Select Committee on Legislation and Security debate -
Wednesday, 5 Oct 1994

SECTION 8.

Mr. G. Mitchell

I move amendment No. 13:

In page 6, lines 37 to 41, to delete subsection (1) and substitute the following:

"8. (1) The Board shall, after the end of each 6 month period, submit a report in writing to the Minister of its activities during the previous 6 months and, not later than one month after such submission, the Minister shall cause a copy of the report to be laid before each House of the Oireachtas.".

The number of refugees arriving in Ireland would allow for this to be done. Six months is a reasonable period. One month after the Minister receives the report also seems to be a reasonable period. The peak number of refugees coming to Ireland in recent years, excluding the Vietnamese refugees, was about 90 and the average is between 40 and 50. In a six month period 20 to 25 applicants would be received and adjudicated on. I do not think it would be a major task to lay a report before each House of the Oireachtas one month after the six month period has ended. It is not as if we will have 500,000 refugees as they have in countries like Germany. We are surrounded by water and there is not much prospect of a large number of people coming through Northern Ireland. For the foreseeable future the average number of refugees coming here will certainly be less than 100 and probably less than 50. To compile reports of this kind after a six month period and to present them to both Houses of the Oireachtas within a month is a reasonable requirement and I hope the Minister will find it possible to accept the amendment.

Mr. Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny)

The submission from the Minister refers to not later than six months after the end of each year. This means that it could be 18 months before the first report would be issued.

Mr. G. Mitchell

And a further three months before it is put before the Oireachtas.

Mr. Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny)

As we are all serious about helping refugees, the period during which no report would be submitted to anybody would be very long. If things went wrong — they certainly have gone wrong — it could be 21 months before the Minister submits the report to the Oireachtas. Six monthly reports would be reasonable. Such reports may not be normal, we are more used to annual reports. However, this is not a normal Bill and we are not dealing with a normal situation. I ask the Minister to consider making provision for the preparation of a report by the board within six months and the laying of the report by her before the Oireachtas not later than one month after she receives it. There is no justification for keeping a report for three months.

Ms O'Donnell

With regard to this section and the idea of reporting back to the Minister, it is important that we evaluate how the board is functioning. Such an evaluation should be submitted to the Minster first. It is most important that both Houses are kept aware of how the new process and procedures are operating in practice. Many of the concerns and worries over the years have related to the total lack of transparency of the previous procedures. The process of determining who was a refugee and everything connected with asylum law was dominated by obsessive secrecy, and suspicion was bred where suspicions might have been well founded. It is important to involve both Houses of the Oireachtas in the process.

This morning we were privately briefed by Department officials on the dangers of the Dublin Convention being implemented before its ratification. Many Opposition Members and other members of the committee expressed fear about the democratic deficit in the area of asylum law and how the matter is progressing at EU level. Many developments occur behind closed doors between EU Ministers for Home Affairs and Justice and there is fear and suspicion that Parliaments in the European Union do not have enough input into the development of asylum law. Immigration policies and visa requirements lack a democratic input.

It is important to monitor and evaluate how the board is operating, what problems are being encountered, how the definition of refugee is being interpreted and the various other interpretations which have been raised during the debate on Committee Stage. I am interested to know why the Minister has stipulated three months after such submission, as distinct from Deputy Mitchell's requirement of one month. There may be a procedural reason for this, but it is important that this section allows both Houses of the Oireachtas to see what is happening to our policy on asylum. That has been a big pitfall in the past.

Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn

As someone who has been critical of semi-State organisations which publish annual reports two or three years after that year's work has been done, I cannot disagree with what my colleagues across the floor say on reports from the Refugee Applications Board. I am aware that all Members of the Oireachtas will be interested in the work of the Refugee Applications Board and will want to know about its work and results over a particular period as quickly as possible. I am not adverse to the point made in Deputy Mitchell's amendment. However, I am conscious that if one has large numbers of applications — for example, this year there are 253 applications for asylum — and one confines the board to making two reports per year, one every six months, one might tie it up in preparing the six monthly report, rather than allowing it do its work. However, I appreciate the points made and I will look at them between now and Report Stage.

As regards Deputy O'Donnell's point as to why we have laid down three months in section 8, there is no specific reason for it, other than that this is the type of language used in all legislation which requires a body to produce a report for the Houses of the Oireachtas. I will consider her points between now and Report Stage.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 8 agreed to.