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

Matt Carthy (SF), Cavan-Monaghan

Earlier, the Minister spoke about the democratic process and how the EU migration and asylum pact was democratically voted through by the Houses of the Oireachtas and, therefore, there should be no question of it or the implications for Irish sovereignty. To be clear, when I say, “Irish sovereignty”, I mean the ability of the Irish Government to enact legislation relating to immigration, particularly international protection, in this State. I make no apologies for Sinn Féin’s position that we oppose, and will continue to oppose, moves that undermine Irish sovereignty unnecessarily.
I am a former Member of the European Parliament. I believe in the concept of the European Union where member states work together to deliver things that can only be delivered by working collaboratively. In respect of what that means in the context of the EU asylum and migration pact and how Sinn Féin approached this, we looked at each of the regulations and directives within the pact in turn and deliberated as to whether it was in Ireland’s best interest to sign up to the pact. There were a number of aspects with which Sinn Féin agreed we need to sign up to on the basis that the only way they are workable is through working together.
Of course, we need to have an EU framework to deal with returns regulations and the sharing of information between member states. We do not need an EU framework to ensure that we have an efficient processing system, however. In fact, it is irrelevant. When it comes to having a competent government that can speed up our processing times, the only difference signing up to the EU migration and asylum pact makes is that we will be potentially liable for fines if we do not achieve it. Not only do the Irish people get the benefit of having an incompetent Government, but taxpayers will also be fined for the luxury of having that incompetent Government.
We do not need the pact to ensure that when decisions are made, they are enforced or at least monitored nor do we need the pact to move away from the blatant profiteering that has become the hallmark of this system. For all of those things, we need a competent government. Therefore, it does not make any sense for us to sign up to an EU framework, particularly when we are doing it from a starting point where we have a dysfunctional system and have not seen advances in processing. I accept that first-instance processing and median times have reduced, but the appeals have increased more than the first instances have reduced. Therefore, there is nothing.
As I mentioned earlier, we dealt with pre-legislative scrutiny. Stakeholders, Department officials, legal and migration experts and people from all different perspectives were before the committee, including people with a humanitarian perspective. No one expressed confidence in the ability of the Government or State to be in a position by June of this year to fundamentally transform the system and, therefore, it is crucially important that we deal with those areas we can deal with on a State-wide level.
The Minister spoke about how the Irish people amended the Constitution to allow us to sign up to measures at an EU level, that is, to hand over sovereignty. They did so on the very clear premise that it would be on matters we must deal with on an EU basis. In fact, throughout every debate, particularly in debates relating to both the Nice and Lisbon treaties, the Irish people had concerns about what they could mean for the ability of governments to hand over powers that could never be returned. One of the ways in which their concerns were assuaged - not the concerns of all Irish people, and certainly not mine - was through Protocol 21 of the Lisbon treaty. That gave Ireland something very important, namely, an opt-out of anything related to justice, security or freedom measures, which includes measures such as the EU asylum and migration pact. The Government, therefore, did not need to sign up to all aspects of it. As I have outlined, it is not in our best interests to do so.
Why then did the Government sign up to the EU asylum and migration pact, because it does not make any sense? Why would it tie the hands of not only the Government of the day but also all future governments to show flexibility? It did so because it wanted to show that it is doing something on the issue of migration. It had become a political issue and the Government wanted to be able to say that it was getting its act together and signing up to an EU pact, despite, as I mentioned earlier, not having any plan to actually deal with that. This means that, into the future, we will be operating within an EU framework. There is a lack of scrutiny in respect of this legislation. We are dealing with rushed timelines and a situation where we are going to have legislation enacted by June, although the processes and plan to deal with that will come at some undefined point in the future.
Elected representatives from here on will essentially be shut out. Democracy is not just about the ability of governments to make decisions. Rather, democracy fundamentally is about the ability of the people to kick out governments and elect a different government to make different decisions, if that is what the Irish people want. That is what is fundamentally being breached here.
I have three amendments in this regard. I have moved amendment No. 2. It expressly states it should be the will of these Houses to ensure no external body or institution would have the ability to make laws in respect of migration or international protection without the express approval of the Oireachtas and primary legislation.
Amendment No. 3 asks for the Minister, on an annual basis, to lay before the Oireachtas a report dealing with:
(a)	the extent to which the State’s international protection system remains under domestic control;
(b)	obligations arising from EU or international agreements during the preceding year; and
(c)	steps taken to ensure that Irish sovereignty and democratic oversight are maintained.
It states the report should be referred to the Oireachtas joint committee on justice. I hope the Minister will indicate support for that provision, if he does not support the first. It is important there be an outline.
Amendment No. 4 is crucially important because it goes to the crux of the second reason signing up to the EU asylum and migration pact was an absolute mistake. The pact, naturally enough for a European Union document, makes no provision for and gives no consideration whatsoever to the common travel area and how changes that happen in Britain might affect changes here. The amendment asks the Government to "prepare and publish an assessment of the potential and actual impacts on the common travel area arising from the operation of this Act." It states that the assessment should include:
(a)	analysis of any implications for the movement of persons between the State and Great Britain,
(b)	consideration of the effect of international protection procedures on CTA integrity and cooperation,
(c)	evaluation of any risks of displacement or diversion effects within the CTA, and
(d) measures proposed to mitigate identified impacts.
It also states:
(3)	The Government shall consult with relevant Departments, agencies, and stakeholders, including those with responsibility for immigration control, border management, and CTA co-ordination.
It states that assessment should be laid before this House on an annual basis. That is crucially important because various Ministers at different times - I have lost count of the different figures - have said that 80%, 85%, 90% and 90%-plus of the number of people seeking international protection in this State arrive via the common travel area. I presume everyone agrees that over 50% are coming from within the common travel area, and it is probably higher.
If we are then locking ourselves into an EU framework that does not take cognisance of that, it requires an explanation that no Minister has given. If it is the case that those numbers are, in fact, the reality, and if we were serious and if the Government was serious about dealing with the dysfunction in the international protection system, the priority would be having a bilateral agreement with the British Government in respect of ensuring that we have a returns policy and the sharing of information and all of that. We have an informal agreement but there have been no moves and there is no sense of urgency or sign that the Government is dealing with this issue as a serious matter. I hope and expect that amendment No. 4 will be supported by the Government.
This amendment is required because the Government signed us up without any consideration. We have seen it time and time again. The Government is now rendering Protocol 21 meaningless. It is opting into virtually every EU measure that is coming forward. It is all a facade. It is to show that the Government is doing something when in reality all it is doing is signing up to measures it cannot control. It is not taking cognisance of the position.
The Government carried out a review of Protocol 21. It acknowledged explicitly that opt-outs exist and are maintained because of the common travel area. Yet, the opt-outs are always and repeatedly being disregarded. The amendment requires the Government to examine and publish how the Bill will affect the common travel area and mandates analysis.
I will say the following, and I think this is an appropriate time to talk about the issue. Lots of people have raised concerns about immigration into this State. Some come from a genuine place of concern for those people who are coming here and for the capacity of the system to deal with the numbers who are coming. Others come from a nastier and racist position. Let us call a spade a spade. If people were serious about tackling those concerns, the single greatest thing we could do to ensure we have a migration system that works effectively would be to get rid of the Border on this island and ensure we deal with the issue on an all-Ireland and united-Ireland basis. The people who have concerns and believe that these issues have not been managed should be the loudest and most vocal united Ireland proponents among us. It is the only way in which to deal with this.
I look forward to hearing the response of the Minister of State, Deputy Brophy, to these amendments. It will speak volumes to the seriousness of what the Minister has said about his respect for these Houses and the ability of these Houses to act in the best interests of the Irish people, going forward, and being able to be flexible in terms of making changes to the international protection system when circumstances change. That is the definition of democracy.

---

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