I am the first to say that reform of our international protection system is necessary, not simply because of the changes at EU level, but because there is international agreement and universal agreement that we need a system that is fit for purpose. I say that because I saw first hand the consequences of years of compounded bad policy decisions, along with a failure to recognise the nature of modern asylum and plan for a system that responds to the reality of asylum today. I want to make a genuine effort to be fair because managing this is one of the hardest tasks in politics today. The asylum and migration pact, though imperfect, is important in that it ensures the whole EU works together on these issues. That is what I argued for in government and what I continue to believe today. Going it alone, as the UK did, solves no problems; it only makes things worse. However, how this reform is implemented and what wider reforms are being brought forward at the same time is where we need to be extremely careful. We have the benefit in Ireland of being able to learn from the experiences of other jurisdictions, such as the UK, about what is effective and fair, but also what does not work. Speaking objectively, some elements of the Bill are needed. The Government is attempting with this Bill to address the two decades of policy failure that led to an international protection system that left people waiting for a decision about their status for years. It was a system that buckled when Ireland started to experience the same number of people seeking international protection as other European countries, compounded by the war in Ukraine at the same time. It was a nightmare confluence of factors for which our State was utterly unprepared. Therefore, we arrive today at this Bill. I acknowledge the efforts of the Minister's officials in what has been a complex drafting process. However, given the tone of the debates around migration - the heightened context under which this comes before us - it is the duty of Opposition TDs to ask whether we are solely advancing solutions to real world problems or we are bringing forth policies that have more to do with playing to a particular political line than improving our system. If it is the latter, what are the consequences for those this law claims to serve? What are the consequences for our country of focusing on areas where problems do not exist, like with draconian family reunification changes, but failing to focus on the acute problems, such as those in reception and accommodation? I need to call out the persistent efforts across the Minister's party to muddy the waters about the approach taken to these issues by the last Government. The Taoiseach persistently says that he is glad migration is back in the Department of justice. It is worrying that he was under the illusion that migration was not the responsibility of the Department of Justice in the last Government, particularly considering he was Taoiseach for two and a half years during that period. For the record, in the last Government, responsibility for immigration control, the International Protection Office, the refugee appeals tribunal, decisions on visas, family reunification policy - responsibility for every one of those areas - remained with the Department of Justice. The one area that was removed to the Department of children was responsibility for accommodation for those seeking international protection. As the Minister will be aware, that has now returned to the Department of justice. Now we are seeing a series of changes being loudly flagged in the media, including family reunification being tightened for no real reason, a diminution of legal advices that tests the limits of established due process, and fully desk-based reviews with no oral hearings. In today's Bill, some of that is formalised into new structures that look to weigh the balance against someone accessing refuge here. That may be the signal the Government wants to send from today's debate, but it is storing up new problems for the future and it penalises people in desperate situations for no real policy benefit. We absolutely need reform. We need decisions to be made more effectively and quickly. I acknowledge that, following investment and reform made under the last Government, the International Protection Office is now delivering its decisions on status in a far more timely way. However, we have to separate the policy we need from the policy that plays well in political theatre. That means adopting the pact and making our decisions more efficient, but it also calls for the Government to preserve basic legal rights and to put the same relentless focus on the accommodation side and moving away as quickly as possible from private providers. It calls for a border procedure that does not involve the incarceration of minors and their guardians. The cold house approach, the kind of hostile environment beloved of the UK Conservative Party, simply does not work. It is not supported by the evidence. Look at the post-Brexit migration numbers in the UK. The Minister knows as well as I the overriding factors determining international protection numbers in Ireland are decisions made at the Cabinet table in Downing Street. Right now, the numbers are lower. The relentless pressure I faced in sourcing accommodation has lessened and openings are consequently fewer. This is all because we have a moderate, co-operative Government in London, but what happens if Reform UK wins the next UK general election? What happens if the Minister faces Richard Tice as home secretary? What would have happened if the Starmer Government had pushed forward its mandatory ID cards policy? Which UK land border, which an entire peace process depends on being completely open, would have been the first to see an impact? With the lower arrival numbers, the Minister's Government has been given a moment to act decisively. While our international protection decision system must be more efficient and that will reduce numbers overall, if the Government fails to take advantage of the lower arrival numbers to change the accommodation system and to begin that move away from the expensive private providers of international protection accommodation, the Minister and his Government will find themselves hopelessly exposed when some international event outside of their control creates the next wave of migration across Europe.

Sentiment score: 0.05