I welcome the opportunity to speak in support of the International Protection Bill 2026. Fianna Fáil welcomes this debate because we believe it is vital and important. We fundamentally believe in the right to claim asylum. That principle is not optional. It is a cornerstone of international law and a test of our values as a country. Equally, we are committed to a fair but firm system, one that respects the dignity of those who genuinely need protection while also safeguarding the integrity of our borders and the credibility of our immigration and asylum system. If public confidence in the fairness and effectiveness of the system is lost, we risk undermining the very protections that exist for those who need them most. This Bill matters because it is a reset. It is the most comprehensive reform of international protection law in the history of the State. It will replace the International Protection Act 2015. It is vital. At the crux of this, a system that is too slow is unfair to everyone. It does not serve applicants who are granted protection because they can spend years stuck in limbo, unable to properly integrate, plan and build a stable future. It does not serve the State because long delays place huge pressure on accommodation capacity, health services, educational services and community infrastructure. It does not serve local communities because the longer a system drags on, the more it fuels frustration, misinformation and fear, and it creates an environment in which bad actors can exploit legitimate public concerns. This is not good for Ireland and it is not good for genuine refugees either. The Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, Deputy O'Callaghan, has been clear that our current system can be more efficient, faster and less costly. That is what this Bill is designed to achieve. The Bill also ensures Ireland has a sustainable and credible system in line with the EU migration and asylum pact. The pact is designed to upgrade the common European asylum system so that there is a consistent, fair, sustainable and efficient asylum procedure across the EU, not just in ordinary times but also in periods of migratory pressure and crisis. Ireland has opted in to key elements of the pact. That was the right decision because a common system across the EU ensures applicants are treated the same in every member state. That matters. It reduces the incentive for people to move from one EU state to another, reduces secondary movement and ensures responsibility is shared more fairly. Crucially, it ensures Ireland is not isolated in how we manage migration and asylum because this is not a challenge any one country can solve alone. It is important to highlight what this Bill does. It ensures speed, structure and fairness. This Bill is not about closing the door to asylum; it is about creating a system that works. It introduces major reforms in four key areas. It introduces, first, a streamlined decision-making process; second, a streamlined returns process; third, a new border procedure with strict time limits; and, fourth, new institutional structures, including a new appeals body and an independent inspectorate. This is a rules-based reform. That is the central point. It is about moving from a system that is slow and inconsistent to one that is rules-based, predictable and efficient. One of the most important reforms in the Bill is the strengthening of screening procedures. Part 2 provides for the taking of biometric data and the screening of applicants, including the designation of screening centres, the screening process, and preliminary health and vulnerability checks. This is not about suspicion; it is about the basics of a functioning system. The State has a right and an obligation to know who is in the country, to verify identity and nationality and to ensure there are checks against relevant databases, where necessary. Screening is envisaged as a one-stop shop, a practical system to carry out checks, register and lodge applications and determine the appropriate procedure. It also includes preliminary health and vulnerability checks. That is vital because a humane system must identify those who need healthcare, those who are vulnerable, those who may be children and those who need special supports. This is not only good administration; it is a human rights issues as well. The Bill also provides for applicants to receive an international protection applicant card. That is a sensible and necessary reform. It allows applicants to identify themselves to national authorities and to access their rights for the duration of the procedure. It brings order, clarity and structure, and it reduces the confusion that can arise in communities and services when people have no consistent documentation. Another key reform in this Bill is the restructuring of decision-making at first instance and on appeal. Under the Bill, officers of the Minister will directly make decisions on international protection applications. However, most significantly, a negative decision will be issued as one decision, including a decision that an applicant does not qualify for refugee status, a decision that the applicant is not eligible for subsidiary protection and a return decision under Part 9. For the first time in Irish legislation, a return decision will be issued together with the decision rejecting an international protection application. This is a major change. It is essential because one of the greatest weaknesses in our current system is that refusal does not automatically translate into an effective and timely return process, and that creates a gap between law and reality. When there is a gap between law and reality the public loses confidence and the system becomes vulnerable to abuse. This Bill closes that gap. This Bill introduces a new asylum border procedure. This is one of the most discussed and necessary reforms. The asylum border procedure sets a 12-week time limit for first-instance and appeal decisions in appropriate cases. It applies to applicants from countries with an EU recognition rate of 20% or less, applicants who intentionally mislead authorities, applicants who destroy documents to prevent identity verification or applicants deemed a national security risk. The aim is clear: to issue decisions to the quickest possible time to those less likely to have an entitlement to international protection. That is not unfair; that is common sense. It is aligned with how many EU member states already operate - ending the endless delays. Similarly, the Bill provides for an accelerated examination procedure, with a three-month time limit. This is essential to end the long backlogs that have built up over time. I want to emphasise that speed is not the enemy of fairness. In fact, in many cases, speed is a requirement of fairness because long delays damage applicants, damage communities and damage the credibility of the State. The Bill also establishes a new second instance body, the tribunal for asylum and returns appeals, TARA. This body will replace the existing IPAT for new applications from June 2026 onwards. The Bill also provides for fewer oral hearings in appeals, unless an oral hearing is necessary for a full and fair examination. This is another important reform because oral hearings are resource intensive. They are time-consuming and can contribute to delay but the Bill ensures that fair procedures are maintained. Appeals will still be available, and the appeals officer will still have the power to decide that an oral hearing is necessary. Again, the balance is correct - efficiency without undermining due process. A major strength of this Bill is that it does not simply create faster procedures, it also creates stronger oversight. Part 12 establishes a new, independent monitoring mechanism, through the Office of Chief Inspector of Asylum Border Procedures. This office will monitor compliance with EU and international law, including the EU charter of fundamental rights, during screening and during the border procedure. It will investigate allegations of breaches. That is crucial. If we are going to have faster procedures, we must also have strong, independent safeguards. That is what separates a rules-based, fair system from one that can drift into injustice. I also welcome the provisions relating to age assessments and the involvement of Tusla. The Bill provides for multidisciplinary age assessments where there is doubt as to whether an applicant is a minor. This is a difficult area but it must be dealt with in a structured and lawful way because the stakes are enormous. Children must be protected, and the system must be protected from misuse. The Bill's approach, developed trough engagement between the Department of children and Tusla, is the correct approach. Part 13 provides for the appointment of representatives for unaccompanied minors, with further amendments planned on Committee Stage to clarify which arm of the State will be responsible. I believe this is essential. Vulnerable children cannot be expected to navigate these procedures alone. The Bill also strengthens voluntary return. That matters because voluntary return is often the most practical, cost-effective and humane way to implement return decisions. It provides an incentive. If a person opts for voluntary return and complies fully, the return decision and entry ban can be revoked. That is sensible. It helps achieve the objective of returns without creating unnecessary enforcement costs or confrontation. Restoring credibility and integrity has to be at the core of this Bill. We have to speak honestly about returns. A system without returns is not a functioning asylum system. If a person has exhausted his or her claim and does not quality for protection, the State must be able to implement the decision. Otherwise, the entire system becomes meaningless. The Bill mandates that return decisions be issued alongside negative decisions. It also includes a carve-out to ensure that returns cannot happen where they would be unlawful, including where refoulement risks arise. That is an important safeguard. This is not about breaching international obligations; it is about enforcing them properly. I also welcome the fact that the Minister intends to bring forward on Committee Stage amendments on key areas, including legal counselling, legal advice and legal aid, reception conditions, including accommodation allocation, restrictions of movement, detention and labour market access, representatives for unaccompanied minors, security appeals, data sharing and consultation with the Data Protection Commissioner. This is how legislation should be done. It is not a closed process; it is a serious reform, improved through scrutiny and debate. I want to say this clearly. This Bill does not undermine Ireland's commitment to asylum; it strengthens it. The only way we protect the right to asylum is by ensuring the system is fair, efficient, credible and sustainable. A slow system has no compassion for anybody. A chaotic system is not humane. A system without returns is not a system at all. This Bill is a reset. It streamlines decisions, strengthens screening, creates faster timelines, reforms appeals, improves returns and introduces independent oversight. It protects applicants, communities and the integrity of the State. For those reasons, I support the International Protection Bill 2026 and wish the Minister all the best with the amendments.

Sentiment score: 0.11