I welcome the opportunity to address the House today on migration and the continued development of Ireland's migration system, a subject of significant importance, not only for the Government but for Irish society as a whole.

Migration has always been part of Ireland's story. For generations, Irish people left these shores in search of opportunity, security and a better future, building lives and careers across the globe while maintaining deep and lasting connections to the country they had left behind. Many of those who emigrated made enormous contributions to the countries that welcomed them, and their experiences shaped not only our national history but also our collective understanding of what it means to seek opportunity, safety and the chance to create a better life for oneself and one's family.

Over recent decades, Ireland has evolved from a country largely defined by emigration to one that is increasingly characterised by immigration, with people from every corner of the world choosing Ireland as a place to live, work, study, invest, innovate and raise their families. Those who come here make important contributions across every sector of our economy and society. They work in our hospitals, schools, universities, businesses and public services, helping to drive economic growth while also supporting communities across the country and contributing to the success of our nation.

There can be no doubt that migration has strengthened Ireland and enriched our society in countless ways. It is important for me to say clearly that this Government recognises the value of those contributions. The people who have chosen to make their lives here have helped to shape the modern Ireland we know today and they will continue to play an important role in our future development and prosperity.

At the same time, migration is not a temporary phenomenon or a passing trend. Rather, it is one of the defining features of the modern world. Economic development, technological change, demographic pressures, labour market demands, humanitarian crises and international conflict all contribute to movements of people across borders on a scale not seen in previous generations. These are developments that are affecting countries throughout Europe and beyond, and Ireland is not insulated from those wider global trends.

As a small, open and outward-looking country, deeply connected to Europe and the wider world, migration will continue to play an important role in our future. Our economic success, demographic needs and international obligations all mean that migration will remain an important feature of Irish society for many years to come. The questions facing policymakers, therefore, are not whether migration occurs, but how it is managed and how we ensure that our migration system can respond to changing circumstances in a manner that is effective, fair and sustainable.

That requires a migration framework capable of achieving a number of important objectives simultaneously. It must support economic growth and competitiveness by enabling Ireland to attract the skills and talent that our economy requires. It must allow us to meet our humanitarian and international obligations to those fleeing persecution, conflict and instability. It must maintain secure borders and robust immigration procedures while ensuring that applications are dealt with fairly and efficiently. Above all, it must command and retain the confidence of the public.

These objectives are not contradictory. Indeed, they are mutually reinforcing. A migration system that is not managed effectively risks losing public confidence, while a migration system that lacks public confidence ultimately becomes more difficult to sustain over the longer term. Equally, a migration framework that is fair, transparent and rules-based, that provides certainty for applicants and consistency in decision-making, is one that is capable of maintaining the trust and support of the wider public. That is why this Government has been clear that Ireland must have a migration system that is welcoming to those who come here legally and contribute positively to Irish society, while also being firm, fair and effective in its operation.

We must continue to support economic migration, uphold our humanitarian commitments and promote successful integration, but we must do so within a framework that is orderly, sustainable and capable of responding to the challenges of a rapidly changing world. Ultimately, the principle of a rules-based migration system underpins every aspect of the Government's approach. It informs the reforms we are pursuing, the investments we are making and the long-term strategy we are developing to ensure that Ireland's migration system continues to serve the interests of the country, the communities that welcome new arrivals and those who come here seeking to build a future.

It is for precisely this reason that the Government is approaching migration not merely as a series of operational challenges to be addressed in isolation, but as a long-term strategic issue requiring co-ordinated planning across government. The development of a national migration and integration strategy reflects that broader approach and recognises that migration will remain an important feature of Irish society for many years to come.

As Members will appreciate, migration is not a stand-alone policy issue. It is a matter that touches virtually every area of public policy and has implications across government. Migration impacts economic development, labour market planning, housing, education, healthcare, integration, social protection, foreign affairs and national security. For this reason, migration cannot be viewed solely through the lens of any single Department or agency. It requires a whole-of government approach, long-term planning and a willingness to balance a range of important and, at times, competing considerations.

The reality is that migration presents both opportunities and challenges. Ireland's continued economic success depends on our ability to attract skills and talent from around the world, while our international obligations require us to provide protection to those who are genuinely fleeing persecution and conflict.

At the same time, we must ensure that our immigration systems remain robust, secure and capable of responding to changing circumstances while also supporting communities across the country that are experiencing the practical impacts of a growing population and increasing demand for public services.

Against that backdrop, the Government is developing Ireland's first national migration and integration strategy. The purpose of that work is to provide a coherent long-term framework that will enable Ireland to respond effectively to migration challenges while also preparing for an ageing population and future economic and societal changes. Migration policy requires a strategic framework that considers how migration intersects with broader national objectives including economic competitiveness, social cohesion and public service delivery.

Work on the development of the national migration and integration strategy is progressing across government, with engagement taking place across Departments and with relevant stakeholders. The objective is to develop a framework that sets out a long-term vision for how Ireland approaches migration while also ensuring that policy development in areas such as housing, employment, education, integration and public services is informed by a clear understanding of future migration trends and needs. The strategy will establish a framework through which the Government can better anticipate migration trends, assess their implications for public services, support workforce and infrastructure planning and incorporate migration considerations into long-term policy development.

The strategy will not seek to address migration solely through the lens of immigration policy. Rather, it recognises that migration intersects with a wide range of economic and social objectives and that successful outcomes require joined-up planning across a number of policy areas. In that regard, the development of the strategy represents an opportunity to establish a more coherent and sustainable framework for managing migration while ensuring the Government is better positioned to respond to future challenges and opportunities. The development of the strategy reflects an understanding that migration will remain an important feature of Irish society for decades to come. It is therefore necessary and appropriate that the Government adopts a longer term perspective, identifying the opportunities that migration presents while ensuring that the necessary systems, infrastructure and policies are in place to address the challenges that can arise.

Central to this work is a rules-based migration system. That principle informs every aspect of the Government's approach. People should be able to understand the legal pathways available to them to come to Ireland. Applications should be considered efficiently and fairly, and decisions should be made in accordance with the law. Rights, procedures and safeguards must be protected. Equally, once decisions are made, they must be implemented in a consistent and effective manner. A rules-based system benefits everyone. It provides clarity and certainty for applicants, supports confidence among employers and communities and enables the State to manage migration in an orderly, fair and sustainable way. It is through such a system that we can ensure Ireland remains welcoming and open while also maintaining the integrity of our immigration framework and the confidence of the wider public.

However, migration policy does not begin and end at the point of arrival. Successful migration policy must also focus on what happens afterwards. It must support people to participate fully in Irish society and to become active members of the communities in which they live. That is why integration remains a central pillar of the Government's approach. Integration is a two-way process that benefits both new arrivals and the communities that welcome them. It is also about ensuring that people have opportunities to work, access education, learn languages, engage with public services and participate fully in civic and community life, and fostering social cohesion, encouraging mutual understanding and ensuring the benefits of migration are shared more broadly across society.

The Government remains committed to supporting positive integration outcomes because strong integration is essential to maintaining public confidence in the migration system and ensuring that people who come to Ireland can contribute to their full potential. When individuals are supported to participate in the workforce, engage with their communities and build lasting connections, the benefits extend far beyond the individuals concerned. They strengthen communities, support economic growth and contribute to a more cohesive and resilient society. As migration continues to shape Ireland’s future, it is important that we approach these issues in a strategic and balanced way. The development of a national migration and integration strategy is therefore an important step in ensuring that Ireland has a clear, co-ordinated and sustainable framework for managing migration in the years ahead. It also provides the broader context for many of the reforms being implemented across the migration system.

Perhaps nowhere is the importance of long-term planning and effective administration and policy development more evident than in the significant reforms now under way within our international protection system. While migration has affected many years of public policy, it is fair to say there were visible pressures on the migration system in recent years in the areas of international protection, accommodation provision and the State's response to the war in Ukraine. In recent years, Ireland has experienced significant pressures across its migration system. Between 2022 and 2025, the State received more than 45,000 international protection applications, almost matching the total number received during the previous 16 years. At the same time, Ireland responded to the humanitarian consequences of Russia's invasion of Ukraine by welcoming more than 120,000 people fleeing conflict and seeking safety. These developments placed unprecedented pressure on the accommodation system, public services and administrative capacity. Throughout that period, public servants across multiple Departments, State agencies and local authorities worked intensively to ensure vulnerable individuals, families and children were provided with accommodation and support in accordance with the State’s legal obligations. Their efforts ensured that Ireland was able to respond to an exceptionally challenging period while continuing to uphold its humanitarian commitments.

The reality, however, is that our asylum system was not originally designed to accommodate demand on the scale experienced in recent years. International protection applications rose significantly over a relatively short period, reaching 18,500 in 2024 alone. While important modernisation work had already been undertaken within the Department, it was increasingly clear that the challenges facing Ireland were not unique. Similar pressures were being experienced across the European Union, highlighting the need for a more co-ordinated and sustainable approach at European level.

It is in that context that the EU migration and asylum pact represents such an important milestone. As Deputies will be aware, the new International Protection Act 2026 came into effect on 12 June and constitutes the most comprehensive reform of immigration law in the history of the State. Through this legislation, Ireland has implemented the EU pact on migration and asylum, the overall objective of which is to provide a fair, sustainable and efficient asylum procedure through greater convergence in asylum practices across Europe, including standardised procedures and significantly shorter processing times. Faster decision-making is fairer for applicants, fairer for communities and strengthens confidence in the system. We are now just over 100 days into its implementation and while it remains early in the process, the experience to date demonstrates that the new framework is already delivering positive results. More than 800 first-instance decisions have been issued, while the median processing time for a first decision has reduced to just 33 days. By comparison, under the previous system, median processing times stood at approximately 12 months for standard procedures and four months for accelerated procedures.

The reforms introduced under the pact are not solely about speed but also about improving the overall quality and integrity of decision-making. Enhanced screening measures, strengthened document verification capabilities and more effective use of electronic evidence are improving our ability to establish identity and identify vulnerabilities at an earlier stage, supporting more robust and better informed decisions. Just as important, procedural safeguards remain central to the system.

High levels of engagement with legal counselling and legal representation demonstrate that applicants are accessing and exercising their rights throughout the process while ensuring that decisions continue to be made within a framework that is fair and transparent. Of course, implementation does not end with the initial decision-making stage. The focus now is on maintaining momentum across the entire protection process, including appeals, transfers, returns and final case resolution. The objective is to ensure that improvements achieved at the front end of the system are carried through to final outcomes. Ultimately, the pact is about building an asylum system that is fairer, more predictable and more sustainable, both for applicants and for member states.

The reforms being delivered under the pact are also closely linked to the Government's wider work on accommodation. Since May 2025, my Department has been responsible for all aspects of the international protection process, including the provision of accommodation for people seeking international protection in Ireland. Under both Irish and European law, applicants are entitled to have their basic needs met while their applications are being considered, and accommodation provided through the international protection accommodation services, IPAS. It remains a central component of that responsibility.

The rapid growth in international protection applications over recent years required a corresponding expansion of accommodation capacity, much of which was delivered under emergency conditions. While those arrangements were necessary at the time, the Government's objective has always been to move towards a more sustainable and better planned model of accommodation provision. For that reason, significant investment has been made in expanding State-owned capacity through the acquisition of Citywest, the refurbishment of State-owned properties and the development of modular accommodation projects.

Alongside this, stronger oversight of revised rate card models are helping to improve consistency across the accommodation system while delivering significant savings for the Exchequer. Our long-term objective is clear: to reduce reliance on emergency responses and increase the proportion of accommodation provided directly by the State, thereby creating a more sustainable system and providing greater certainty for local communities and individuals seeking protection.

Alongside reforms within the international protection system, the Government is advancing a managed and responsible transition from temporary protection for those displaced by the war in Ukraine. The House will be aware of the extraordinary generosity demonstrated by communities throughout the country since the outbreak of that conflict. Ireland responded quickly and compassionately. On 15 July of this year, EU member states agreed to extend temporary protection for persons displaced from Ukraine until 4 March 2028. The decision provides important clarity for beneficiaries and member states while the European Union continues to support Ukraine and prepare for the eventual conclusion of the temporary protection regime. It also recognises the importance of supporting Ukraine's future recovery and reconstruction.

While that decision provides stability in the short term, the focus at European level has increasingly shifted towards planning for the future. In that regard, Ireland continues to implement the measures approved by the Government on 26 May, which are aligned with the Council recommendation of a co-ordinated approach to moving beyond temporary protection. These measures include the phased withdrawal of commercial accommodation, the development of alternative residence pathways, enhanced supports for integration and self-sufficiency, improved information provision and preparations for voluntary return and reintegration, where appropriate. That approach is already delivering tangible results. In May of this year, almost 16,000 people were residing in State-contracted commercial accommodation; today, that figure has been reduced to approximately 12,500. As contracts with certain accommodation providers conclude on a phased basis over the coming months, that transition will continue.

At the same time, appropriate arrangements have been put in place for individuals who face genuine barriers to independent living, with applications for continued support assessed on a case-by-case basis. The accommodation recognition payment continues to play an important role in supporting this response. Since its introduction in 2022, the scheme has enabled thousands of households across Ireland to provide accommodation on a humanitarian basis. Approximately 39,500 people are living in around 22,000 host properties supported through the scheme, demonstrating the remarkable generosity shown by communities throughout the country.

Looking beyond temporary protection, the Government recognises that many people who came to Ireland from Ukraine have established lives here, entered employment and contributed to their communities, and they wish to continue doing so. In recognition of that contribution, my Department has developed the temporary protection transition scheme, which opens for applications today. The scheme provides an alternative residence permission for eligible individuals who wish to establish a longer term basis for living and working in Ireland. Successful applicants will receive permission for up to two years, with provision for renewal, and time spent under that permission will count as reckonable residence for the purposes of applying for naturalisation. The scheme forms part of a broader suite of measures intended to support an orderly and sustainable transition from temporary protection while providing greater certainty for those who have already made a significant contribution to Irish society. It is important to emphasise, however, that this permission is not intended to replace temporary protection. That remains in place until March 2028, and those who do not qualify for the transition scheme will continue to benefit from temporary protection for as long as the directive remains in effect. Rather, the scheme provides an additional pathway for those who meet the eligibility criteria.

Taken together, the reforms being delivered under the EU pact on migration and asylum, the ongoing transformation of our accommodation system and the transition measures being implemented for beneficiaries of temporary protection reflect a broader objective. The Government is working to build a migration system that is fair, orderly and sustainable, one that meets our humanitarian obligations, supports integration, maintains public confidence and ensures Ireland is equipped to manage migration effectively into the future.

Successful migration policy is not simply about arrival, accommodation or legal status. It is also about integration. Integration remains a central objective of that approach and for many people citizenship represents the culmination of a successful integration journey. Irish citizenship is a significant status that reflects a lasting commitment between an individual and the State. It is one of the most important legal relationships that can exist between an individual and the State. It brings with it important rights, opportunities and protections, but it also carries responsibilities. It represents far more than residence in Ireland. It reflects a lasting and enduring bond with this country, its people and our shared future. As citizenship represents the fullest expression of membership of Irish society, it is important that the legislative framework governing access to citizenship remain robust, fair and sustainable.

As I noted earlier, the programme for Government contains a commitment to continue implementing a firmer migration system that protects the integrity of our immigration framework. Last year, the Government approved a broad package of policy and legislative reforms of Ireland's migration system so that it remains efficient, sustainable and aligned with international best practice. As part of that wider programme of reform, we are reviewing aspects of citizenship. As legislators, it is entirely appropriate that we periodically review the legal framework governing citizenship. Our laws must continue to meet current needs, reflect international developments and support effective modern migration systems. Indeed, the Government has a responsibility to review citizenship policy and adapt its frameworks in light of changing migration patterns, demographic developments and evolving public policy objectives.

The Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and I recently secured Government approval for the priority drafting of legislation to strengthen Ireland's naturalisation framework. The reforms being considered are intended to ensure that the pathway to citizenship by naturalisation reflects a genuine, sustained and meaningful connection to Ireland.

The general scheme of the Bill approved by the Government contains several key proposals. I would like to outline some of them. First, the scheme proposes increasing the standard residence requirement for naturalisation applicants from five years to eight years. Under the proposed model, an applicant would generally be required to demonstrate two years of continuous residence immediately before applying, together with six additional years of residence accumulated over the previous ten years. The rationale is straightforward. The rights and responsibilities associated with citizenship are significant. It is therefore reasonable that applicants demonstrate a sustained record of lawful residence.

Second, the scheme proposes that applicants demonstrate language proficiency, which is common across the European Union. That proficiency can be in English, Irish or Irish Sign Language. The objective is not to create barriers; rather, it is to support integration and ensure that citizens can participate. Importantly, the legislation would provide flexibility regarding the standard required, the method of assessment and the circumstances in which exemptions or waivers may be appropriate.

Third, the scheme proposes the introduction of a civics, society and politics requirement. This reflects the principle that citizenship involves active participation in life in the State. Understanding how our institutions operate, the rights we enjoy and the responsibilities we share helps to strengthen social cohesion and encourage active citizenship. We will ensure that any testing regime is proportionate, fair, accessible and transparent, and supports meaningful participation in Irish civic life without creating unnecessary barriers to naturalisation. The objective is not to reward educational achievement but to ensure individuals can navigate daily life, communicate effectively with their communities, participate fully in the workplace and perform the important duties of citizens, including voting and, where called upon, jury service.

The scheme also proposes measures relating to self-sufficiency. The objective is to promote independence and support positive integration outcomes. It is important to note that the detailed operation of these provisions would be determined through regulations following consultation with relevant Departments and stakeholders. These changes would provide greater clarity regarding the categories of residence that may be counted towards naturalisation and would provide that certain temporary permissions and schemes, including residence under the temporary protection directive, would not be reckonable for citizenship purposes.

These proposals should be considered in the broader European context. Some commentary has suggested that Ireland would become an outlier if the reforms were enacted. That is simply not the case. Citizenship policy is ultimately a matter for each sovereign state. Across Europe, countries have adopted different pathways to naturalisation, but almost all require applicants to demonstrate a substantial period of lawful residence and, in many cases, some degree of language competence and civic understanding. Fourteen EU member states require eight years or more of residence before naturalisation. Ireland is currently the only EU member state that does not require language competence. Civic integration requirements are also common across Europe. Taken together, these proposals would bring Ireland more closely into line with established European practice.

While we are discussing changes to citizenship policy, it is important to acknowledge the significant work undertaken in recent years to improve the operation of the naturalisation system. The number of citizenship applications received in recent years has increased substantially. Improvements in digital processes, enhanced operational capacity and ongoing reforms have enabled the Department to process applications more efficiently.

Citizenship ceremonies play an important role and I have been pleased to attend a number of them. The pride, commitment and sense of belonging demonstrated by those taking the declaration of fidelity to the nation at a citizenship ceremony is valued by people at home and around the world.

In conclusion, I recognise we are undertaking a series of major changes but at the heart of it the objective of the proposals is to have a firm, fair and balanced system of migration.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an díospóireacht seo faoi imirce agus saoránacht. Migration is a critical area of public policy that must be got right. Setting the terms of Irish citizenship is a matter of fundamental importance. Citizenship should reward integration and contribution to our communities and our country. Citizenship laws should be connected to a wider immigration framework but remain distinct. A migration strategy must be underpinned by the needs of the country, recognising capacity challenges in housing and public services, our capacity to integrate those who come here and the need for a humanitarian response to those fleeing war and persecution. Citizenship laws are about ensuring that people who have legally been here on a long-term basis, made Ireland their home and integrated into their communities are provided with a clear pathway to belong. Our citizenship laws should never be the reason to come to Ireland. They should be the route for those legally and permanently resident here to become part of the Irish nation.

The truth is that there has been a failure to plan and develop a coherent migration strategy. Rather than deciding what is in our best interests and planning accordingly, policy has been driven by short-term decisions. Student permission numbers have been driven by the needs of language schools and cash-strapped colleges. Employment permits have been driven by the needs of sectors whose skills shortages Governments have failed to adequately plan for, with no account of pressures on housing and public services. Then there is the dysfunction that has marked the international protection system. These failures have created chaos, increased tensions and undermined social cohesion in a way that was entirely avoidable.

Sinn Féin wants a fair, strong and efficient migration system. Migration management, including work permits and student permissions, must take account of capacity for integration and of housing and public services. It is time to move towards migration management on an all-Ireland basis. This makes sense for Ireland - more sense than signing up to an EU pact that failed to recognise the unique challenges arising from the common travel area with a state outside of the EU. Sinn Féin has called for faster international protection processing, effective and tracked deportations, an end to profiteering and stronger supports for integration. The record backlog that is now within the IPAS appeals system and the continued poor enforcement of decisions where a person has no right to remain raise huge concerns. IPAS centres should not be located in areas that are already lacking services, facilities and investment. There has to be a meaningful engagement with communities. The temporary protection directive was introduced as an emergency response when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. It was envisaged as a short-term emergency measure lasting a maximum of three years. The expectation was that conditions would allow people either to safely return or to move into other legal statuses within a relatively short period. Instead, the Government has agreed to one extension after another, creating unnecessary uncertainty for Ukrainians and pressures on our services and resources.

Confidence in the migration system depends on key principles. First, there must be a fair system with clear rules that are consistently enforced and clear consequences when those rules are breached. The system should not be categorised by delays of permit renewals or asylum applications. Second, migration policy must be guided by robust data, transparency and proper planning. Decisions should take account of the capacity in housing and public services, integration and community resources while also addressing the skills and workforce needs. Finally, deportation orders must be enforced once due process has been exhausted and particularly for those involved in serious criminality. Failure on all these fronts undermines the integrity of the system, erodes public confidence and unfairly damages the perception of the overwhelming majority of migrants, who have made a positive contribution to our society.

Caithfimid luach a chur ar shaoránacht na hÉireann. Sinn Féin believes that Irish citizenship is something to be valued. It signifies membership of our nation. It carries rights and responsibilities and should reflect the genuine and lasting commitment to Ireland. International experience shows that successful integration is best achieved through a clear, transparent and fair pathway to citizenship, one that encourages civic participation, community involvement and a genuine connection to the country. Changes to citizenship rules can create uncertainty for those seeking to become Irish citizens, while delays in renewing residence permissions also contribute to unnecessary anxiety for many people.

As citizenship applications grow, it is right that we examine whether the current system is fit for purpose and properly reflects the significance of Irish citizenship. The current system relies heavily on time spent in the State, broad ministerial discretion and very unclear rules. Time spent in Ireland matters, but in and of itself, it is not a measure of integration contribution or commitment to Irish society. Citizenship should be acquired through a structured and transparent process that reflects both the privileges and responsibilities that come with it. Sinn Féin supports stronger, clearer and more consistent citizenship rules. Citizenship should not just be reduced to a passport acquired simply through the passage of time or a privilege reserved for the wealthy. Emphasis has to be put on integration, civic participation, community involvement and an understanding of Irish society, including an ability in Irish, English or Irish Sign Language. Sinn Féin also wants a clear pathway to Irish citizenship for people who are legally resident in the North where they meet the same conditions applied elsewhere on this island, recognising that this nation goes beyond the Twenty-six Counties of this State. People who have lawfully built their lives in Ireland but who may not want or qualify for citizenship should also be able to access secure, long-term residence. This is something that we will be engaging with the Minister on. The transitional arrangements also need to be considered for those who have established their lives here under the existing rules and had legitimate expectations about when they would qualify for citizenship based on their reckonable residence.

I wish to make it clear that Sinn Féin wants to see a managed migration system, one that ensures that we do not see existing communities isolated or removed from decisions that affect the area where they live, one where permit and visa numbers take account of the capacity to integrate and the pressures on housing and public services. We have to recognise that many communities have seen huge population increases in a fairly short timeframe and in a completely unplanned way. This has impacted on cohesion, community relations, housing demand and public services capacity. It has led to resentment and anger. The dysfunctional IPAS system, marred by delays and inefficiency, has resulted in huge profits for a small number of private operators but completely failed local communities and those fleeing war and persecution. The handling of the Ukrainian temporary protection system pitted people against each other, providing supports to one cohort that were denied to everyone else, including struggling Irish families. These failures taken together mean that many within the public have lost trust in the migration system. Our communities have been let down, as have those who have moved here legally wanting nothing more than what is best for their families, who have often been subject to unacceptable racism and intolerance.

Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael must take responsibility for this. Sinn Féin wants to address this through the delivery of an all-Ireland migration management system. We have brought forward policies to improve the current system and we will be bringing forward others. I say all of this because every day I am shown an online post that misrepresents my party's position, with self-declared patriots and nationalists with their self-promoting videos decrying Sinn Féin's non-existent open borders policy. These actors are not representative of ordinary people, who in many cases have genuine issues with how migration is managed and have every right to be heard on these issues. Those people I described lock arm in arm with the worst extremes of British colonial racists. They take advantage of Government failings. They take advantage of the chaos, profiteering and lack of engagement with communities, not to attack Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, which are responsible, but instead to try to create a wedge between working-class people and Sinn Féin. Of course, this week, when an actual Irish nationalist working-class community on the Garvaghy Road is under siege, these carpet baggers are nowhere to be found. They are more likely, in fact, to be seen drinking with the UDA in a loyalist bar than standing all night in the rain with the nationalist community of the Garvaghy Road, who are trying to defend their right to live free from sectarian intimidation. They are the real Irish patriots.

The days of misrepresenting Sinn Féin are over. The people can see who has the backs of the Irish working class. We will always proudly and unashamedly stand with our communities, North and South. We are for Irish unity. We are for the working people of Ireland. We are for a managed and fair migration system that treats everyone with dignity and respect but does not dismiss the concerns or pressures on existing communities, that sees Irish citizenship as something to be valued and that rewards integration and contribution. We are for a country that does not force our young people to travel in the opposite direction as the only hope for a home. We are for giving people a break from the cost-of-living crisis. We are for the Irish Republic, and we will not allow any west Brit self-declared patriots to misrepresent us ever again.

I start by acknowledging the hugely positive contribution that many people who have come from outside of Ireland to live here have played. I say that as Sinn Féin's health spokesperson, obviously deeply conscious of all of those who work in our hospitals and in primary and community care settings. Our healthcare system simply would not function if it was not for many people who have come from outside of the country on work permits. They were welcomed into Ireland and are necessary to help us deal with the challenges we have in the healthcare system but also to make sure people get the healthcare and treatment they need. I thank each and every one of them and everybody who works in our health services.

The Minister of State made the point that the question is not about whether immigration happens. It does happen. It happens in every country. It is a fact of life. The question is how it is managed. This is a point of departure from where my party stands and, I would argue, the track record of the Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Government. I do not believe it has properly managed the migration system. The impact of that has been that many people have lost confidence. They do not see the system as working. They see the profiteering. They see the inequalities in it at times. People who work or live in working-class communities can see that they are the ones who are always asked to do the heavy lifting when the resources are often not there. In fact, these communities are very welcoming. Lots of promises are made in relation to additional resources and capacity but it never follows though. That creates resentment and anger and it creates opportunities for some of those so-called false patriots Deputy Carthy talked about who pedal mistruths about Sinn Féin's position every single day. However, they are not representative of the vast majority of decent working-class people who are welcoming of those who are genuinely coming into Ireland seeking to work and fleeing oppression and war and so on. They want to be welcoming.

The issue is whether we are properly managing our migration system. For those of us who believe in a rules-based system, which I do although I do not know the position of every political party in this House, the rules have to be applied. As difficult at times as that may be for some people, the rules have to be applied. You cannot say you want a managed migration system and a rules-based system but then turn a blind eye to the rules not being implemented. That is also what creates resentment among communities. They want the system to be fair, as I do. They want a system which is efficient, as I do, but they also want a system which is enforced.

When I talk about a fair system, I mean a fair system for those who are seeking to come to Ireland as well. Any migration system has to be underpinned by human rights, equality and all of the international obligations we have signed up to, but also has to be fair to communities. It has to be fair in not having a two-tier system of immigration - which we have seen as well and that has also caused problems - where some who come into Ireland are treated differently from others. That position is unsustainable and also creates difficulties and tensions. I want a fair system but when I talk about an efficient system, that means we do not have people coming here and then waiting years and years for an application to be processed. Despite the fact that this has been said over and over again in this House, and promises have been made about speeding up the system and more resources and staff, the reality is it still takes far too long. That undermines the very rules-based system and the "managed migration system" the Minister of State said he wants to see. It should not take years for an application to be examined, yet it does. The enforced part of it is that if somebody applies for international protection and is refused they should be returned home safely. It should not be controversial to say that. It is not right wing. I have to challenge and push back against those who make those arguments. As I said, we cannot have it both ways. We cannot say we want a managed system but then do not want to see it enforced.

I also believe we need to have a bilateral agreement with Britain and a returns policy. We have to make sure we are protecting the island of Ireland and ensure we are doing greater checks when it comes to people who are coming into and onto the island of Ireland and moving between different parts of the island. That will also require stronger arrangements with Britain.

I will finish where I started. I welcome and acknowledge the hugely positive contribution that so many immigrants have played, and will continue to play, in Ireland, but I also acknowledge that people want that managed system to be in place, to be working effectively and fairly and they do not see that at this point.

I normally do not contribute to these debates on justice and migration but I have come to speak on this issue because I am deeply concerned about the direction of the policies the Minister of State and the Government are taking. They have lost their way and it is deeply concerning. I am also deeply concerned about the anti-migrant rhetoric we hear on different sides of the House from national leaders. Migrants who come to Ireland make an extraordinary contribution to our society in so many ways.

It is important for us to remember that the story of Ireland is in many ways a story of migration. For thousands of years people have come and moved to this island in different waves of migration. In century after century, people have come and have lived here to make a better life. All of us, if we look at our ancestors and trace it back, have migrated from somewhere to be here. In many ways, the story of Ireland is a story of migration and of leaving this island to live elsewhere. I grew up in the west of Ireland and like many other families from there, generation after generation, people left and migrated to make better lives elsewhere. My great-grandparents went to New York back in the 1920s; I have grand-uncles and grand-aunts all around the world; my uncle lives in Canada; I have an aunty in London; my siblings went to Australia during the financial crash; and I lived in the UK. Many other families across Ireland have that experience of migration, of moving from here, seeking a better life and establishing themselves in other countries. We cannot forget that and how crucial that story is to our national identity and to who we are. I urge the Government to rethink its strategy and its approach to migration.

I was talking to two men in my constituency who moved here from Orbán's Hungary. They moved here to make a better life in Ireland and did all of the things they were told to do. They got really good jobs and paid lots of taxes. They bought a house. They pay their property tax and their TV licence. They contribute to the local society. They got involved in clubs and societies. They made friends and they learned the language. They came here with good English but they learned even more. They feel like they have done everything right. They have done everything they were told to do, but suddenly the Government is pulling the rug from under them. They came here four and a half years ago. They were looking forward to applying for citizenship in January. Now, they feel like they are not welcome because of the policies that are pursued by the Minister of State and the Government.

I urge the Minister of State to rethink the strategy. He should rethink the message we are sending to the people who have come to this country and who have made an extraordinary contribution to Irish life. What message is being sent to them? What they are hearing from the Minister of State and his pronouncements is that they are not welcome here, and that is wrong. It is particularly wrong, given our history of migration and given that we have left this island in our millions. We need to rethink this plan and this strategy because the Minister of State has got it wrong.

The role of migrants in this country, as my colleague has said, is so important. We go, people come - that is how it is. Our hospitals would not exist without people coming from all over the world. How would our restaurants manage? I would like to mention teachers who are coming here, people who want to set up life here because it is a great place to live. They want to work as teachers but it is incredibly difficult because the pathway through the Teaching Council is incredibly difficult. That is something we need to consider. We need to mature as a country, when we have people coming from elsewhere, as to how they can become teachers within our country. We want to broaden out that career for everybody. We want to make sure that those young people and their parents who are coming from migrant backgrounds can see teachers from other countries, not just from our own.

The categorisation of human beings is quite difficult. My own husband is a migrant. He came here because he loved Ireland. He thinks it is fantastic. However, there is a categorisation of who comes here and who is allowed to stay based on colour, where they come from, social class and lots of different things. We need to get a grip on that because as climate change happens there will be more and more people who come here. There will be more and more people who will have to come here. We only saw that from the heat in Europe this summer. People were dying because of that heat. We have a lovely temperature here, although it was also very hot. We are going to see that necessarily happening.

I will end on a positive note. The Minister of State was there at my husband's naturalisation ceremony in Killarney this year and it was an absolutely amazing day.

Over the course of that day, over 4,500 people became Irish citizens. As Deputy Rice said, since the new announcement has been made, a lot of people have come to my clinics to plead that they are here. They want to make a life here. They want to be citizens of this amazing country. We need to have a fair, humane and evidence-based approach to how we do naturalisation and immigration.

I welcome today's opportunity to discuss migration and citizenship because although this is an issue that dominated public discourse in 2024 when we were all engaged in the election, it has receded somewhat given the geopolitical tensions that are abounding and the energy and cost-of-living crises. I just do not think we are simply talking about it enough, particularly in light of the actions of this Government since it came in. I feel very strongly that we have seen a series of cruel, performative measures which are set out to a create a picture of this Government being tough on immigration without reasoned evidence. That to me is the hallmark of the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan's ministership so far. When we try to dig for an understanding as to why these measures are being introduced, there is no evidence for them and that to me is part of what we talk about when we talk about these cruel and performative measures.

I am proud to be part of a pro-immigration party. It is not easy because the other thing we have to call out right now is the rise of fascism and anti-immigrant sentiment, not just in Ireland but the world over. Before I became a politician, I was heavily involved in the work around human rights and equality, particularly on the topic of international protection. I can tell the Minister of State that groups such as Doras and the Migrant Rights Centre Ireland, MRCI, that are fighting for migrant rights and people in the international protection system, and defending the right to claim asylum, come under huge attack, but it all pales into insignificance compared to the overt racism and discrimination experienced by migrants in this country. That is the context in which the Government has chosen to take this direction in its term of office in terms of migration and citizenship.

I talk about cruel decisions. The one we are dealing with in the Government's current strategy around moving from five to eight years is just ridiculous. It is five years already, plus another two years by the time it is processed, so that is seven years. Moving it to eight years is essentially moving it to ten. These are people who are contributing to our society. They are paying taxes. They are working. They are integrating and the Government is simply moving the goalposts on them. People who had expectations around when they were going to have citizenship have had their lives upturned by this decision. I urge the Minister of State to rethink it. Believe me, I want the Government to reverse the decision, but at the very least offer those people who are already in the system the clarity and consistency that they expect on their naturalisation path towards citizenship in this country.

It is a cruel decision, but it builds on multiple cruel decisions the Government has overseen in terms of harder rules around family reunification and the asylum and migration process, which the Social Democrats believes pose major threats to people's ability to claim asylum in this country and the international protection process itself. The Minister of State talks about the system being "firm" and "sustainable", and all of those words always go before "fair", but our system was never fair. We never even reached the conditions we were supposed to meet under the reception and integration directive of the European Union before we moved towards this more "firm" and "sustainable" model.

However, the worst part of all of this is that it is such a waste and suck of energy. I worked in the international protection space. Part of the changes that the Government is looking at now is around the threshold for earnings, for example. I know it is a separate system but it is related to the same area. When the right to work in the international protection system was introduced by a preceding government that included the Minister of State's party, it was chaos because the thresholds did not make any sense. All of these NGOs that I mentioned had to fight to get a proper realisation of the right for people in the international protection system to work. Even then, most people could not realise that right because they did not have access to a driver's licence or bank accounts. All of the energy in the organisation that I worked in, which is a State organisation, plus the entire migrant rights sector, is being placed into pushing back against the Government's regressive measures, instead of where it should be going, which is the actual integration of these people who are holding up our hospitals and our health system. They are people who we are neighbours, friends and family with.

The Government's cruel measures are making life more difficult for them every single day that it chooses to take this tough on immigration stance that is "firm" and "sustainable" while failing to implement anything of the fair and rights-based system that it should be looking over.

I welcome these statements and thank the Minister of State for his work to date. Irish citizenship is one of the most important things this State can confer. It is a legal status, a bond with the country and a commitment to its future. I welcome the general scheme of the Irish nationality and citizenship (amendment) Bill. Eight years' residence instead of five, language and civics tests and, importantly, a requirement to be self-sufficient are not unusual. Austria, Italy, Spain and Slovenia require ten years, and most member states test language and civic knowledge. That matters because an Irish passport is also a European passport. It carries the right to live, work, study and vote in the local and European elections across the Union, so our standards should be in line with our partners.

However, reform must also be fair. Many people came here on work permits. They are nurses in our hospitals, carers in our nursing homes and staff in our businesses. They played by the rules as they were and I welcome the assurance that they will be fair. I ask the Minister of State to give consideration to those who are already here though.

More generally, I welcome the continued progress on the asylum backlog. Since the International Protection Act commenced in June, new applications are being decided within six months or three months under the border procedure. Daily applications are down almost 40%. Last year, 4,700 deportation orders were signed, almost double that of the year before. More than 2,100 people left the State through deportation or voluntary means. Where someone has an unsuccessful application, they must be returned to their country of origin. That gives the asylum system credibility and protects it for those who genuinely need our protection. We must keep speeding up processing times, clear the cases already in the system and strengthen our borders.

At European level, I welcome this summer's agreement on the new return regulation. I hope to see progress on the return hubs and I welcome the Minister of State's position on them. We also share a common travel area with the UK and I welcome the Minister's engagement with the home secretary on protecting it. It is only by working together with our EU partners and the UK that we can deal with the challenges this presents.

I have two asks for the Minister of State. First, that clear transitional arrangements for those already living and working here are set out early, so they can plan with certainty. Second, that the Department publish quarterly figures on processing times and returns under the new Act, so this House can track progress. The system should be fair to those who play by the rules, firm with those who do not and in step with our European partners

I start by sending my sympathies to the families and loved ones of father and daughter, Mihai Chinez and Denisa Mihaela Chinez, who tragically lost their lives in a workplace accident in Banagher on Monday. It has left an entire community sad and in shock at a very difficult time. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a n-anamacha dílse.

Migration and citizenship are issues that we all need to be able to have an open, mature and honest conversation about, and not name calling across the Chamber. We can recognise and welcome contributions that many people who come to Ireland make to our economy and communities. At the same time, we can acknowledge that migration needs to be properly managed with appropriate rules governing our immigration system that are actively enforced. Those two things are not contradictory. Ireland must always remain an open and welcoming country, and a place of compassion, fairness and opportunity. Openness must go hand in hand with order, accountability and public confidence.

People have come here from across the world and are working in hospitals, nursing homes, transport, technology and agriculture. We also have industries that need more resources, such as the shortage of heavy goods vehicle, HGV, and bus mechanics. We have an obligation to identify where genuine skill shortages need to be addressed and allow our economy to recruit those needed, while at the same time protecting our employment standards and the opportunities for those already living here.

Public confidence cannot be taken for granted. Our confidence in legal migration is inevitably linked to public confidence in our wider immigration and international protection systems.

Rules should mean something, be adhered to and enforced. The recent reform of our migration system now means that enhanced identity and security screening, biometric registration as well as clearer timelines on applications are implemented. It is fair but firm and this is the right approach. A person who genuinely needs international protection should not have to spend years waiting for an answer. Equally, where it is found that a person does not have a right to stay in Ireland, that decision must lead to action.

I have raised in the past the issue of foreign nationals who commit serious criminal offences in this country. My position is clear on that. They should face justice, just like any Irish national who commits a crime. People who come to Ireland must obey the laws, work, raise families and contribute meaningfully to our society and should be treated with respect and fairness but we must be capable of responding robustly to those who commit serious crime.

I return to the word "confidence". The public must have confidence in our immigration system. Confidence comes from and is facilitated by strong communication. This Government must communicate clearly and regularly, with identified metrics that can give us timelines and trends in relation to how these initiatives are unfolding for the benefit of our society. In my own county of Offaly recently, there were rumours of an IPAS centre being opened in a very rural area. I engaged with the Minister of State and it was firmly put to bed very quickly that there were no such plans but information suggesting otherwise had travelled quickly and caused concern. We see this today in relation to housing allocations, voting rights, and economic benefits and we really need to get a handle on this so that the facts are out there. My priority throughout this process has been simple. Communities are entitled to accurate information and legitimate concerns deserve answers. We must strive to never let speculation replace facts. We cannot allow myths, misinformation or disinformation to become a substitute for the facts.

Irish citizenship is of enormous value. For generations, Irish people have travelled to countries all across the globe. We know what migration means for both sides and today people come here to build their lives in our communities. I understand the eight-year rule that the Minister is introducing but I would ask him to give consideration to some individuals who have been in the system, who have made Ireland their home and who are now finding that they will have to extend their time.

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate on migration and citizenship. One of my biggest regrets of the past few years is that in the social media age there is a tendency to run immediately to the black or white. Immigration policy has fallen into a trap whereby there is little nuance afforded to it in public debate and everything gets into lumped into one bucket or the other. A lot of the discussion that happened during 2024 and 2025 characterises that problem in particular. It is incumbent on us, as public representatives, to strive to ensure that there is nuance in our discussions on the various aspects of immigration policy.

I represent Dublin Mid-West, possibly one of the most multicultural constituencies in the State. I attend events hosted by new communities in my constituency as an honoured guest and am privileged to do so. I am very proud to be able to represent many of those people, many of whom have acquired citizenship. One of the most touching things a public representative can get is an email from one of those new citizens saying that they had their citizenship ceremony last week and thanking us for being part of their journey. That reminds us of the importance of citizenship in and of itself. Some aspects of the reforms that are being put forward are welcome, including the opportunity for people to articulate what they have learned and integrated in terms of our values and our civic system. Honouring both of our national languages is something that we should be celebrating as well. However, like other speakers, I would say there are people in our State at the moment who came here and who started on the citizenship journey. They are very far along that journey and their circumstances need to be taken into account. I would welcome discussion around the extension from five to eight years to see what is the basis for it, without prejudice, necessarily, but to understand the reasoning behind it.

There is one aspect of this that I want to draw attention to, which is the importance of integration and of funding streams like the new communities fund that allow for the integration of new communities. I want to pay tribute, in particular, to our sports clubs which are at the forefront of integrating new communities into our society. In my own son's soccer club, a number of the coaches coaching teams are people who were not born in Ireland but came here to make their home. This is a classic example of the integration that we need to promote. However, it is important that we in this House remember that integration does not just happen; it is something that needs to be fostered and led by the State and incentivised through support for community groups.

Finally, on our immigration system, delays in the processing of visas and the paperwork and bureaucracy associated with that needs to be addressed. The system needs to be resourced adequately. I know of one bus company in this country that has had to go abroad to hire bus drivers but because of the delays in getting visas for those drivers, it is not able to provide the level of service required.

Again, I emphasise the point that there are many nuances to the discussion around immigration, citizenship and migration. It is important that in our debates on it, we do not try to other the other side but try to engage with those particular aspects of nuance.

Sinn Féin wants a strong, fair and efficient migration system that serves the interests of the people of this State as well as those fleeing war and persecution. I have lived in Dublin West for the past 30 years and I have seen it grow into one of the most diverse communities in this State and it is our strength. However, we must move towards the management of our migration system on an all-Ireland basis. This makes absolute common sense and would have huge benefits in the long term. Migration is another incredibly important reason for having a Border poll as soon as possible. The British State should not have control of any part of our borders.

We want the management of migration and the issuing of work permits and student permissions to take into account issues such as the ability to house and integrate those who come here and the availability of public services. How can we be encouraging people to come here to work and study if housing is not available to them or it costs up to 60% or 70% of their wages? For some who are here, working and contributing, there are serious issues with the system. How can people be expected to support themselves when the State allows them to remain in Ireland but administrative delays prevent them from working? We have people who have followed every single rule. They have applied to renew their IRP and change their immigration permission before the existing permission expired but they have to wait for months for the underlying application to be processed while being left without the ability to earn an income. This is not merely an administrative inconvenience; it means lost wages, suspended employment, lost jobs and sometimes even the loss of a place to live. It is particularly concerning for international graduates who are trying to remain in the country lawfully and find employment in their field of study. These are people who we need in this country to keep our health services going.

The Minister previously indicated in reply to a parliamentary question that extensions of student conditions were granted only on compassionate grounds. However, a recent FOI response appears to indicate that extensions may also be available to graduates who are still seeking employment in their field. I ask the Minister to clarify this apparent discrepancy and publish clear and consistent guidance. We also cannot continue to rely on temporary bridging arrangements around Christmas and summertime. This is an issue of fairness. The State proposes an income threshold for citizenship but how can people demonstrate financial independence when the State's own processing delays prevent them from working? People who applied lawfully and on time should not be financially punished because their application is sitting in a queue. I call on the Minister to establish a permanent bridging mechanism that protects eligible applicants' employment rights while their applications are being processed. Administrative delays should never be a barrier to people's ability to work, pay their rent, support their families and, more importantly, contribute to Ireland. We need these people.

What the Minister is proposing in relation to these citizenship changes is nothing more than performative cruelty. There is no evidence for this because if the evidence existed, then the Minister would publish it. He has not done so and he will not do so. The people we are talking about are, in the main, highly skilled. Many of them are doctors, other healthcare workers, engineers and so on and the Government is going to leave many of them in a grey area, in immigration uncertainty, for longer than they need to be. That is not acceptable and, in my opinion, it is shameful. I suspect that these changes might have more to do with the Minister for justice's protracted Fianna Fáil shadow-leadership election than they do with actually dealing with immigration and migration properly.

The Government is destroying another pathway to social integration instead of supporting it. I have been contacted by so many people in my constituency, including doctors, software engineers and tech workers, who told me they are really worried. Many of them are quite far along the pathway under the existing rules. At the bare minimum, they need a transitional arrangement. This is a cruel thing to do to people. Also cruel is the way the Minister just said this is changing, like it or lump it, while the Taoiseach is saying, "Sure we might do something at some stage". We need clarity from the Government on this issue. It is not just a simple technical change. It affects people who live, work and have built their lives here, who are here legally and lawfully and who contribute so much to our economy and society. They should not be held in immigration uncertainty for a longer period.

To speak in language the Government might actually listen to, this is something that could damage our economy and our competitiveness. It is very depressing, when the Overton window in this country has moved so much in terms of immigration and migration, to see the Government, in effect, chasing something it will not catch and trying to satiate people it will not be able to satiate. Many of those the changes will affect people who came here as critical skills workers through the stamp 4 process. They have spent their lives here. If they were to up sticks and leave, our health service could potentially collapse. Citizenship should not depend on income, because the income threshold will disproportionately affect people in lower paid but valuable employment - such as care workers; people whose jobs we could not fill if they did not do them - and also people with disabilities.

Extending the pathway should not involve an arbitrary cliff-edge deadline. At the bare minimum, we need a transitional arrangement. I ask the Government to put in place a transitional provision to protect people who are here lawfully, including people on stamp 4 permits or employment permits. The goalposts should not be moved on them midway through the process. It is not fair. They should be assessed according to the rules under which they came to Ireland. This is about fairness and ensuring people who came here and followed the rules as they were laid out when they came are not simply told, when they are some bit of the way along, that the requirement is going up to eight or ten years. That is not fair.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this topic. I have been receiving a significant amount of correspondence in recent weeks, as, I am sure, have all TDs, on the proposed citizenship changes. I am totally against the changes to the residency period requirement to apply for citizenship. They are totally unnecessary. This is an attempt by the Government to appease a vocal minority.

On a personal level, my best friend, Amir, who came to Ireland from Tunisia three years ago, despite opportunities to study in France, Germany and the Netherlands, is currently doing a PhD in chemical engineering and air quality at UCC. Over the past three years, Amir has represented Ireland on several occasions in Europe, speaking about the work UCC and Ireland are doing on air quality and climate change. This demonstrates that immigrants to Ireland provide invaluable contributions - in this case, in scientific research. Immigrants like him, who provide a vital resource to Ireland, are in the situation when they complete their studies of having built up no residency requirement credit. That is a disgrace. Ukrainians are in the same scenario, with their time here not counting towards citizenship. How on earth does four years of scientific research on behalf of the State count for nothing? How does five years working in our health service count for nothing? We are going to lose these people to other European countries. When the realisation of what that means comes, it will be too late.

People who have come to Ireland for refuge from war or famine and immigrants who come here to work and have a better life should never be scapegoated for the failures of the State. Immigrants did not cause the housing crisis. Greed, landlordism and the failures of successive governments caused it. Immigrants did not cause a stagnation in wages while the cost of living soared. The free market and government neglect caused that. Immigrants did not cause young Irish people to emigrate. That was brought about by the economy successive governments created. I absolutely acknowledge my party's involvement, while in government, in failing to stem emigration from Ireland.

For the Government to use citizenship in this way, to appease the anti-emigrant sentiment that is present in Ireland, is utterly disgraceful. The Minister of State and his colleagues should be absolutely ashamed of what they are doing. I hope he hears me when I say that they cannot out-far-right the far right. That never works and they will not win because the far right is not reasonable. Of course, it would not be the first time that the other party in government, Fianna Fáil, did not stand with immigrants and instead chose to scapegoat them to appease racist sentiment. The 2004 referendum, with its associated fearmongering and dog-whistling campaign, stripped Irish-born children of foreign-born parents of birthright citizenship. An inscription inside the Irish passport states: "It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born on the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish nation." That is what it says on our passports but it is a lie. I am proud that the Labour Party stood against the 2004 referendum. We likewise stand against the changes being discussed today. We are proudly an anti-racist party and we will defend the rights of all workers in Ireland and all the people of Ireland, no matter the circumstances of their birth.

It is worth noting some of the facts. Some 80% of the population usually resident in Ireland is Irish born. Approximately 87% of the population is white. Non-Irish citizens make up only 15% of the population. Ireland has between 70,000 and 163,000 empty homes. We are at full employment, with approximately 30,000 job vacancies. Ireland is in no way overrun, as some would suggest. My staff and I deal with multiple immigration cases every single week. It is not easy to come to Ireland to work and it is not easy to stay here. It takes a significant civic engagement.

We need immigrants. We should welcome those who have made a life here for themselves, contributed to our society and worked in our State services. They should be given céad míle fáilte, not be faced with a stern Department of justice trying to appease bigots. I remind the House of a statement by the founder of the Labour Party, James Connolly: "Let no Irishman cast a stone at the foreigner; he may hit his own clansman."

I am strongly in support of any individual who wants to come to Ireland, make a home here, work and contribute to our society. I count many such among my friends in my community. People who have come from Europe and beyond have found a home in my home town of Gorey, which is a wonderful place to live. They have made a life here. When they want to become a citizen, they are quite keen to contribute. They want to make sure they can go out and vote. They get involved in local community organisations. We need to recognise that.

Colleagues talked about different sectors of the economy. International workers now make up more than 15% of the HSE workforce and 23% of our nurses and midwives, with 42% of our doctors having been trained internationally. In the hospitality sector, 45% of workers come from overseas.

With me being from Wexford, it will not surprise the House that my first summer job was picking strawberries. It is really difficult now to get any Irish person to work in the horticulture sector. If we look at the proportions from the most recent Teagasc study, which is nearly ten years old, it found that 77% of those in horticulture came from overseas. For those at the baseline, in other words, picking the fruit and vegetables, it was 87%. In all sectors of the economy, from high-value workers to making sure that we have fruit and vegetables on our tables, we are seeing people coming to this country to contribute.

Citizenship should not be given away easily, of that I have no doubt. There have to be standards expected of anyone who comes here. We have to have what is called a firm but fair immigration policy. However, fairness is needed to recognise those who want to come to Ireland and who have contributed towards this country.

I have a particular concern about the proposal to extend the residency period from five to eight years. I have constituents and friends who may already have started in the system or have not yet applied for citizenship and often have Irish partners. They are very concerned about these proposals. I welcomed the step forward when the Taoiseach said that for those who are already here, the extension to eight years will not be implemented. I ask the Minister of State to clarify that. It would send out an important message to those already in Ireland if the five-year requirement were to continue. Our student population, particularly the research population, can benefit enormously from bringing in international strength from around the world.

I happen to be very proud of my party's tradition of being a welcoming and inclusive party. There are people who are not Irish who have taken a very active role in my party. It was founded by people with surnames like De Valera, Lemass, and Markievicz. This is a very clear recognition of the contribution of people from various backgrounds to the foundation of the State. While we need to have a proper immigration policy, it needs to be fair and to recognise the contribution of migrants to our shores.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this topic. Listening to some of the debate, there seems to be a muddying of the waters as to what we are proposing in relation to citizenship and then the discussion in regards to migration. Ireland has always been a welcoming nation. However, over the last couple of years, we have realised that we need to have a firm and fair system to deal with the challenges coming down the line. Through the work of the Government and its Ministers, reforms have been implemented and we are now seeing the benefits. We have always recognised that those who have come to Ireland and joined our communities and workforce have been welcomed and they are necessary. Never more than now, with an ageing population, we need more people like that coming into our country, being part of our community and participating in our political parties. Fine Gael also has a very large representation of diversity within the party, and we are very proud of that. We would welcome more people to join the party. That is the political broadcast finished for now.

At the same time, it has to be recognised that citizenship is not a right, but a privilege. People need to strive for it and work at it and ultimately be proud of it. It should never be taken for granted. This is what is being proposed in the Bill. We are acknowledging that people are working here and would like to establish a life here. Like their children, they would like to be citizens. There is no problem in my mind with extending the timeframe. What is the issue, whether it is five years or eight years, when the goal we are talking about is a lifetime?

Like Deputy Byrne Malcolm Byrne, I too had summer jobs. Unfortunately, I was not from Wexford. I am from County Louth, so my summers were spent picking wild oats and potatoes. Nowadays we do not have in the countryside people coming in looking for summer jobs. We do not have the migrants and local young people are not coming to do this.

Deputy Eoghan Kenny made a valid point, though I perhaps would not have used the same terminology. We have graduates coming in now, and while I would not extend it to all undergraduates, I think there is a valid argument to be made - and I hope it would be considered - that if postgraduates are here doing research in any subject through an approved institution, after that, if it is three, four or five years, those two years or three years of study be taken into consideration and be part of the residency rule. It seems a little unfair, if they have chosen to stay here to study and then contribute to society, that we would not recognise those years.

This country does not function without foreign workers. If the people who come here to give us the benefit of their expertise, hard work and experience were to leave, we would not have a healthcare sector, hospitality sector or tech sector. Let us put that to bed straight away. We need people to come here, and we are incredibly lucky that we have a coterie of hard-working people who are willing to come and make their lives here by contributing to our communities, society and economy. This is why I think the use of words like "racist" is incredibly unhelpful. If we are to have a civil and reasonable dialogue about the issues in these statements, bandying around words like "racist" is really unhelpful. The reality is that it is not racist to ask that we reconsider our migration policy and change it in a way that reflects reality. We are changing it in a way that we need to change it. That is not a racist policy. That is a reasonable policy evaluation that should happen in any country and we should have a discussion that is not based on name-calling and accusations.

That said, I fundamentally disagree with the proposal to change the basis on which citizenship by naturalisation would come about. In my opinion, we do not need to increase it to eight years. It does not bring us in line with Europe. Thirteen of the 27 EU countries have a requirement of five years or fewer for citizenship. I think only six require eight years, for example. That does not matter, to my mind. When we look at the requirements in different countries, there are all kinds of more complicated criteria involved. For example, if a person has a family history of connection to a country, it might reduce the period of time. If a person has a good knowledge of the language of a country, it might reduce the period of time. I do not see the benefit for Ireland to increasing the period for naturalisation from five to eight years. I also do not think that anybody comes to this country on the basis of how long it takes before they apply for citizenship by naturalisation. I do not know how much difference it will make either way.

I agree with the provisions for a citizenship test. I called for this in the Seanad in May 2024. It is entirely reasonable that people should acquaint themselves with the history and culture of the country. The language also plays an important part. I made reference to other countries in Europe, Hungary and Spain for example, where having a knowledge of the language speeds a person up on the track to citizenship. More often than not, when we talk about language and people coming here we are referring to the English language. However, if a person came here and developed an interest and expertise in Irish, that should put them in a different position when applying for citizenship. I pay tribute to the Minister of State, because he has taken on an invidious task in being the person responsible for migration and he has transformed the way we approach many aspects of migration in a positive way. I disagree with him on this particular policy. We have, however, made huge progress, and that huge progress should be recognised when possible.

Ireland has changed hugely in the past 40 years or more. As a country, we were a net exporter of labour until 40 years ago. Things have changed. Very large families were the norm and people died younger. We also had an economy which struggled. Now, much of that has changed and as society becomes more affluent, families get smaller and people live longer. Those two things mean that we are going to need an awful lot of labour to come from somewhere else, and that is similar across every country in Europe. We particularly need skilled labour for the manufacturing sector and other sectors in Ireland and it has to come here from elsewhere. That is a reality we have to get used to.

The problem we see in my office more than anything else is employers who have people here working when they try to get their visas renewed.

The whole system has changed. Whereas this issue was dealt with by a local garda in the local Garda station, which dealt with the immigration office, it has now moved to a portal. It might as well be in Mars because nobody can get through to anyone or talk to anybody. They send in their information, wait for months and then hear their information has been lost and they should resubmit their application. There have been cases in my constituency where Americans, Canadians and Australians - I am dealing with two Australian people who are working here - cannot get their visa renewed because the system is broken. The Minister of State is talking about making changes. If he gets the blinking thing that is there now right, we might have a chance of working it. I have spoken to senior people in the Department of justice to try to resolve this and they keep telling me they are putting more resources into it and doing this, that and the other to help. It is not working. That is the reality. The system needs to be got right and I ask the Minister of State to get it right.

As regards the other changes, particularly with regard to citizenship, no one is coming to me saying there is a big problem with citizenship. The problem is trying to apply for it and the difficulties applicants are having with doing so.

The entire debate on migration in this country and most other countries is being poisoned by fascism. All kinds of lies and nonsense are being spread the length and breadth of the country. It is feeding people's egos to make them believe that we Irish are better than everyone else. That is part of the problem we have here and I want the Minister of State to recognise that. Many of the people who are spreading these lies are connected to international fascists, parties such as Alternative for Germany and the National Front in Britain. These are the people who are poisoning the atmosphere and we need to spell that out and recognise it.

I am not saying changes do not need to be made - they absolutely do - but whatever changes are to be made, the first one has to be to get a system that actually works for people who are here and want to stay and contribute to society. They need to have a human being to talk to at the end of the phone because nobody can get one now. My office is inundated with people who cannot get their visa sorted out. The Minister of State needs to make the effort to change the system for the right reasons.

Let us be honest about what is happening here with the new proposed citizenship Bill. This is the latest episode of Jim O'Callaghan trying to clamber his way to the top of Fianna Fáil on the backs of vulnerable people. In this case, it is the people who make our health services work, who are part of our communities and who contribute to our society. Jim O’Callaghan is making himself out to be the hard man on immigration so that he can become leader of Fianna Fáil. It is a solution to a problem that simply does not exist and one that will make real problems worse for people. It will make the health crisis worse and potentially make the housing crisis worse. It certainly will not address the cost-of-living crisis. It is another one of these episodes of performative cruelty that will not make life better for anybody in this country. Instead, it will just make life harder for people who are working and living here, doing essential work, paying taxes and contributing to our society. It is a policy that the far right could have written. It is pandering to racism, the far right and fascism and Government members should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for it.

Many of the arguments put out there are simply falsehoods through and through. It is not true that this would bring us into line with other EU countries. No other EU country has all three of the bars to citizenship in this proposed Bill, namely, the salary bar, the benefits bar and the debt bar. Twenty-one of 27 EU countries do not have any salary bar for citizenship, recognising that many migrants do low-paid but essential work such as caring for older people, children and people with disabilities. Extending the residency requirement to eight years before people can even apply for citizenship is out of line with other countries. France, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, Malta and the Netherlands allow people to apply after five years. In Canada, Australia and the US, where thousands of Irish people go every year, people can apply after three to five years. This highlights the hypocrisy. It is why it is correct to say that what is proposed is racist. The Government is happy to see people emigrate and happy to see the back of as many young people as possible, but when it comes to people coming here a different standard is applied. That is racism and xenophobia, pure and simple. It is also not what people want. If we look at opinion polls, nobody is asking for this. People want to see integration and support for people.

Citizenship is not merely a legal status; it is a statement of belonging. It is how people who have built their lives here, work here, raise their families here and contribute to our society become full and equal members of that society. Each country has the right to determine the rules around how it grants citizenship to others - no one disputes that. However, the proposals being advanced by the Government, specifically the increase in the time period from five to eight years, moves us in the wrong direction. These changes will make the pathway to citizenship longer, more complicated and more uncertain for people who are already living legally in Ireland and making a valuable contribution in our country.

Last week, some of the people who will be impacted by these changes protested outside Leinster House. I was struck by what they chanted, "We work, we pay tax". Their frustration was tangible. These changes are impacting people who have played by the rules and who undertake crucial work. Some are in high-end jobs, some are in university research, while others are in core, caring roles that are essential to our health and social services. What is most striking is that the Government has failed to explain what problems these measures are actually intended to solve. At a time when anti-immigrant rhetoric is becoming louder across Europe, including here in Ireland, there is a real risk that these proposals are more about political signalling than they are about good public policy. To me it seems the Government is being performatively tough on migration of any kind to match what it perceives to be a shift in sentiment. That is the opposite of the leadership we need right now.

I am particularly concerned about people who already have applications in process. Those who have submitted applications did so based on the rules that existed at the time. Existing applications should be submitted under the current system and the new requirements should not be applied retrospectively.

I raise again the delay in issuing visas to students from Gaza who have been accepted to study in Irish institutions. Sixty students are facing unacceptable delays and unfair procedural requirements, particularly considering that they live in a war zone. The Department of justice needs to rapidly process these visas.

The proposals to impose more severe regulations governing Irish citizenship are pandering to a tiny minority of far-right, anti-immigrant voices. It is shameful. As the Irish Council for Civil Liberties has said, no rationale, research or evidence has been presented by the Department for these proposed changes and no issues have been identified in the current system.

Claims that changes bring us into line with Europe do not ring true as several European countries retain the five-year rule, including France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and many others. At a minimum, any new rules must not apply to those who are already in this country. These workers were actively recruited by State agencies to address critical staff shortages. The HSE, for example, targeted recruitment across the globe to fill medical, nursing, paramedical and healthcare assistant posts. Many were specifically recruited for IT and engineering sectors under Ireland's critical skills programme. These workers keep our hospitals, nursing homes, hospitality and agricultural sectors afloat. These workers are here legally on work visas and employment permits and under Ireland's critical skills programme. They work and pay their taxes, they are law-abiding and they have brought their families here with them. They are embedded in local communities, on parents' councils in the schools their children attend, and they are members of our sports clubs, with many playing our national games. These families have made a permanent commitment to this country and it would be deeply unfair to move the goalposts for these individuals now. It must not happen. The five-year rule must stay for anyone who is currently in this country.

I commend Clonmel Together, an organisation that does tremendous work in the area of welcoming and integrating new communities.

We have heard a lot about this Bill but we have not seen it. We have heard what has been planned. We need to say that it is unnecessary, divisive and damaging. There has never been any demand in this Dáil or anywhere else for a discussion about citizenship. In fact, all I have heard about is IPAS centres and "illegals".

Suddenly, we have a problem with citizenship. The Government is failing on housing and the cost of living and suddenly, this is brought into the equation as the Dáil starts its term. It is taking the focus of the data centres eating our electricity or the fact that seven out of ten young people feel they are going to have to leave this country. It is performative cruelty.

Naturalisation should not have to be a massive burden. If people have been living and working in this country for five years and want to settle down here, they should have security and they deserve that, especially non-EU citizens who have to go through visas and difficulties every single time they need to go home if a family member is sick. This is racist and it follows the far-right approach taken elsewhere. As others have said, it is not in line with other countries.

I want to mention the income test as well. A rake of parties and Independents went to briefings about how terribly migrant healthcare assistants were being treated in this country. If those Members dare stand up and support this Bill when it does come through, they are hypocrites because these people are doing essential work in our nursing homes and so many aspects of our lives.

The language test is a similar matter. I do not speak Irish. Are we going to make migrants perform to a higher level than is the case for other people? This is not needed and all the Government is doing here is making life miserable and creating guest workers in this country rather than people who have a stake in society.

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on this debate. There are three essential points I want to make. First, as others have said, we have not yet seen the bones of this legislation but we are hearing what is coming down the line in respect of citizenship criteria. I am generally supportive of it. I think we need to have bookended policy that defines what citizenship is. That is quite standard for most countries. However, accommodation needs to be made for people who have been here long term or people who are married or in long-term relationships here and who are already queuing in the system. There needs to be some honouring of that. They have already bought into the system and applied. They are in a long queue to have their citizenship and naturalisation determined. Some accommodation needs to be made for that.

It has been said there will have to be a proficiency in speaking the English language. There are not many migrants who have become fluent in Irish since they came here but there is a minority of examples. One is Misha Yerhidzé - I have probably made a disaster of pronouncing his name - who was in the Public Gallery 12 months ago. He came down and met people of all parties and none. He is a young boy who is living in Ballyferriter and he has a fabulous blas for the Irish language. He plays the concertina. Irish is our State language and it needs to be in those criteria. It cannot just be proficiency in English. The Irish community demands that that be inserted as a criterion.

Communities like Lisdoonvarna in County Clare bent over backwards when the war in Ukraine began. Their population increased fourfold. I have heard people stand up and speak about what their communities have done. There are none in the country that has taken on as much as Lisdoonvarna and it did so proudly. However, I made the point this morning at the Oireachtas education committee that the local school there went from 70-something pupils to 140-something pupils within the space of a month. This was a massive change for it. The point I made at the committee is that just as this ramped up very quickly, at some stage, please God, there will be peace in Ukraine and their status as beneficiaries of temporary protection will expire. At that point, the Department and the Government need to show the same flexibility to schools and communities like that as they wind back from this escalated scenario, as the communities themselves showed that flexibility in the first instance.

I thank the Minister of State for the opportunity to discuss migration and, of course, the Bill that is being proposed. In the first instance, I acknowledge his opening remarks and the value that he put on migration, which is a hallmark of his tenure as Minister of State in this Department. It is so important that people in power use every opportunity they get to talk up the value of migration.

In fairness to the universal theme that has been evident in this Chamber, so far at least - and I have listened to the entire debate - every person who has stood up has spoken about the value and importance of migration, in all parties and none. That is a measure of the strength of integration in this country. I do not think that should be divorced from our ability or capacity to make changes to our system in a firm way. We have made very significant changes to our international protection system. That has worked and, quite frankly, has proved to be fair. There is a recognition of the changes that have been made and that has not done any damage to the issues of integration.

Similarly, I have no objection to the issue of citizenship being examined or to changes being made 20 years after the last iteration, but as it relates to people who are playing by the rules - I am talking about people here on stamp 4 visas, many of them constituents of everybody in this Chamber - they want to play by the rules and they have played by the rules. As the Taoiseach indicated, at least in interviews with the media earlier, it needs to be examined in the context of the Bill that people who came here and have been granted visas knowing what the rules would be on their pathway to citizenship should be exempt from any final iteration of this Bill and should be covered by the existing regime. That would be proportionate and fair. These people recognise that you can change the rules. They are working hard and trying to get ahead. They recognise that countries can change rules, but they have played by the rules and support work.

It is ironic that within this Chamber, for the first time in a very long time, we have heard discussion about full employment and the economy from the Opposition, which never talks about those things. One of the big challenges we have in this country is that we do have full employment and we want to ensure we have the right skills here. I urge the Minister of State and the senior Minister in the Department to examine this issue of being proportionate and fair to people who have played by the rules. They should be covered by the existing regime and not by any new regime that will be introduced.

I thank the Minister of State for the opportunity to speak here today. I am the son of an immigrant. My mother was Indian. She came here in 1954 to study medicine in the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. She loved this country. She did not hold citizenship for almost 40 years after having seven children and working in a rural practice. She took out an Irish passport in her later years because it facilitated travel to and from Europe. The point I am making is that you can have residency here, and we should not conflate that and scare people who are long-term residents here and have not applied for citizenship heretofore. While we look at reform of our citizenship requirements, we should make that clear to people.

It is important that we have a review of the citizenship requirements. I am quite happy with the idea that there are certain civic requirements such as language tests, a history of contribution to the economy and other such tests. I do not have a problem with that. The extension of five to eight years can be debated but I have had no representations of real fear around that. Where there is concern is the fact the application for citizenship takes so long at the moment. I have been dealing with a medical consultant and his wife, who is a nurse. They have been here for a number of years. They have two children in India being brought up by frail, elderly grandparents and they are finding it very difficult to effect family unification. IWe need to have more flexibility around individual cases where people have demonstrated their commitment to this country.

Let us not forget that migration to this country has been a good thing, in spite of the efforts by organised right-wing groups to conflate illegal and legal immigration. The vast majority of migration here involves people we have invited into this country and who have added to our economy in all sorts of spheres, such as healthcare, the hospitality industry, construction, pharmaceuticals and information technology, IT. They have added to this economy, and they need to feel that their work and their presence here are valued.

Unfortunately, we have had a rise in racism. Fourteen or 15 months ago, we had a spate of attacks against Indian nationals around this country. I visited the then Indian ambassador, Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, and expressed my sadness at those attacks where people were being targeted because of the colour of their skin. It was driven by social media and people like Elon Musk and his hundreds of millions of followers.

There is a crucial point about people whose application for citizenship is already in the system, such as that couple I referred to who have been in the system for two years. Another doctor who has approached me has been here for 15 years. His wife is a teacher and now works as a special needs assistant, SNA. She has applied for citizenship. She has been in the system for two years and they are fearful that they will be set back.

We really need flexibility and fairness for the group of people who already have their application in process. It is important that while the Government has pursued a focus on immigration, part of the reasoning for that has been, in my estimation, that we must have a fair, firm system the public believes in. There is a narrative against our immigration system that suggests we have an open-door policy and that creates problems, so we have to have a system the public has full confidence in to avoid creating political vacuums where fascists and right-wing agitators can prosper. I agree with the tightening of our immigration rules on that basis. We have to demonstrate to the public that the system is fair and equitable.

On the issue of migrants generally, the State is not recognising adequately their contribution to the State and to our economy and we must have a much more forceful narrative coming from the State, Government and public representatives on the value of migration to our country. Our birth rate is falling. Our elderly demographic is growing larger. There will be one million people over 65 by 2030 and 1.6 million by 2045. We need migration to keep this country and this economy stable.

Irish citizenship is something to be valued. It represents membership of our nation, carries rights and responsibilities and should reflect a genuine and lasting commitment to Ireland. When I first heard the Government was looking to change citizenship rules I thought it was just a smokescreen to hide its failures on migration in general, and nothing I have heard since has led me to change my mind. The Government is just looking to go after low-hanging fruit. It is going after people who have migrated to our island, who have already contributed positively to our country, who work hard, who are part of our communities and who want to become citizens. All the Government has done is create uncertainty for these people, and to me this is wrong. I recognise any changes to citizenship rules can create uncertainty for those seeking to acquire Irish citizenship, and this needs to be considered.

For too long successive governments of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have failed to develop a coherent citizenship policy. The current system relies heavily on length of residence and rules that are often unclear to applicants. Time spent in Ireland does and should matter but it should not be the only determining factor. Those seeking citizenship must demonstrate integration, contribution, good character and a commitment to Irish society. If you believe in a rules-based system for migration, those rules must be enforced, not next week, next year or in five years’ time. Those rules must be enforced quickly and efficiently. If you are someone who enters our country seeking refuge and you have a right to be here, you should be afforded every single opportunity by the State to make a positive contribution to our society. If you have not got the right to be here, as outlined in the rules, then you should be returned to your country of origin as quickly and as safely as possible. Most decent people on this island would agree with that. People I talk to when I am canvassing day to day and speaking to them face to face would agree that is a fair system.

On international protection, I have raised before many times, especially in relation to Saggart, IPAS centres should not be located in communities that already lack services and facilities and which are already experiencing deprivation. There needs to be a process of engagement with communities. In previous debates we put forward amendments that would ensure communities are consulted and that there is a conversation about new IPAS centres going into their areas and that their genuine concerns are listened to, but the Government and other parties voted against this. When communities are not listened to it creates a vacuum for bad actors to fill, often with false information. This can lead to division and unrest in our communities and this is the last thing we need.

I will make it very simple, as I always have, and say that if people of any nationality are migrating to this country are here to work, support their families, integrate, support society and respect Ireland - as we do - then we will respect them and they are welcome. If people are here for the wrong reasons, they should turn on their heels and get out. It is as simple as that.

People in Ireland are the most welcoming in the world. They integrate and they work with everyone and all different nationalities. They respect everyone's religion and everyone respects ours. That is what I support. However, there have been people who are here for years who have done exactly what I said in that they have worked hard here, applied for citizenship, integrated and supported their families and communities. The rules on that should be based on the rules on the day they came here, and if new rules are being implemented, they should not be part of that. They should be recognised from the time they applied. It is the same as any rule that changes in that it should change from here on out. It is true we need to tighten up our citizenship and that we have an open-door policy that we need to tighten up, but the good people who came here for the right reasons should be accommodated here. As for the ones who came here for the wrong reasons, we need everyone's help to get rid of them.

The Cathaoirleach Gníomhach might indulge me as I would like to pass on my condolences to Treasa, Cillian and Aisling and their family on the loss of Seamus Carroll. Seamus was a lovely usher here in the Dáil. He was friendly, charming and full of fun and was always so very helpful to us all, especially me and my office staff. We will miss him here in Dáil Éireann. May he rest in peace.

Hear, hear.

Ireland has always been a welcoming country and raising legitimate concerns about immigration does not make somebody anti-immigrant. Independent Ireland supports legal immigration and we recognise the enormous contribution people who come here legally make to our economy, our health services and our communities. However, we also have to be honest about capacity. We have a housing crisis, enormous pressure on our health services and communities being asked to accommodate significant change without proper consultation. We need faster decisions and proper enforcement when applications are unsuccessful as well as effective border controls and genuine engagement with communities.

At the same time, a firm immigration system must also be a fair one. I recently made representations on behalf of a South African national living in Ballydehob who is facing deportation. He has specialist skills in solar PV, inverter and battery storage technology. He works with a west Cork company and is passing those skills on to Irish electricians. His employer wants to retain him and is prepared to regularise his employment. Surely circumstances like these deserve proportionate consideration.

I also welcome the Taoiseach’s indication that the proposed new criteria may not apply retrospectively to people already resident here. That protection should be written clearly into the Bill. People who came here, planned their lives around the five-year rule, and are working here, especially those nearing eligibility, deserve certainty and fairness. We should also examine the situation of PhD researchers, many of whom teach, publish, pay tax and contribute enormously to Ireland, yet time spent here on a student permission does not count as reckonable residence. At least part of full-time doctoral research should be recognised towards residence. I sent the Minister of State’s office a case on Monday concerning a young man who was born and raised in Ireland and lived here for approximately 20 years, but because he was apparently born just days after a change in the law, he is now struggling to obtain citizenship. Will the Minister of State personally examine that case? It should be straightforward but once again it is not. We need an immigration system that is controlled and accountable but also fair, proportionate and capable of applying common sense to individual circumstances.

This summer a man was convicted of the murder of three young children in Parnell Square. He lived in Ireland for 20 years. He needed an interpreter because he could not speak the language in court and he never worked a day in his life. Despite this, that person had Irish citizenship. How does that happen? Irish citizenship should be valued. It should be something to be worked for and something to be earned. Generations of Irish men and women have fought and bled for this nation, and this Government has thrown out citizenship far too easily. I asked the Minister for Social Protection how many people are on social welfare benefits who are new arrivals to the country and have a similar history of not working in this State.

The Minister was unable to tell me because he does not count the figures. How do we make a policy on this if we are not even going to collect the data?

Countries like Denmark and Germany have a language test, a civics test and financial requirements as well. Many years ago, we raised this and called for citizenship reform. Indeed many Irish citizens right across the country did so as well and anyone who raised this topic was shouted down and called many names under the sun. What an immature democracy. What a poor reflection on this Parliament and this Dáil that so many politicians who actually stood up today and welcomed the proposal were the same politicians from the same parties who shouted down Aontú and called us many names. I welcome the fact the Government is moving in the right direction. It is only right and proper that we would treat citizenship with value and introduce a language test, a civics test and, crucially, requirements around social welfare and financial independence. These things are normal and right and it is absurd the Government is only waking up to it now.

It is good to have the opportunity to talk about this. I know Senators did a couple of days ago. When the legislation comes forward, I hope we have ample debating time. I told the Tánaiste that we need a citizens' convention on citizenship, immigration and asylum issues. We need to have a proper debate, get rid of the myths and the conspiracy theories and look at facts and figures. Sometimes the facts and figures will suit those perceived to be right wing and sometimes they will suit those perceived to be left wing but to be clear, morally, anyone who has made a contribution to this country should have a pathway to citizenship. It does not mean it should be an easy pathway because Irish citizenship is a privilege and not a right but so many people have contacted me who have been here and applied for citizenship on the basis of five years and now they fear it is going to go to eight years. For anyone who has applied, it would be totally unfair for that to change during his or her application.

I think five years is enough if the application process is tough enough in the first place. That means stringent language requirements not just in one language, such as Irish or English, but the ability to demonstrate some proficiency in the other language along with a knowledge of cultural norms, how the electoral system operates in this country, how the various State agencies operate and what is expected in terms of being a law-abiding citizen. In that context, there are many here who are already making a good contribution to our country who should be rewarded through that pathway.

Then we have people who are fleeing persecution. We know that at least 30% of those who go through the system are found on appeal to be genuinely fleeing war and persecution. They need to be protected and they also need a pathway but, equally, they have to follow the same cultural norms and have to have the same learning requirements to become citizens rather than protected residents. There are others in this country who have committed crimes, have been told they have to leave and have not left. That has to stop. That is what a balanced process is.

We need to be able to speak about migration and citizenship calmly, openly and honestly because if we do not talk about these issues in this House, people will talk about them elsewhere and very often without the facts. I represent Carlow-Kilkenny and I listen to people on the ground. People talk to me about migration and about the pressure on housing, schools, GP services and other public services and those concerns should be heard. People should be able to raise reasonable questions about migration without being labelled or dismissed but equally we have a responsibility to deal in facts. There is a perception among some people that the number of non-Irish people living in Ireland is far greater than it actually is. The most recent census showed that around 12% of the population were non-Irish citizens. We should acknowledge the contribution people who have come to Ireland make every day in our hospitals, nursing homes, construction, agriculture, hospitality, business and communities right across the country so this cannot be a debate of one extreme or the other.

Ireland is entitled to manage migration. We should have a system where the rules are clear, where decisions are made efficiently and where those decisions are then followed through. People seeking international protection deserve a fair decision and they deserve it quickly and where someone is found not to have a right to remain, that decision also has to mean something.

However, there is another side to this discussion and that is citizenship. I acknowledge that there is a real concern among many newcomers to Ireland about the proposed changes to our citizenship rules and what those changes mean for them and their families. Some people have come here, worked, paid their taxes, raised children and built their lives around an understanding of the pathway to citizenship that existed when they arrived. They now need clarity and certainty. They need to know where they stand. Of course, it is entirely reasonable that we have a serious discussion about the rules governing Irish citizenship because Irish citizenship is significant. It brings rights and responsibility. Becoming an Irish citizen should mean something. It is also about belonging. At citizenship ceremonies across the country, we see people who have chosen Ireland as their home. They have built lives here, become our neighbours and our colleagues and are raising the next generation here. That is something we should value so as we consider any proposed changes, we need to get this balance right - protecting the integrity and value of Irish citizenship while also being fair to people who have come here legally, who have contributed to this country and who genuinely want to make Ireland their permanent home.

It is so important that in all discussions here, we choose our language carefully. We must not say anything that might inflame situations or give encouragement to any extreme positions. We must stick at all times to the facts because we remember that we are talking about fellow human beings. The most important thing is that we have open and frank discussions. This will lessen the possibility of false information and extreme positions taking hold.

Three years ago, I stated publicly that we should have an open discussion on immigration. To date, we have failed to have open discussions. We have nothing to hide. What are we afraid of? Do we not trust the Irish people with open discussions and all the facts? In Ireland, over 23% of the population were born outside the country. The US and the UK, which are countries we consider melting pots, have never had this level of foreign-born residents. Their highest figures were 17% to 18%. Why are we not discussing this? What implications does it have for social cohesion, education and other issues in society? The rapid rise in numbers over the past decade has implications for housing. It means we are playing catch up in every part of the economy and our public services.

A common thread in most of the issues we discussed here in the Dáil and at committee is that as a State, we are poor at long-term planning. We need to be doing detailed planning and budgeting ten, 20 and 30 years ahead. Do we need to review our work permit situation or how we can encourage Irish-trained people, for example, nurses to remain? By not discussing these matters, we are leaving it open to the extremes on both sides to dictate the narrative. Many of the people I meet and those who call into my clinics regularly raise these issues with me. These are ordinary, decent, generous, community people.

I commend the Minister of State on the steps he has taken to deal with international protection. The European migration pact was a significant move that will contribute to regularising migration and lead to quicker decisions. I have always said that we need to align our country with all other EU states as the only way to manage migration. In relation to cost, I expect to see large reductions in the cost of IPAS centres as we go forward. The new citizenship rules regarding residency again align us with other member states. One of the cornerstones of any system is that all citizens of the State are treated equally. In the case of IPAS residents who are working and earning a wage, there must be a contribution to all accommodation costs. Can we also have an open discussion regarding housing? Do people exiting IPAS centres obtain social housing locally quickly, do those centres then take in new IPAS residents and does this lead to some small communities having very large IPAS populations? In my own county of Wicklow, the majority of IPAS centres are located in one municipal district - west Wicklow.

This district is also the most poorly served by public transport and services.

I will repeat what I said at the beginning. I hope this forms part of a move to a more open and frank discussion.

I welcome the proposals brought forward by the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and Minister of State, Deputy Brophy. I encourage the Opposition to consider them at face value rather than ascribing a motivation to them. I believe they are in many ways common-sense proposals. Citizenship is among the most important rights a state can confer on an individual. It is not just a paper document. It is a reflection of a connection to Ireland and a commitment by the citizen to actively participate in the life of our nation, in our communities and in our democracy. Citizenship offers an individual the opportunity to actively participate together with others who call this island home and those around the world who are summoned to our flag.

In my community, I see those families. I see those who came here to work, study and build a life. They are involved in our sports clubs, staff our hospitals and run our local businesses. They are our neighbours and friends. It is a proud day for both them and Ireland when they cross that threshold and become citizens of a republic. You can see it on their faces in the photographs and the video footage. It is because that moment matters so much that we should protect it.

The proposals in the Irish nationality and citizenship (amendment) Bill 2026 include increasing the qualifying period of reckonable residence from five to eight years and introducing language testing in English, Irish and, importantly, Irish Sign Language, alongside a test on Irish civics, society and politics. Importantly, none of this is unusual. Austria, Italy, Spain and Switzerland all set residency periods in a similar way. Most EU countries require language proficiency. Civics tests are common across the Union. Economic self-sufficiency is a standard pillar of citizenship policy from Germany to Denmark to Poland. These changes bring Ireland into line with our European partners.

Of course, we retain sovereignty in this area, but this comparison with other EU countries is important because in granting Irish citizenship, we are effectively granting EU citizenship and granting people access to the four freedoms that we cherish so dearly in the European Union. The Bill will also give the Minister a distinct power to revoke citizenship on public order and national security grounds, with a streamlined process to do so, surely a reasonable safeguard for any state.

The Bill will now go to the Oireachtas joint committee on justice for pre-legislative scrutiny. I look forward to a detailed debate there because there are questions with regard to addressing the transitionary arrangements. However, in the same way that these are common-sense proposals, I expect that those transition arrangements will also be dealt with in a common-sense way. I commend the Bill to the House.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on these statements on migration and citizenship. Sinn Féin’s position is clear. We want a strong, fair and efficient migration system that supports the ambition and interests of the people of this State, while reflecting the inherent decency of the Irish people and upholding our obligations to those fleeing war and persecution. Managing migration requires concerted action and long-term planning. For a start, migration should be managed on an all-island basis. That makes absolute sense. With work permits and student visas, we should take into account our capacity to house and integrate people, as well as the availability of public services. That is an argument for basic planning, something that was clearly missing in recent years.

I am looking at the most recent push notification in the news on my phone and the headline is: “Substantial sums paid to asylum seeker accommodation providers represented ‘no value’”. That is the news today from the Comptroller and Auditor General. It will not come as a surprise to people. We need to do better. Our international protection system must be fair, efficient and enforced. People need to have confidence in it. Sinn Féin calls for faster processing, an end to profiteering, as just mentioned, enforcement of deportations and genuine support for integration. Each of those elements is important.

Sinn Féin opposed the majority of the EU asylum and migration pact and the International Protection Bill 2026 due to sovereignty concerns and the fact the pact did not adequately account for Ireland’s unique status as an EU state sharing a common travel area with a non-EU state. We need better data collection on entry and exit and the urgent pursuit of a legally binding, bilateral agreement with Britain.

Irish citizenship is deeply valuable. It represents membership of our nation, carries rights and responsibilities and reflects a genuine commitment to Ireland. We recognise the immense contribution that migrants make across our public services, economy and communities in every single corner of Ireland. Citizenship should never be reduced to a passport acquired simply through the passage of time or a privilege reserved only for the wealthy or well-connected. Successive Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael governments have failed to build a coherent policy, relying instead on broad discretion and unclear rules. Measuring time spent in Ireland, for example, in and of itself does not necessarily demonstrate integration. Sinn Féin supports a structured, transparent pathway to citizenship, with clear rules focusing on civic participation, community involvement, tax compliance and language proficiency.

Elsewhere, the Government must urgently address residence permit renewal delays. It must provide access to secure long-term residence options, create a pathway for people in the North who have legally moved here, and examine fair transitional arrangements.

I welcome the debate. It is great that we can debate this in a reasonable and calm manner. I was in the Chair for a lot of it and I have listened to all of the debate. It is three years ago that we should have had this debate, but we could not raise it here in the House. Any of us who raised serious issues were decried and bemoaned as far right and God knows what else.

I welcome the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and the Minister of State, Deputy Brophy, to this job. They have made an effort to deal with elected politicians. What happened under the previous Goverment, Deputy Roderic O'Gorman and his Department, and what happened with the senior officials in justice and integration, was nothing short of scandalous, given the way they treated the people and communities of Tipperary and beyond. What they did in Roscrea, Dundrum and many other places showed the deceit and contempt they had for the ordinary people. The people of Dundrum and Roscrea came out and stood solidly, calmly and honestly. They did not want any far-right people. They hunted bad actors because of their contempt for the communities. The demographic is not supposed to be changed by more than 5%, but it was changed by 200% in Dundrum, with a good community destroyed. They sat at the gates. They were peaceful and good-humoured, and they did it for as long as they could, but no, the Government would not talk to them. Now it has taken the decision to close Dundrum House Hotel. What happened in this situation is that there were greedy actors that had no interest in anyone else, Irish, English or from Timbuktu, but an interest in fat, deep pockets. This allowed people to get rich. Filthy people, I call them, who were exploiting these people coming in, with bad conditions, getting millions in contracts from the State - taxpayers' money - and getting away with it. Now we have created a mess. Thank God, Dundrum is sorted, but many other areas are not.

My uncles and aunts had to go to America to work. There was nothing here for them in the late fifties and sixties, and they gave all their lives there. I appreciate people who come here to work and are working in healthcare, hospitality and the construction industries. The country needs workers with proper visas.

The main issue that I am hearing every day in my office, and again today, is from people who want to work here but who are having difficulties renewing or getting work permits or visas. There used to be an immigration officer whom a person could meet to discuss a visa or permit application, but that has all gone online and it is nearly impossible to get an update. There is a slowing down of everything for those who want to stay here to work. The Government needs to address that issue and not confuse it with anything else.

I am constantly being contacted by employers in the construction and hospitality industries who are trying to retain staff and have issues with their work visas. The system needs to be simplified. We should not be making people jump through hoops to get their work visas.

A lot of people were brought to Killarney and packed into asylum centres against the wishes of local people. It hurt local people very badly.

Time is up, Deputy.

My companion speaker has not arrived so I am using her time, as would be normal.

I was not made aware of that.

I am sorry.

The Government would not listen at that time. It hurt and angered so many people and brought their wrath down because the Government was not listening to them. I was told I was a lone dog whistling when I mentioned there were more than 70 male asylum seekers put into a house on the Muckross Road. I was called every kind of name and it was like as if I was the red divil altogether when I mentioned such a thing. There was no thought given and no discussion with anyone. We need to get away from that. I thank the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, for some of the measures he is bringing forward.

I go back to the fact that there are people who want to work and we need to ensure they are allowed in here to work and are given work permits.

The Deputy's time has concluded.

Can I speak for a second?

For one second, as Deputy Nolan's time has gone now.

Stand up and say something anyway.

Thanks, and I apologise.

With the permission of the House.

Is that okay?

Agreed.

I will give Deputy Nolan a minute.

I will be as brief as I can. A very small minority of us in this House have been saying for years now that the levels of inward migration and explosion in the number of people being granted citizenship would lead to major challenges for the State and for Irish society. We have been thoroughly vindicated in those concerns. That is why I welcome moves to introduce a more rigorous set of requirements but to my mind, they do not go far enough. I accept this will have an impact on a very small number of people but the time when the State can simply coast along handing out citizenship and immigration permissions like confetti is well past. I will end on that note.

While I do not agree with what the Deputy said, per se, I do admire that she got here. I heard the breathlessness in her voice and it is important she got to make her contribution.

I will begin my reply by saying that we had a debate today that covered migration and citizenship. The difficulty in doing that in one joint debate is that I felt there was quite a lot of conflating of various issues which, unfortunately, did not give any real clarity to people who would listen to this debate.

I will not use my prepared remarks but will take a few minutes to reply to what Deputies said. I will start by re-emphasising that I believe the commitment of the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and I has always been to look at reform around the area of how we handle migration in our country - inward migration, emigration and the whole process of migration - and ensuring we have a system that is fit for purpose. That is a system, particularly in the migration area, which is firm, fair and effective, a system that is rules based, a system that makes sure the public can have confidence in it and that people going through it can be dealt with in a fair manner. Through the implementation of the migration pact and the transposing of that into Irish law we have actually done that.

I noted some of Sinn Féin's contributions today, which were pretty much the usual tropes thrown out and did not even acknowledge the fact that the migration pact has brought some of the singularly biggest changes. We have seen a drastic reduction in numbers, which was not acknowledged. We have seen times change from years to months to weeks. We have seen a process that is now working and is deemed by people going through it to enable them to have a very fair and effective system, and is one that is actually delivering for the State.

It is really important that in looking at the argument, be it migration or be it citizenship, that we try to have a discussion. To be honest, I frankly find it insulting that when certain Deputies stand up, their contribution could be distilled down to, "Let me see how many times I can say performative cruelty", and they think that is a thought-out contribution. I do not feel that what anybody is doing in this House is trying to introduce a system that is based on performative cruelty. You may disagree with individual aspects of how the system works but throwing out insults, whether it is at the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, at the Government or at me, does not contribute to the debate. What is important to recognise is that there are real changes we can look at to ensure the system works, be it in migration or citizenship.

I want to clearly move to citizenship as part of this discussion. What we are trying to do is propose a series or package of measures that would change how we look at how someone acquires citizenship. We have been clear from the start that it is a package of measures. We believe that package reflects a modern society. It reflects a lot of European norms. It reflects how people feel about the importance and the privilege that attaining Irish citizenship is. I look forward to the fact, and have done from day one, that package of measures will be looked at, analysed, gone through and debated during the pre-legislative scrutiny process and by the process of legislation going through the Oireachtas. The Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and I have always made it quite clear we want that process because we want to have an effective package at the end of it that not only enables people, which I am absolutely committed to, to achieve Irish citizenship because they have come here and made their lives here, but also ensures that citizenship is a very genuine, deep citizenship that somebody has an opportunity to feel they have achieved through a whole range of experiences. That includes their life experience, their work experience, their knowledge of our country, their proficiency in our language and their ability to contribute. It is never just any simple matrix such as "How many years have I been here? I must have citizenship".

I am someone who has presided over citizenship ceremonies as a Minister of State. As someone who has such a deep belief in Irish citizenship, I am afraid I do not subscribe to the notion that just because you come here, and we want you to come here and work and make a life here if that is what you want to do in whatever area, whether contributing to our public services or working at the heart of our tech, that is somehow or other selling an Irish citizenship or passport. It is not. It is the first stage of a process of someone coming to make his or her life in Ireland and as a result of that, having an opportunity, as that evolves, to have the privilege of citizenship, which is very important.

The debate is important. It is important we try to listen to each other. It is important we try to take out the language that is just designed to vilify or knock someone whose viewpoint you do not agree with. I heard people whose political party I agree with virtually nothing on what it stands for, say things I totally agreed with. I heard people who I would be much closer to in a political party context say things I did not agree with. That is the thing about this debate. You must be willing to take the debate in the round and believe contributions can be made by everybody to this debate that will contribute to us having the thing we want. The thing I would like and believe we should all want at the end of this is a system of migration that works for people coming in, be it coming in to claim international protection or, crucially, coming in to contribute in so many ways to work for our country. We also want a system that works when it comes to citizenship and ensures that when somebody gets the privilege of Irish citizenship that it is a deep privilege, which we - them and the State - have collectively worked together to ensure the benefits they derive from that citizenship are the maximum for them and for the State. That is what we are hoping to achieve in the legislation we are bringing forward.