Richard Boyd Barrett: Demands Right to Work for Asylum Seekers

Minister, up until May 2017, your government operated a complete ban on the right of asylum seekers to look for employment, to work and contribute to our society. That ban was found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2017, but the limited right to work that you have brought in as a result of that Supreme Court case has still left the vast, vast majority of asylum seekers either without the right to employment or with so many obstacles in the way of getting employment that effectively is no use to them. Now I wonder, do you recognise that fact and do you not think we would solve a lot of problems and hardships if you gave a right to work to asylum seekers, to all asylum seekers in this country? The Commission's directive allows for member states to decide on conditions for granting access to the labour market for applicants for international protection in accordance with national law. The European Communities Receptive Conditions Regulations 2018, which were signed into effect on June 2018, includes access to the labour market for qualified international protection applicants. The Regulations provide access to both employment and self-employment in all sectors and all categories of employment, with the exception of civil and public service in Gardaíkán and Defence Forces. No restrictions on the type of work, no restrictions on the level of income possible. Under the Regulations, international protection applicants will have access to the labour market nine months from the date when their protection application was lodged, if they have not just received a first-instance recommendation from the International Protection Office, and if they have cooperated with the process. Applicants must have made reasonable efforts to establish their identity, and then on commencement of employment they must register with regular commissioners and be tax-compliant. Providing access to the labour market where a person is waiting more than nine months without a first-instance recommendation is in full compliance with the provisions of the Directive. It recognises that where a person does not have clarity on their status in the State within that period, it is reasonable to allow them to access the labour market. The access provided for in Ireland is broad and generous, with almost no restrictions. I believe that the system as it prevails is a fair one, and allows protection applicants to seek employment after a reasonable period of time, from the time they apply for protection in the State. A balance must be struck between the intention not to turn the asylum system into a pathway for economic immigration, as it would not be fair for those fleeing persecution, or for those who might get to Ireland to work under the appropriate immigration challenge. However, it has always been intended to review the system, and I feel the time is appropriate to do that now, because it has been in operation for over a year, to determine if it is meeting the needs of applicants for protection and their potential employers. With that regard, a high-level interdepartmental group has been set up to currently review the implementations of the State's obligations under the EU Reception Conditions Directive, including access to work and the direct provision of services offered to applicants while their applications are being made, and I expect to receive a report within days from that interdepartmental group. With regard to eligibility, as of the 30th of October of this year, there were 2,429 international protection applicants aged 16 or over, who are waiting nine months or more for a first-instance recommendation on their international protection claim. All of these people may apply for labour market access permission, subject to meeting the eligibility criteria. Thank you, Minister Deputy Boyd Barrett. Minister. You know, it makes no sense. We have labour shortages in a whole number of areas, in our health service, in special needs, in childcare, in construction. You can go through the list, and yet we have thousands of people forced to live in pretty inhumane conditions, in isolated, much of the time, direct provision centres, who want to work, but can't work. Now, it doesn't make any sense for them, or for our society. Having to wait nine months, and only in the case of a first application, why force them to wait nine months? And, remember, many of the people who subsequently get the right to asylum in this country get refused on the first application. And, in fact, in the particular case that led the Supreme Court to strike down your ban on employment for asylum seekers, it was a man who was in direct provision for eight years from the Rohingya, a persecuted group, we know to be persecuted, subsequently gets the right to stay, but was forced to exist in direct provision for eight years. Why would you do that? When it would benefit our society, and it would benefit the people forced into the isolation, the stigma, the hardship, and so on of direct provision centres, not to give them the right to work, to make it easy for them to contribute to our society. So, I'm glad your review is upcoming, and I hope you will seriously look at the many, many obstacles, inability to get driving licences, the transport isolation of many asylum seekers because of the location or direct provision centres, and so on. So, if you look at these things and recognise these are people who could and want to make a contribution to our society. Aye, Izzy. The Deputy Tribes and Misery. 3,438 labour market permissions have been granted to date. That's a huge number that have been granted to date. And I reject, oh, totally out of hand, the Deputy's assertion that people are forced to live anywhere, or that they're inhumane. That's terrible language to use for people who are coming here looking for international protection. And it's not true, and I think the Deputy should reconsider using that kind of language. So, there are people now who are working, and we are actually on the brink of making changes to the system and looking at it. We are taking it very seriously, and it is very, very important for people to be able to work, because if they do get permission, they can actually work here and stay here, and they have built up skills. And if they don't, and if they have to leave the country, they'll bring them skills back with them to where they came from initially. So, everyone wins in this regard. So, it is a successful scheme. We are working to improve it, and we're going to do that. Thank you. Deputy Boyd Barrett. Listen, having children live in hostels or hotels for years on end, for their mothers and fathers not to be able to cook dinners for them, that's inhumane. It's inhumane for asylum seekers. It's inhumane for people in family emergency homeless hubs, right? That's not an unreasonable word to use about it. And I'll tell you what's a more important word, totally unnecessary. And you're failing to recognise, or at least I hope you will recognise, there are many obstacles to those who have been given the right to work, namely public transport difficulties, the difficulty of getting a driving licence, all of those barriers, which mean even people who want to get to work, and now have been given the right to work, actually find it difficult because of those obstacles. And many people, who are longer in the system, who are on an appeal, deny the right to work completely. Why would you deny them the right to work, rather than allowing them to make a dignified contribution to our society? Yes, very much. Listen, we have actually made huge improvements to the system, and I invite the Deputy to look at those improvements. More than half the people in the centres now actually can cook for their families and are cooking for their families. They're living in much improved conditions under the MacMahon report as well. So I'd invite the Deputy to look at what's been done, and to start using positive language in respect of asylum seekers and those looking for international protection, rather than negative verbiage that's coming out all the time. Thank you. Thank you.