditions which are not conducive to contributing in a positive way to society. And I know Joseph well, he’s a great guy. But there is change in this area that’s needed and of course that puts more pressure on a minister like me, in terms of social housing provision which is why we’ve committed €5.5billion to a social housing build programme that’s going to add 47,000 social houses.”

Leo Varadkar said:

“I suppose the idea of direct provision, when it was first established, I think it was probably back in the 1990s at this stage, was that people would be in direct provision for a couple of months while their applications for asylum or refugee status would be decided on and if they got status, they would then leave direct provision. If they didn’t, then they’d obviously would have to leave the country if they were found not to be eligible for refugee status or asylum status.

“The real problem is that people are now staying so long in direct provision. And there actually are people who have status, who’ve been given leave to remain, who’ve been given refugee status, but are still living in direct provision because there is no housing available for them. That’s a terrible situation to be in for people, they are still living in Mosney for example, the old Butlin’s camp, who have been given status but there is no homes for them to go to and I think that’s really, really difficult for us as a society to stand over.

“I do think things will improve. We brought through new legislation, Minister [Frances] Fitzgerald, the Minister for Justice, has finally, after a lot of hard work, successfully brought through the International Protection Act. And that’s going to change things, cause at the moment you can apply for different statuses, you can apply for different types of statuses at different times. And under the new rules, you’ll apply for all types of status on day one.

“So, at the moment, you might apply for refugee status, not get that, apply for leave to remain, then not get that, then judicial review it, she’s going to streamline that whole process so decisions are going to be made a lot quicker and I think that’s a real step forward and it’s a tribute to her and Dave Stanton, in fact, for getting through that legislation.

“One thing I’d like to see examined. I haven’t studied it in detail myself  so I don’t want to make a definite commitment on it but I do think people who are in the country for a long period of time, whose status hasn’t been decided on, we should consider giving them the right to work. It must be a very frustrating thing to be in a country, you’re waiting on a decision, you want to work, you want to contribute, you want to make money for your family, you want to give something to the society you’re now living in and I think that’s something we need to take a long, hard look at.”

Earlier: A Bad Dream


Sponsored Link

23 thoughts on “Fine Gael And Direct Provision

  1. Tony Groves

    No mention of Direct Provision in any FG grand vision document. Future generations will castigate us for standing by and allowing people to be reclassified into levels of import.

  2. Henry Woods

    There will come a day where Irish people will have to claim refugee status in Ireland.

  3. Eamonn Clancy

    At least they don’t have to bed down in Henry Street every night. I bet any homeless man or women would change places in the blink of an eye.

    1. Anusia Grennell

      Just as direct provision is not-fit-for-purpose, there are not-fit-for-purpose homeless shelters. The two are not mutually exclusive so to be bring it up here is just divisive.

    2. Sham Bob

      Isn’t it handy that you have the homelessness crisis to justify direct provision.

    3. Bob

      But would other homeless men/women be happy to live in direct provision centres, with other people, if they are suffering from drug addiction. The homeless crisis is a blanket term for a lot of socioeconomic problems, one of them is the unaffordability of homes/accommodation,

  4. Andrew

    T real issue ar the dwlays brought about by legal challenges to decisions made. It’s a nicer earner all round. one appeal should be allowed an after that it’s deportation. Most applications ARE bogus .Should we not mention Pamela Izevbekhai?
    There are thousands of people now living in this country who had no legal right to be here. Many have now been made citizens and never should have been. All to suit the globalist agenda while ignoring all the negative consequences.

    1. MoyestWithExcitement

      Translation; ‘Mine!’ I’m not even joking, right wing ideology (certainly the type displayed in the post above anyway) comes from the exact same place as the kid in this video’s need to guard the playset. They have feelings and their brain searches for reasons to justify those feelings. It’s the same process toddlers have. You feel a territorial sense of ownership over something so you justify that by making up rules about asylum and dumb arguments about economics.

      1. Rob_G

        You scoffed when I referenced a South Park episode in an argument; now we have you embedding videos from Family Guy…

    2. Bob

      One appeal should be offered depending on the reason for denial of application.
      There shouldn’t be an automatic right to appeal without a valid reason.

  5. Jake38

    Endless bureaucracy combined with non-stop appeals pursued at a snails pace to enrich lawyers. Direct provision is just a reflection of the justice system in general.

  6. Truth in the News

    How come no asked about need to provide direct provision for the homeless sleeping rough all over
    the country, indeed we are becoming strangers in our own country.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link