Senator Gerard P. Craughwell - speech from 30 Jul 2020

Good morning, if it's possible, I'd like to share some time with my colleague Senator Mullins. I'll take four minutes and let him have two, if that's okay. Four and two, is that agreed? Minister, first I want to welcome you to the House. If you perform like you did in the European Office, Justice has got a great Minister. So I'm delighted to see you here. Minister, we've been bashing about. I came into the Senate in 2014 and at that stage, 2014-2015, Senator Norris introduced a bill on direct provision. And there were grand words stated by everybody in this House, and we were going to fix the problem overnight. We haven't fixed the problem. We have never, ever, ever tackled the problem of asylum seekers, refugees and economic migrants coming into this country. I don't believe anybody from this Parliament, apart from myself, went to Sicily to actually see firsthand how the process was dealt with when we had literally tens of thousands of migrants crossed in the Mediterranean. God helped them. At least the young men were able to care for themselves. But I met young women in Sicily and what they went through to get from Tripoli and various other parts of North Africa into Sicily was just unbelievable. So I'm afraid grand words about asylum seekers and about direct provision and all that, it rests nowhere with me. Absolutely nowhere. I haven't been to Carras Iveen, so I'm not going to speak about Carras Iveen. I don't believe in speaking about something I haven't seen firsthand. What I am going to say is I am extremely concerned when I hear in the Programme for Government that we're going to develop a not-for-profit direct provision centre. I'd love somebody to explain to me what this means because the state shirked its responsibility to provide proper accommodation for asylum seekers, refugees and economic migrants coming into this country many, many years ago. And what they did do is they took soft options. And I'm not accusing you here, Minister, I'm talking about the system. They took soft options. They went to small little villages where there were hotels locked up because of the economic crisis in the 2008 and beyond. And quietly and sneakily went into these villages and done deals with hotel owners and NAMA and whoever else in order to bring these most unfortunate people into these villages. We really did not care for the people who came into this country. We treated them as a problem and they have been a problem ever since they arrived. The other thing that we did wrong in this country was, my colleague has pointed out, limited access to education. You know, children that were born in this country went from national school through to leaving cert. How did that happen? Why is it that we shirked our responsibility to actually assess those who come into the country as genuine asylum seekers, genuine refugees or economic migrants? And where they did not fit the criteria to enter the country, that they would be dealt with in a short period of time and sent home if they did not fill the criteria. That might sound heartless, but by doing what we have done, we have affected those who came into the country and made their lives miserable. So we have by sticking them in these godforsaken places for years on end. Now, I do not see a way around the not-for-profit. I thank the profiteers that actually provided the accommodation we could not provide as a state. So I would love somebody to explain that. The large numbers being brought to small villages has decimated political careers in this house. Both those who won seats and those who lost seats. And it was done because the deal was done behind their backs. And quite frankly, I think it was terrible. So I hate to see it moving from one department to another. I am not convinced that it will happen. I am going to leave it to my colleague now. Thank you. Thank you.