Jim O'Callaghan
Dublin Bay South · Fianna Fáil · Ireland
“This relates to section 69 of the Bill as passed by Dáil Éireann, which amends Schedule 5 to the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 to add the Courts Service to the Schedule.”
“The first four amendments in this group are minor drafting corrections. They corrected the wording in four places so that the Bill reads consistently. It is changing the word "references" to "a reference". They make no change to the substance or effect of the Bill.”
“The ARP scheme was introduced in July 2022 to recognise the generosity of members of the public who opened their houses, whether in their entirety or through the provision of a room, at their own expense to provide shelter to people displaced by the Ukraine war. The Department of Social Protection administers the scheme on my behalf.”
“I have no doubt it will be challenged, and I have to be able to convince a court, if it is being challenged, that this legislation weighs up conflicting interests and recognises there is a mechanism for somebody who has reformed himself to get off the register.”
“The scheme has been a lifeline for people from Ukraine displaced by the conflict, given high rental market rates and scarcity of rental accommodation.”
“I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle in the first instance for presiding over these Stages of the legislation. I am very pleased that this legislation has been enacted. I want to thank a few people very briefly. I thank Deputy McAuliffe for introducing me to Jason Poole. I thank Senator O'Loughlin for her work on this issue in the Seanad.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,181 lines we hold for Jim O'Callaghan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 51 of 84.
“I agree with the Deputy that it is a very traumatic experience for a family after there has been a death if they are told that there has to be a post mortem and then there can be a considerable wait prior to the funeral. I would not like to see Ireland develop in the same way as other countries where there is a significant delay between death and the funeral. One of the things we do very well in this country is death and it is not something that we want to change by having a big gap between death and a funeral. Where a coroner deems a post mortem examination to be required, the coroner concerned will arrange the post mortem examination to be conducted as expeditiously as possible to ensure timely release of the remains to the next of kin.”
“In April 2022, my Department established a standing committee on the provision of coroner-directed post mortem examination services, membership of which consists of representatives from the Department of Health, HSE, Office of the State Pathologist, Garda, Coroners Society, and other officials from the faculty of pathology in the Royal College of Physicians. While this committee is an important forum with appropriate membership to discuss issues in relation to the autopsy service, I am conscious that the situation in University Hospital Waterford has reached a critical juncture and an urgent solution is required. I will consider and continue to seek to engage on this issue but it is an issue over which I do not have full control in light of what pathologists are doing at present.”
“I am afraid that I am also advised there are issues arising with respect to the performance of post mortems within the pathology profession generally. These include issues relating to training and recruitment as well as competing demands on pathologists in areas of diagnostic and research work. These are concerns that I am particularly worried about. There is an overlap here between my Department, which has responsibility for the Coroner Service and inquests, and the Minister for Health, Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill.”
“Following a recent meeting in University Hospital Waterford, UHW, attended by representatives and officials in my Department, I am advised that the pathologists employed at that location have indicated they are not available to carry out post mortems. On foot of this, my Department has been engaging with locum pathologists with a view to agreeing a solution to the situation in UHW from 1 January next. This approach is an unfortunate necessity to minimise any impact on bereaved family members who are engaging with the Coroner Service. A long-term sustainable solution is, nevertheless, required whereby locum pathologists are not relied upon to provide for the autopsy service and instead this service to the community is provided from within the pathology profession in Ireland generally.”
“I understand that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and Irish embassies and consulates are limited to providing assistance to non-Irish citizens but they are actively exploring options for the provision of assistance to individuals in Gaza who wish to travel to Ireland. The Deputy will also be aware that we did a lot in terms of the medivac scheme. In September 2024, the Government approved Ireland's participation in the initiative to evacuate up to 36 children from Gaza. So far, 19 paediatric patients and members of their families have arrived.”
“The officials in my Department give a very sympathetic response and an efficient response. The numbers of applications for visas to come here are very significant and it takes a long time to process them. I do not know whether it is the case that priority is given to applicants from certain countries but the best way of dealing with it is to ensure that we improve and increase efficiency, which is something that can always be done. In terms of what else is happening, the Irish Red Cross has offered to assist families in Ireland to apply for entry visas for their family members still in Gaza. Applications from eligible family members will be processed as swiftly as possible. This is what my officials say to me.”
“There was a broader European response with Syria and Afghanistan but there are very particular issues arising given the Israeli policy of precluding people from leaving Gaza that have an impact on policy developed by European countries.”
“There is a significant difference between Gaza and Ukraine. People cannot leave Gaza but they can leave Ukraine. The European Union decided that the temporary protection directive would be commenced in respect of individuals emanating from Ukraine. We also want to be careful in that we do not want to facilitate an Israeli policy of seeking to compulsorily move people out of Palestinian territory. The statistics confirm that a lot has been done. Looking at the total number of visa applications received from Palestinian nationals since October 2023, which is the past two years, 1,700 have applied and we have granted over 1,000. A lot of visas are being granted to individuals who apply for visas from Palestine. It probably does require a broader international humanitarian response.”
“It is particularly difficult to get out of there, but Ireland plays its part in assisting people who want to leave, whether that is through immigration visas or someone making an application for international protection. Of course, that will be considered as well.”
“Visa applications are part of a screening process, designed to establish that a person has a legitimate reason to come to Ireland prior to travel. All such applications undergo this process. Separately, there is also the process of applying for visas since October 2023. I understand that the total number is 1,790, of which 1,068 have been granted. Visas are being granted in respect of Palestinians who seek to come to Ireland. Obviously, individuals who come to Ireland and claim international protection having emanated from Palestine will have their applications considered. This is an international crisis in terms of trying to provide humanitarian assistance to people in Gaza.”
“What is happening in Gaza is horrific. My Department continues to work closely with the Department of foreign affairs to ensure a co-ordinated national response to the situation. This includes working with Irish citizens and their families who may require visa assistance. Many visas have been granted to individuals coming from Gaza to Ireland. In common with the position for all non-EU nationals, entry of Palestinian nationals is undertaken through the existing legal immigration pathways available. Palestinian nationals are visa required and must have a valid Irish visa before they seek to enter Ireland. Palestinian nationals can apply for a visa and permission to remain in Ireland for a variety of reasons, including employment, education or to join a family member in the State. That information is available on my Department’s website.”
“I have been telling them that consistently. Part of the reason the Deputy received a previous answer by way of a letter from me a number of months ago is that I am insistent that information is given, not just to the Deputy but to all TDs, as thoroughly as possible.”
“I am checking something that is of significance to the answer. I take answering questions in this House extremely seriously. Obviously, parliamentary questions come in. I was searching for a figure. Since I have been appointed as Minister, somewhere in the region of 3,500 to 4,000 parliamentary questions have come in and each one of them deserves a full and complete answer. I have instructed officials in my Department that when it comes to answering parliamentary questions, in cases where there can be either a broad or narrow interpretation, they are to adopt the broad interpretation in giving an answer.”
“As I said, the information should have been provided to the Deputy in respect of the rent that was paid on the former Commissioner's behalf by An Garda Síochána. That should have been provided to the Deputy previously. As for any other costs, aside from the payments the former Commissioner received which I have already provided to the Deputy, namely, the rent and property and the other financial costs associated with expenditure on doing up the house for security reasons, I am not aware of any other expenditure or extra package that was available to that Commissioner.”
“Obviously, there were unusual aspects to the appointment of the previous Commissioner because he was from outside An Garda Síochána. He came externally and, obviously, issues arise in respect of that. However, I went back and looked at some of the coverage of the new Commissioner’s appointment. On 13 December 2017, The Irish Times reported, “The Government may pay the accommodation costs and education fees for dependent children if an international candidate is selected for the role of Garda Commissioner.” It was obviously envisaged at the time that if someone were going to be appointed to the job of Garda Commissioner from outside of Ireland, accommodation costs would have to be paid in respect of that individual. That situation arose.”
“In respect of the pension arrangements, the former Commissioner had the option to join the single public service pension scheme or receive a pension contribution, equivalent to 18.4% of the salary, into a pension scheme nominated by him. He waived that and, in fairness to him, that resulted in a considerable financial gain that he did not seek to accrue.”
“While I am conscious that the personal tax details of individuals are confidential, I can confirm that the former Commissioner paid benefit-in-kind in respect of that arrangement. The question Deputy Kelly is asking goes further than those he asked in September and October. It also seeks information on other financial costs to the State related to the appointments. In respect of that and on foot of a security assessment by An Garda Síochána, expenditure of €212,000 was incurred by the Garda Vote for security at the house. An annual monitoring charge of €2,500 was incurred for those security arrangements. Neither I nor my predecessors have commented on those security arrangements for serving Garda Commissioners.”
“I want to start by apologising to Deputy Kelly. He asked a question on 23 September and asked the same question on 9 October. In both questions, he asked about the total remuneration package paid to the current Garda Commissioner and the former Garda Commissioner. The answer he got was incomplete. It was very restricted in that it outlined only the salary of the current Garda Commissioners and stated that the previous Commissioner had had the same salary. It did not include, as Deputy Kelly has said, details about the fact that the previous Garda Commissioner had been provided with accommodation in Phoenix Park by the Office of Public Works and that the rent on that had been paid by An Garda Síochána. The rent was €1,800 per month.”
“That is supported anecdotally as well. The percentage of people applying for asylum at the IPO is 87%. As I have said previously, there are many people going in the other direction. When I speak to the Home Secretary, she will be saying to me that she has great concern about people flying into Dublin Airport and coming into Britain through Northern Ireland.”
“In response to the Deputy's specific questions, in 2019, of 35 people transferred, 33 were sent to the United Kingdom. In 2020, of eight people transferred, seven were sent to the UK. This is at the top of my list. In fact, I am criticised for trying to deal with issues in respect of international protection and for giving too much priority to it but it is an absolutely essential issue. In terms of what the Deputy said about the figures, what we have is an assessment that the figures are very high because huge percentages of people are applying for international protection at the International Protection Office, IPO. They are not applying at the airport and while it is not conclusive, we believe it is strongly persuasive evidence that those individuals who apply for asylum at the IPO are coming south over the Border.”
“There needs to be an awareness that opting in to the pact has not precluded us from doing what we want to do. The reason we have had a significant change is that the British have left the European Union. It is as a result of the British leaving the EU that we have this issue in our common travel area. I would appreciate if Deputy Carthy and Sinn Féin would say that the common travel area is for the benefit of citizens of Ireland and the UK and not for anyone else. That would be a considerable contribution.”
“Progress has been made with the British Government. There is very good engagement between my Department and the Home Office. The only way we will be able to resolve the issues of concern to the Deputy and me is through collaboration and co-operation with the British Government. He keeps mentioning that we should not have opted in to the pact, but he must then present to the public the consequence of that. The consequence of not opting in is that the 2015 International Protection Act would still apply, as would the 2004 directives giving effect to that. It is not as simple as saying that we should not have opted in to the pact. If we had not opted in to the pact, we would still have the same issue under the 2015 legislation and that does not resolve the issue we are facing.”
“I had very good engagement with the previous Home Secretary and I assume I will have the same good engagement with the current one. That said, I have to point out that the political reality is such that the UK is not going to enter into an agreement with Ireland whereby it simply takes back individuals who have applied for asylum in Ireland because they emanated from the UK. We can see what is happening in France. I agree with Deputy Carthy that there has to be greater engagement with the UK and I am in the process of doing that.”
“Prior to Britain leaving the European Union, Britain was part of the Dublin III regulation and, therefore, returns could operate in respect of people who had come from Britain and applied for asylum here. After Brexit that changed. Promptly after Brexit, we designated the United Kingdom as a safe third country but that was fairly rapidly challenged and the court ruled it could not be categorised thus for a period. Then, earlier this year, on 11 March, I designated the UK as a safe third country. However, because the UK is outside of the EU, we do not have an operationalised system of returns between the UK and Ireland at present. My officials are in discussion with officials from the Home Office and I will be talking to the Home Secretary again in the week after next.”
“I thank Deputy Carthy for his question. He is correct in identifying that there clearly is a lot of fluidity between asylum applications in the United Kingdom and Ireland because individuals can travel freely from Britain to Northern Ireland and, because of the common travel area, there is no barrier to individuals travelling south from Northern Ireland into this jurisdiction. Similarly, it operates in the other way. Many people can fly into Dublin Airport, freely travel up to Northern Ireland and then readily transfer over to Britain. It is an issue in the context of assessing applications for international protection. It is important to set out the situation that pertained previously.”
“There is another avenue available to parties before defamation proceedings in the courts, in that the terms of the Mediation Act will apply to them. I do not have that Act in front of me but its provisions could be something a court could rely on for the purpose of trying to encourage parties to engage in mediation. I note the Senator's point about the specified ADR procedures and how the provisions may be limited to members of the Press Council. Notwithstanding that, the court has the power, under the Mediation Act, to adjourn proceedings and recommend parties go to mediation, which is the primary form of ADR. I will give consideration to the Senator's point but I think the laws that exist at present, on enactment, will be broad enough to cover parties who are not members of the Press Council.”
“It is a cheaper mechanism, it can be a faster mechanism and it allows both parties to achieve something by way of resolution. As observed on many occasions, with court proceedings that are adversarial, there generally is a winner and a loser. That certainly is the case when it comes to defamation proceedings. The plaintiff either wins his or her case or the defendant succeeds in his, her or its defence. There is always benefit in there being compromise and in individuals seeking to resolve proceedings through settlement or alternative dispute resolutions.”
“Section 34M, as proposed to be inserted by section 21, provides that the court, on the application of any party to the proceedings or, indeed, of its own motion, may invite the parties to consider engaging in a specified ADR or provide the parties with information in respect of it. Consequently, a litigant who is not a member of the Press Council but is a publisher in the broader sense of the word would be able to be encouraged by the court to consider alternative dispute resolutions. Obviously, no litigants, regardless of whether they are a member of the Press Council, can be forced to resolve their dispute outside of court. However, it certainly is the case that the objective shared by the Government and both Houses of the Oireachtas can be achieved through availing of an alternative dispute resolution mechanism.”
“I thank the Senator for his question on what is contained within section 21. As he is aware, alternative dispute resolutions are mechanisms whereby people are encouraged to try to resolve their differences without having to go to a final determination by the courts. The Senator inquired as to whether defendants in defamation proceedings who were not members of the Press Council would be able to be subject to the statutory provisions set out in section 21. I believe they will be and, in fact, the Senator has answered the question in the way I am going to answer it.”
“Having brought the Bill before the House, the Government is satisfied that the additional judicial positions are warranted to address the current demands being faced by the courts and to improve efficiencies across all our courts, providing support for our judicial system and increased access for citizens who seek access to the law. The amendments to the Gambling Regulation Act 2024 and the Family Courts Act 2024 will provide for the more efficient operation of those Acts when fully commenced. I commend the Bill to the House and thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach and all Senators for their support.”
“I thank the Seanad for the efficiency with which it has dealt with this matter. We had a debate here last week on Second Stage and there were very useful contributions from many Senators. The support for the Bill is evident from the fact that there have been no amendments put down on Committee or Report Stages. I acknowledge the co-operation and support that has been given to the Bill by colleagues and party spokespersons across the House. As Senators will be aware, the purpose of this Bill is to provide, by amendment to various Courts Acts, for an increase by 21 judges in the maximum number of ordinary judges in the Court of Appeal, the High Court, the Circuit Courts and the District Courts. The Bill also provides for amendments to the Child Care Act 1991, the Family Courts Act 2024 and the Gambling Regulation Act 2024.”
“I have been out there and have seen the facilities in Citywest for people who are applying for asylum. It is a very generous response by the State. We are providing people with accommodation while processing their applications. It is a lot better than in other European countries. Finally, I agree with Senator Byrne. It has been an interesting debate. We do not need big crowds here to have an interesting debate. I always enjoy my time in the Seanad. I will be writing a report card at the end of all the top performing Senators. I am pleased to see they are all here today, including Senator Boyhan.”
“People moving around the world is going to be one of the defining characteristics of the first half of the 21th century. The idea that we are just going to be able to establish a situation where nobody wants to come, is not going to happen. If we have crashed the economy and have a disastrous economy, nobody will want to come but in general people want to come into successful and wealthy countries. The policy I am trying to advance is that we have a rules-based system that is fair but firm. If people comply with the rules, they can come in. If they do not, they have to leave. Regarding Citywest, I know the Senator was disappointed with what Commissioner Brunner said about best practice. She said there was a dangerously low bar for standards.”
“There is huge opposition to it coming from certain countries in the European Union and from certain privacy campaigners who say they do not want it because they say it will weaken encryption and it is an interference in their privacy. I know that the Senator and every other Member of this House see nothing wrong in seeking to access information if we are going to be able to use it for the purpose of removing child sexual abuse material. I listened carefully to Senator Sarah O'Reilly. My understanding on the designation of Ireland is that we are presently at risk of migratory pressure. I hear what she said in respect of other EU countries. Whether we like it or not, immigration and forced movement of people is a very significant part of life in the beginning of the 21th century.”
“Not opting into the migration pact does not solve anything for us, as the position of the UK shows. There is a real advantage in harmonising and speeding up asylum applications across the European Union. Come 12 June next, in the aftermath of that, we will see an efficiency in the system and how it operates. Senator Ryan also mentioned the issue about the weakening of encryption. That is a very interesting point. There are a lot of people who object to the European Union and Magnus Brunner trying to introduce a directive that would permit access to encrypted messages. The main reason Commissioner Brunner wants this is that he is trying to get agreement on a child sexual abuse regulation. The Senator may know this but I am presuming she does not because it is an issue I discuss out in Europe.”
“The advantage of opting-in under Article 3 is that we have an opportunity to try to influence the negotiations for the package. If we go in under Article 4, we just get the package and that is it. We either vote for it or we do not. There are benefits in respect of both. Sometimes an Article 4 opt-in may be preferable, but certainly here there is a big benefit in us going in under Article 3. Similarly, the Senator mentioned the migration pact. Deputy Carthy said we should not have opted-in to the migration pact. We have to follow through what the consequence of that is. If we did not opt in to the migration pact, we would still be bound by the regulations and directives from the earlier part of this century that dealt with international protection or refugee applications as they were described at that stage.”
“I will not keep going on. I disagree with the Senator. There are a lot of funds available for us to apply to. We are now a net contributor to the EU. Let us consider the benefits we get out of it as well. Our economy has been transformed from being a member of the Single Market and the EU. The reason all of these businesses are coming here is we have access to the EU. We do not want to find ourselves in a situation where we go back to the 1950s where we stood alone bravely but it was not a great time financially for our people. I agree with what Senator Gallagher said about no man being an island. We have to be aligned with others. That is an important emphasis. Senator Ryan raised the interesting the point about opting-in under Articles 3 or 4. There are advantages to either.”
“Its influence and power in the world have reduced since it left the European Union. Part of the reason the United Kingdom left the European Union was it wanted to assert more control over immigration and migration in its countries. It has not been able to do that. We need to be careful in recognising that. There are advantages to being part of a bigger bloc in the world at present. The world is breaking down into different power blocs. I heard somebody accurately describe it on the radio the other day. There was a bipolarity of power blocs during the Cold War. Then we had the hegemony of the United States. Now we are seeing different power blocs arising around the world, such as China, Russia and its allies, the European Union and the United States. Multilateralism seems to have broken down.”
“It is a dangerous world out there at present in terms of the increasing threats and different nature of the threats. I listened carefully to Senator Keogan about the migration pact and how we are giving up sovereignty. We have seen an example of an EU country that decided to go it alone. The United Kingdom decided to go it alone.”
“I thank all the Senators for their contributions. Senator Byrne made a valid point. This is democracy in operation. Many Senators questioned whether we are giving away Irish sovereignty. This is the elected Upper House of the Irish people. We are debating proposals that have been put forward by the European Union. These Houses decide whether or not to go with those proposals. The Government decides whether to put them to these Houses for a vote or not. That is democracy in action. It shows that we are exercising sovereignty over matters that emanate from Europe. We do not have to support these. It is in our interest to do so. The different constitutional Houses of Oireachtas could reject them. I thank Senator Lynch. I agree with her comments about the threats we are facing.”
“I think it is desirable that Ireland exercise an Article 3 opt-in to this proposal with the Republic of Korea so that we can fully participate in the negotiations as they progress. I commend the motions to the House. I thank Senators for listening to me and I appreciate the speed with which Seanad Éireann has been able to put these opt-ins on its agenda considering that in respect to the first three of them, I only got Government approval about three hours ago.”
“It can provide the authorities with important elements allowing them to detect suspicious travel patterns and to identify associates of criminals and terrorists, particularly those previously unknown to law enforcement agencies. The use of PNR data is governed by the EU PNR directive, which has been transposed into national law. The Irish passenger information unit within my own Department is the body responsible for processing PNR. Today, I am simply asking Senators to support and opt in to those negotiations so that we can participate on the same basis as other EU member states. We will not be bound into participation in the finalised agreement with the Republic of Korea unless we exercise our right to opt in again when fresh proposals are published at the end of the negotiations.”
“I will now deal with the separate motion regarding participation in the passenger name record, PNR, data agreements between the European Union and the Republic of Korea, for which I am seeking the approval of Seanad Éireann. This is a Council decision with a Title V legal basis. It is in the area of police and co-operation. That is why we need to opt in to it and why I am here seeking the approval of this House. The collection and analysis of PNR data is a widely used law enforcement tool in the EU and in other countries for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime. PNR data is the booking information provided by passengers and collected by air carriers for their own commercial purposes, such as names and dates of travel or travel itineraries.”
“We really need entities to be aware that this fund is available and that they can make applications to it if they come within the justice portfolio. The European Judicial Training Network, of which the Judicial Council of Ireland is a member, is also funded under the justice programme. This network brings together judicial training institutions from around Europe to develop and implement training for the judiciary. It is important that Ireland continue to support the work of this independent training institute. In respect of all those three opt-ins I am proposing, I want the House to know that from a procedural point of view, opting in to these measures at an early stage will allow Ireland to maximise our influence on the final shape of these proposals. This is why I am proposing an opt-in under Article 3.”
“Member states can draw down from the fund for projects that promote adherence to the rule of law and fundamental rights, support and improve access to justice and support judicial training and the proper funding of independent judicial systems. Some examples of Irish projects funded under this stream include a research project by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, ICCL, to raise awareness of the application of the standards of the European Court of Human Rights, ECHR, in day-to-day decision-making on flight risk as the ground for pretrial detention, a Law Society project to increase knowledge in key areas of EU law for EU lawyers who would be able to give better advice to European citizens and businesses, and a Tusla-led project to improve access to child-friendly justice.”
“Under the current internal security fund, Ireland has benefited from funding provided that has enabled investments in IT systems, including Ireland's connection to the Schengen information system, the establishment of Ireland's passenger information unit and the enhancement of the automatic number plate reading system in Garda vehicles. From the previous internal security fund, we got €21.8 million. Again, these are funds where there is a clear financial benefit as well as a substantive benefit to Ireland opting in. The third motion listed for this debate is on the proposal to establish the justice programme fund. This proposal is also a continuation of previous iterations of the programme and intends to establish a fund of €798 million in total over seven years.”
“The aims of ProtectEU can be achieved by enhancing operational law enforcement co-operation and the exchange of information between member states and relevant EU agencies. Under this fund, grants may be drawn down for activities that include the development of national and EU-wide information systems, joint operations between cross-border and national authorities and training on new technologies and processes. Beneficiaries of the programmes implemented under the ISF may include national police, customs and other specialised law enforcement services, NGOs and local public bodies.”
“Security threats are increasingly cross-border in nature, necessitating closer co-operation between member states. We also know that serious and organised crime, terrorism, radicalisation and violent extremism need to be combated at a Union level. As we know only too well, Ireland is not immune to this. The indicative increase for this fund reflects the priority afforded to protecting the Union's internal security and the need to keep it high on the agenda. The EU internal security fund is informed by ProtectEU, which is the Commission's new internal security strategy. I had the pleasure earlier this week of meeting the Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration, Magnus Brunner, when he visited Ireland. I know that the ProtectEU policy is a central theme of his Commissionership.”
“This funding assistance also supports the State's ability to fund a wide range of NGO-led migrant integration programmes and covers certain aspects of the Irish refugee protection programme and the returns programme, both of which are managed by my Department. Ireland has also benefited from participation in previous iterations of the EU internal security fund, ISF. The proposed regulation will establish a new internal security fund for 2028 to 2034 and provide an indicative amount of €6.8 billion, a significant increase on the €1.9 billion provided under the current internal security fund, which operates from 2021 to 2027. Internal security is high on the Union's agenda. In recent years, geopolitical instability has impacted greatly on the EU. The threat picture facing the EU is stark.”
“In fact, the total amount that will be in the fund from the years 2028 to 2034 will be €11.9 billion, which is an increase on the €6.2 billion that was in the previous version of the fund. Ireland received €63.53 million from that fund during its last iteration. Ireland has participated in the previous two iterations of the fund and participated in the two comparable funds that preceded it, the European integration fund and the refugee fund. Under the current programme, the fund provides a range of supports for international protection applicants, beneficiaries of temporary protection and other third country nationals arriving in Ireland.”