International Protection Bill 2026: Committee Stage
Dail Éireann — 2026-02-18
============================================================

Matt Carthy (SF), Cavan-Monaghan

I am not suggesting the Minister does but the difficult is that the Bills Office was under so much time pressure that by the time it informed me of that, there was not any time for me to ask any questions or seek any clarifications, as should have been the case.
I mentioned on Second Stage that I fully believe this Bill will not be enacted a full year before provisions of it are challenged legally on the basis that there will be problems with the legislation, and one of the reasons there will be problems is that we have not had proper deliberation.
The second reason these Houses have cause to be concerned is that this Bill is locked in with the EU migration and asylum pact. There could well be infringement proceedings against this State in respect of the failure to adhere to the enactment of the legislation and that is why I have asked the Minister a number of questions. I would appreciate if the Minister could come back and outline the preparatory work that is in place to deal with the issues. In terms of accommodation capacity, what is the plan to ensure that by the time this Bill is enacted, there will be accommodation to deal with any obligations that are contained within the pact? Will there be a move away from the profiteering model that has been the hallmark of this system and ensured that a very small number of companies and operators have made fortunes in very short periods without accountability and transparency? Is the Minister proposing to bring forward additional transparency for private operator contracts?
It would be appropriate at this point if the Minister could outline to us the capacity of both the International Protection Office, IPO, and the International Protection Appeals Tribunal, IPAT, the current levels of staffing within both, the staffing gaps within both, the necessary increase in staffing within both that will be required to implement the Bill on enactment, and how the Minister will make up the difference in time for the enactment.
Has the Minister or his Department carried out any analysis of potential infringement proceedings that could be taken, if his Department is not in a position to do what it is making itself legally obliged to do?
To respond to some of the points the Minister has made regarding the approach, the Minister has a responsibility, as do the Government and the Department, but these Houses have responsibilities as well. One of the difficulties I have with the approach that has been taken is that we are being denied the full ability to play our constitutional role in scrutinising legislation. The Minister mentioned the general scheme brought before the justice committee. Yes, there were good deliberations, good debate and cross-party collaboration from all members of the committee, but the Minister did not say that when the general scheme was brought forward, there was huge gaps in it. There were parts of the general scheme that the Minister's departmental officials told us they would deal with on Second Stage, Committee Stage or Report Stage. Many of the witnesses who came before the committee said they had a real problem because they did not know what was going to be in the legislation in order to contribute to the pre-legislative scrutiny.
The Bill was produced but within a week, we had to deal with Second Stage, and before Second Stage was completed, we had to submit amendments. Amendments are a crucial part of bringing Bills forward. The Minister is coming at this with all the resources of a Government Department behind him, and by his own admission, he said this is an all-of-government priority. With all the resources he had, however, the Minister was not able to have the general scheme completed by the time it was published and was not able to have all his amendments and proposals ready before Second Stage. He has had to bring forward amendments on Committee Stage, yet the Opposition is expected to go through the Bill in detail, engage with those who need to be engaged with, submit amendments, analyse the Government's amendments and analyse other Opposition amendments within a timeframe that is simply impossible.
To remind people, we are talking about a Minister with the resources of an entire Department. Each TD has one member of staff who can assist them in dealing with this. That is a huge ask, and I say this in deference to other parties because within my party, we have the numbers to ensure I deal with justice, home affairs and migration on their own. TDs in smaller parties are expected to go through this legislation and process while also dealing with three or four other portfolios. The approach the Minister has taken has not allowed the Opposition to play its constitutional role in scrutinising this legislation.
That is a huge problem. As the Minister said and as has been outlined a number of times, this is one of the most substantive pieces of legislation. There could be financial consequences way beyond the outworkings of the legislation itself. Therefore, it is unacceptable that the committee has not been allowed to carry out its work by having a deliberation on the questions I have put to the Minister in an over-and-back format on Committee Stage.
I put these questions to the Minister and I hope he will take the opportunity to give this House assurance in respect of the preparatory work and in respect of his own Department, the IPO, IPAT, Tusla, the civil Legal Aid Board and the overall process and accommodation. If he cannot provide assurances that his Department is ready for everything it has enacted, I cannot support section 1, which would give the Minister the authority to enact this legislation at a time of his choosing, potentially opening up this State to huge costs from legal challenges and infringement proceedings at an EU level.

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/dail/2026-02-18/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:39+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-02-18