International Protection Bill 2026: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Remaining Stages
Dail Éireann — 2026-02-25
============================================================

Matt Carthy (SF), Cavan-Monaghan

I am speaking in response to the Minister. He is the one who wanted to bring this to the floor of the Dáil. He is the one who refused the opportunity provided to him by the Oireachtas justice committee to have deliberations across every single amendment and section where these should be discussed - in the committee chamber. He was the one who wanted to allow it to take place on the floor of this Dáil, which means that every Member of this House is entitled to come in and speak to whatever amendment they wish to speak to. The Minister does not get to pick and choose and decide what amendments Opposition Members decide to speak to. They are absolutely acting within their right. The reason this amendment has garnered so much discussion is it goes to the heart of the failures of the Government, including the Minister's party, Fine Gael and the Green Party in government, over the past five years. This issue, more than anything, is the issue that has caused division, frustration and anger within communities. If the Minister or any Member does not accept that, they are absolutely deluding themselves.
The Minister has been a year in office. He managed to spend €1 million last year on communications and staff, so he has had good PR. He managed to set out the narrative that he is delivering, but even though fewer international protection applicants are coming to the State, processing times have got longer. The money the Government spent in 2025 versus 2024 has increased. Those are the true facts about the record of this Government in dealing with this. Every single ounce of effort by the Department has been put into adhering to an arbitrary deadline because his predecessor signed us up lock, stock and barrel to the EU migration and asylum pact. Therein lie the failures and problems we now have. We are dealing with guillotined legislation. It is being guillotined by the Minister, yet he is decrying that people will not get to discuss in the detail that is warranted other amendments that are coming down the line. Spare me, Minister.
This amendment being put forward in my name on behalf of Sinn Féin is crucially important. For all the failures, the single message the Minister could allow to come out of this Chamber is that at least the Government is listening and hearing about the experience. Sinn Féin Members, from right across the State, gave their experiences. They did set out positive experiences of integration where accommodation centres were located and had positive impacts, where the groundwork, planning and engagement were done. Well within their rights, Members set out where none of that happened. What happened was the absolute turmoil that many local communities were thrown into at no service whatsoever. Nobody will tell me that was in the best interest of any applicant for international protection who was put into an accommodation centre on that basis.
The Minister can try to talk about fluctuations in demand and supply and all the rest but the truth of the matter is that for a long period, the only criterion that applied as to whether or not a building was used for international protection was the availability of that building and the willingness of the owner to use it for that purpose. Nothing else mattered, including whether that building happened to have been a resource for the community for another purpose. Homeless accommodation was closed down to be turned into international protection accommodation. Countless hotels and countless other community resources were taken away from those communities. That is not good enough. What this amendment is about is acknowledging, on behalf of the Oireachtas, that we recognise that is a bad way of going about it. If anything led to resentment or fed into the hands of the racists and those other nasty actors who were trying to create divisions within our communities, it was the approach to accommodation that fed into all those narratives.
There seems to be a little confusion around what this amendment sets out. I remind Members it sets out that a community impact assessment would be carried out by a local authority or another body as the Minister sees fit. That assessment would analyse the projected capacity, carry out an assessment of local service impacts and would include community engagement plans, any mitigation measures that might be required and an analysis of the Pobal deprivation index for the area concerned. The amendment states that report would be published. The Minister is right to be cynical as to whether this Government would heed a community impact assessment but he also knows that had I put a further stipulation on the amendment, it would have been ruled out of order, just as many amendments have already been ruled out of order. Therein lies the fact.
I will respond to some of the other points that have been made. As a point of principle in all my political life, I am avowedly anti-racist. I do not tolerate racism. I do not believe racism should be tolerated within any section of society. Where I see it, I will call it out. I have a track record of that in my constituency. I imagine most Sinn Féin TDs are able to point to very proud work in respect of their anti-racism activities over many decades.
To suggest there is a linkage between being racist and having a policy on managing migration is a complete fabrication. Every state in the world has rules around migration. The variation is only in what those rules are, how they are implemented and whether they are actually enforced. Different governments have different levels of success in that regard.
To suggest this is a left–right issue is completely false. Managing migration is the same as managing any other area of public policy. In fact, if you look around the world, you will see that some of the strictest immigration rules ever were implemented by some of the most left-leaning governments ever. One of the reasons, of course, is that a core basis on which left-wing economic policy can evolve and garner popular support is the need to build social cohesion and a sense of social solidarity. Large increases in population in a short space of time can disrupt that. Left-wing governments have recognised that throughout history. None of that is ever to suggest that it is the people themselves who are the cause of some of the challenges that arise. Nobody, certainly nobody in Sinn Féin, would contend for a second that the housing crisis in this State is as a result of somebody from outside Ireland coming here in search of a better life. The only foreigners you could possibly accuse of being responsible for the housing crisis are the vulture funds and other international financiers, but primarily the fault lies with successive Governments that decided to stop building social and public housing.
There was a suggestion that Sinn Féin said having an IPAS centre in an area is a big problem and that this was the tenor of the Sinn Féin contributions last week. I absolutely dispute that. I listened to party members on this. They are people who are rooted in their communities and have been for all of their political lives, and they are avowedly anti-racist and have track records to back it up. They pointed to both positive and negative experiences and also to the need for this amendment.
I have a contention that sometimes gets lost. I am really surprised there has been a suggestion by left-wing parties that we should reject an amendment that is simply calling for a community impact assessment before a development takes place. I would have thought it good politics to state locals should be involved in the conversation if anything is to be developed in their community. This is not to say any single person or group of people can stop a development taking place. The reason we have planning rules and so many of us have been so resistant to some of the Government's moves on planning is precisely because it has attempted to circumvent the need for local communities to have their say. This amendment is simply stating local communities should not be an afterthought when a development is taking place in them. It is not an adjudication as to whether a development in itself is good, bad or indifferent; however, as with every single development, there are places where any given development would be more appropriate. That should be respected.
As a spokesperson on migration who has had a lot of engagement right across the country, not only with Sinn Féin supporters and members but also people who disagree with Sinn Féin’s position, who come from every possible angle you could contend with, and, crucially, local communities, I believe fervently that the vast majority of Irish people are not racist. Are there racists in our midst? Absolutely. Were there always? Yes, there were, but to contend or suggest people who have raised concerns about the locations of IPAS centres are universally racist is doing a disservice not only to them but also to us, because it is exactly that type of attitude and suggestion that feeds into the narrative of the nasty actors I was talking about. If the genuine concerns people are raising are shot down and if people are accused of being racist, fascist or something along those lines, they will shut up and we will not hear from them again. We will not hear from them on election day. Most of them will just not show up. The real winners will be the very nasty actors, who do not represent communities and a huge proportion of the Irish people at all, as far as I am concerned.
What I ask people to do in respect of this amendment is vote on what is actually in front of them. On the one hand, the Minister is saying it will not really make any difference at all and, on the other, Opposition parties are saying it will be a recipe to stop every single development. It is exactly as it is written down. It is about carrying out a community impact assessment. I contend that anybody who votes against that would have serious questions to answer in their local community. How can you actually refuse to allow communities to have some real semblance of a say? Whatever about the merits or otherwise of individuals within the community engagement section of the Minister's Department, the truth of the matter is that the notion that there has been genuine community engagement on the locations of IPAS centres is laughable. It does not reflect the reality of anybody who has dealt with this issue.
Members should read what the amendment states. It is eminently sensible. Members should listen to what people have said and not just interpret the amendment. They should note what we have said about the reason it is so important. If the Minister wants to make a proposal tonight that we should lift the guillotine and go down to the committee room to go through every single amendment and section at the level of detail I believe is warranted, I will happily second it for him.

---

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/2026-02-25/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:41+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-02-25