The Tánaiste, Micheál Martin, recently spoke of the attempts by far-right groups to seek entry into our parliament by the back door by encouraging some TDs and Senators to adopt racial replacement rhetoric in their contributions to debates in the Oireachtas. And his observations have some substance, even if those contributions have gained relatively little traction in the public’s mind.
The notion that Ireland is, or could become, a soft touch for uncontrolled economic migration posing as asylum seeking is a potent political weapon in the wrong hands.
While some tend to ignore the distinction between economic migration on the one hand and seeking asylum from persecution on the other – or to minimise that distinction – it remains important for the purposes of international law and for Ireland’s national policy development in relation to migration. Ireland offers protection to refugees from persecution and offers subsidiary protection to some people who although not refugees are at risk if serious harm if repatriated.
The 1951 United Nations Convention on Refugees originally applied only to historic refugees in the aftermath of the second World War, but its ambit was later extended to all potential victims of state persecution.
Our party whip system is too severe. Politicians should be able to vote with their conscience
Miriam Lord: Swoosh! Down comes the guillotine, but controversial planning Bill is partially spared
New process to strip Irish citizenship is passed by Oireachtas
Seanad is an institution chosen by graduates and stuffed with political wannabes
In an era of cheap mass air travel, the protection right accorded to would-be applicants for asylum is massively expanded in practice. Developed countries find it immensely difficult to deal with the volume of asylum-seeking arrivals in a manner and time frame that is both fair and effective. It is that inability which creates an opening for economic migration posing as asylum-seeking and for the international trafficking of economic migrants.
The European Union has regulations about which member states should process international protection applications to ensure the burden is shared evenly. But would-be applicants for asylum in Ireland find little difficulty in transiting through the EU to seek asylum in Ireland.
This newspaper reported in October that 40 per cent of asylum seekers at Dublin Airport appear to have lost or destroyed their travel/identity documents between boarding a flight for Dublin and presenting at immigration control. The Department of Justice has acknowledged that the volume of would-be asylum seekers has grown very significantly when compared with pre-pandemic levels. The rate of undocumented applicants is 225 per cent higher than it was in 2018.
We cannot afford to become a revolving back door for illegal migrants to Britain
Quite apart from the 50,000 Ukrainians who were rightly given temporarily refugee status here this year (including rights to work, welfare and education), we already have 10,000 other asylum seekers in State accommodation.
In the months January to June 2022, 7,760 non-Ukrainian people applied for asylum in Ireland (an annual rate of more than 10,000); the number of undocumented applicants at the airport was 40 per cent of that figure.
Almost 20 per cent of asylum-seekers at Dublin Airport came from Georgia, a country with visa-free access to the EU but with no direct flights. Other main countries of origin are Somalia and Algeria.
While the department surmised that the growth in post-pandemic asylum seeking in Ireland could be explained in part by less sympathetic protection regimes in other countries, Minister for Justice Helen McEntee stated her belief that this higher rate of asylum seeking is likely to continue.
All of this is thrown into sharper focus by the crisis in emergency accommodation arising from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, increased reliance on extended direct provision facilities and an underlying failure to ensure that home-building matches overall growth in our population.
The number of genuine asylum seekers from Georgia must be tiny. Destroying travel documents makes the Irish international protection legal process longer and less effective. While some may think that air carriers should be obliged to scan and keep records of passengers’ passports, that may be difficult to implement in practice.
As if the present emergency accommodation crisis were not enough, we must recall the vital need to keep the Common Travel Area between Ireland and the UK in proper working order. We cannot afford to become a revolving back door for illegal migrants to Britain.
It is unreasonable to expect that the UK government establishes full immigration border controls between the North and Britain – not to mention from the Republic. No government at Westminster, even a Labour-led government, can be indifferent to the possibility that transit through Ireland succeeds the Channel boat crossing route as a means of illegal entry.
We must face up to these issues honestly, reasonably and, most of all, effectively if we are not going to play into the hands of extremist would-be politicians trading in xenophobia and fear.
International protection applications must be processed far more quickly. Destruction of air travel/identity documents must become a negative for applicants. Judicial review should be simplified and take a different form, perhaps, in lower-level summary immigration courts. All areas of delay need to be tackled urgently.
So Micheál Martin was correct to warn us about the dangers of far-right politics exploiting this crisis. But words of warning are insufficient; action is also required.