I do not propose to accept amendments Nos. 2 and 3. I will go into that in detail but it is important to make a point at the very start. If a party is anti-EU, and Sinn Féin is, in my opinion, with platitudes to the left and the right of what it may or may not want to say about it, its members would be far more honest to come in here and say that. On every occasion when I listen to its members speak - they come in and their line writers have given them whatever cliché to say for the day - it is always anti-EU. That is really the importance of what the last contributor said about that sovereignty argument and how not working with our EU partners can really damage us in this area. That needed to be said. The Bill does not and could not in any meaningfully way do what Article 5 of the Constitution states, which is that "Ireland is a sovereign, independent, democratic state". Article 6 is clear as to where the sovereignty power of the State resides, namely, with the people. At the same time, the Constitution also provides for Ireland to be a member state of the European Union and to participate in addressing shared challenges with co-ordinated solutions. That is the important thing. What Europe is all about, in case the Sinn Féin Deputies have missed it, is shared challenges. This co-operation with our fellow member states was clearly approved by the people when they voted in referendums for the inclusion of references to the various European treaties in Article 29 of the Constitution. Certain things can be done on a common European basis, and should be. As I said on Second Stage, and as the Minister has said, migration and asylum have given rise to challenges not only for Ireland but across the European Union. They are shared challenges which are increasingly difficult for any one country to deal with acting alone in a global and independent world. We have seen very close to home how difficult it can be when a country decides to think it can deal with this on its own. That is why the shared solution is the best way forward. Ireland's participation in international agreements and EU measures in the area of international production is not new. Ireland ratified the 1951 convention relating to the status of refugees in 1956 and acceded to the 1967 protocol in 1968. The Dublin Convention was agreed in 1990. Ireland participated in the first phase of the common European asylum system, opting into several EU measures in the first years of this century, some of which were the forerunners of the measures in the migration and asylum pact which are being given further effect by this Bill. Article 29.4.7° of the Constitution provides that the State may exercise the options or discretions under Protocol 21, but any such exercise should be subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas. The decision to opt in and be bound by the migration and asylum pact measures was approved by this House and the Seanad - the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, has said this to Deputy Carthy many times - on the basis of the proposal of the Government pursuant to Protocol 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This amendment also attempts to reframe the aspects of the separation of powers already defined in the Constitution. With respect to the House, it is well established that the executive authority of the State to determine policy in respect of migration is vested under the Constitution in the Executive branch. The Oireachtas is entitled to exercise its constitutional function to legislate. However, to allocate policy function solely to the Oireachtas might, for example, limit the Minister's authority to determine the policy relating to the granting of visas or other immigration permissions in the State. For the above reasons, I cannot accept amendments Nos. 2 and 3. I also do not propose to accept amendment No. 4. Ireland and the United Kingdom share a very long history and a common interest in effective co-operation on the common travel area. Maintaining the integrity of the common travel area and preventing its abuse in the context of immigration is an issue on which I, the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and our officials have had many engagements with our UK counterparts. My Department is taking all necessary steps to manage the international protection process efficiently and effectively, while ensuring the integrity of those processes is maintained at all times. There is extensive engagement and co-operation at all levels between my Department and the United Kingdom Home Office. This includes joint operational co-operation, as well as information sharing between the Garda, the UK Border Force, the UK policing service and the Police Service of Northern Ireland. This strong and practical engagement and co-operation serves the mutual interests of Ireland and the United Kingdom and that will continue. The protection of an open Border on the island of Ireland was and remains a key priority to the communities on both sides of the Border. I do not believe it would be necessary or, indeed, appropriate to place requirements for consideration of the impacts of the common travel area on a statutory footing.
Sentiment score: 0.22
It is important to recognise there is ongoing co-operation in terms of the management of the common travel area. It is extensive co-operation, as I said in my initial reply. That is at official, political and operational level between An Garda Síochána and the police services of the United Kingdom. All of that is effectively ongoing and continues to be strengthened and deepened in terms of how we actually deal with managing that common travel area. We want to have a common travel area. Every Government of every persuasion has wanted to have a common travel area with the United Kingdom. It is important it is managed effectively. What we are doing with the International Protection Bill is putting in place structures that will serve us in the best interests of the overall management of how we handle this as an issue for our country, decided by us in this Parliament.
Sentiment score: 0.39
It is important to note the overall numbers coming in year on year are going down. That is very important and it is the result of a range of measures - some I will accept before the Deputy says it are international and some are directly as a result of the actions taken by myself, the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan and this Government in terms of dealing with the inward flow of migration into the country. That is a very important thing to recognise when we are having this discussion. It is obviously important for us to recognise also that that deep co-operation between the United Kingdom and Ireland at all levels contributes to managing the common travel area. This legislation will enable us to continue to manage effectively what we need to do on the international protection side.
Sentiment score: 0.41
I move amendment No. 12: In page 23, lines 33 and 34, to delete "174(1) or 174(5)" and substitute "174(1), 174(5), 176 or 193". I propose to take Amendments Nos. 12, 137, 138, 140, 144, 155, 159, 167, 194, 197, 221 to 224, inclusive, 245 to 247, inclusive, 255, 263, 266, 267 and 269 together. They are technical and drafting amendments providing clarity and correcting errors in the text.
Sentiment score: -0.04
It is the Government's intention that the system will be properly resourced to deal with the issues and matters arising that the Deputy has mentioned.
Sentiment score: 0.03
Sorry, the Deputy is talking to an amendment-----
Sentiment score: -0.08
Yes, but he is referring to his amendment. Tusla is not under my control as Minister of State.
Sentiment score: 0.11
I am not.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I am not. I very clearly said it is the Government's intention that Tusla will be properly resourced.
Sentiment score: 0.23
I clearly indicated-----
Sentiment score: 0.40
I have clearly indicated to the Deputy.
Sentiment score: 0.40
I thank the Deputy. In relation to that, I am happy. Care and attention was taken in the drafting of that to make sure it is appropriate and correct.
Sentiment score: 0.53
My understanding is that, as part of this, there will be the deeming of countries to be safe third countries. The procedure in the new Bill is intended to be more efficient, with specific timeframes set out for the different parts of the process. The question of the UK being a safe third country will be looked at after the Bill has gone through.
Sentiment score: 0.45
Under section 74 of the International Protection Act 2015, the International Protection Office is independent in the performance of its function. Officers, in considering international protection applications at first instance, make recommendations to the Minister on the applications, but they do not make decisions. This provision was necessary at the time when the Act was drafted to allow the International Protection Appeals Tribunal to set aside a first instance recommendation and issue a fresh recommendation to the Minister. The ministerial decision unit in the IPO would then issue the final decision. Under the timelines of the pact and Bill, this system of recommendations is no longer feasible. The Minister is the determining authority who will be responsible for issuing first-instance decisions. The measures under the pact do not require the independence of officers who will be performing the functions of the Minister. It is for this reason I do not propose to accept the amendment. By the way, the arrangements have been subject to very careful consideration by the Office of the Attorney General to ensure we are satisfied that this process is in place and correct.
Sentiment score: 0.11
I hear clearly what the Deputy is saying. However, I will reiterate what I said in my initial reply to him. Areas like this are looked at very carefully. Advice is sought from the Attorney General. There is clear advice on what we are doing. Therefore, I am not in a position at this point to accept the Deputy’s amendment.
Sentiment score: 0.28
As I have mentioned in relation to this - and I appreciate the Deputy has too - this will be examined in terms of the UK prior to commencement and it can be done by ministerial action. It is our intention to look at this after the enactment of the Bill.
Sentiment score: 0.20
It is section 11 and it will be resolved by the designation of Britain, which can be done prior, as I said, to the commencement by the Minister.
Sentiment score: 0.18
A huge amount of work has gone into this Bill for the purpose of examining the range of issues Deputies are mentioning to ensure from the Government's point of view we are bringing forward the strongest set of legislative proposals we can, taking account of the advice we have received. The Bill is designed to succeed in trying to address all the issues Members across the House want to see us address in terms of international protection, how we regulate it and how manage it. I am very confident this Bill can do that for us.
Sentiment score: 0.62
We are legislating to put in place what the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and I believe is a complete overhaul of our system and what we need going forward. As other contributors have said, this is not just for the now, but for the future. That is very important. On a number of occasions, I have addressed comments on the fact that we have a strong ongoing relationship with the UK at a political and official level, and at a relationship level between An Garda Síochána and the policing authorities in the UK. All of that relates to ensuring the proper and effective running of the common travel area.
Sentiment score: 0.29