Thread by @sarahmaintains

Thread. What's the alternative to direct provision? All day I've been hearing elected reps and ministers saying they haven't been given any suggestions on how to end direct provision. This is untrue- I am attaching a submission made by the small community organisation I work in

I am not claiming that it is the perfect solution but it at least makes suggestions.
clareppn.ie/wp-content/upl…

It was written following a weekend of work in Glencree, with asylum seekers, those who had been through the process and those still in it, with community organisations who support them and with immigration solicitors. We went step by step through the process from arrival

to decision the main consensus was that a complete overhaul of the early reception process- where enough supports, resources and staff were oriented towards the first 6-8 weeks after an international protection applicant arrived would be far better than paying DP owners for years

As it is, people arrive have a preliminary interview where their claim is admitted or not - (admitted to the process not decided on) then they are dispersed to DP and emergency centres where they wait to be called for their main or substantive interview - up to 19 months

So the dp centre gets paid for those 19 months and the asylum seeker waits, then after their interview they wait for a decision, after the decision they wait for either a letter of confirmation from the minister or deportation order all the while the dp centre owner gets paid-

a further problem to the current process is that although applicants have the right to translators and legal advice these are so poorly resourced in Ireland that many people can not access them early enough in the process to ensure that they benefit -

and make errors in their 60 page form or in their substantive interview which means they get a negative first decision which then has to be appealed - at this stage they get legal representation and many of these incorrect decisions are overturned but often after much time-

and of course hardship delay and uncertainty for the applicant and expense for the Irish state. What our group considered and has proposed is that the system gets frontloaded with resources, that we have reception centres with every support needed available there and then and

that international protection applicants do the all the main parts of their process up to substantive interview in the reception centre before being moved in a supported fashion into communities where they would live and work or attend education until the decision is reached

This change around would require an increase in staff in the IPO, in the Refugee Legal Service, in Physco- Medico NGOs and translation it would require expansion and enhancement of the reception centres and would be costly, but guess what's really costly and also inhumane? Yes DP

Especially for the lengths of time we use it for. I personally know or have met people who have been 4 years, 9 years, and 12 years in DP. If we frontload the reception and direct the €€ towards the applicant instead of property owners we minimise institutionalisation, -

we ensure that the applicant's life progresses,that they can live, work, contribute, learn & participate in life while they wait-something all our communities will gain from. I haven't all the answers but there are alternatives if we put our minds and hearts into it. Let's do it.

Also a quick update - many other organisations made submissions too. One from @maeveorourke and @ICCLtweet can be read here iccl.ie/wp-content/upl…

NB that our submission was on the strength of voluntary efforts of people who gave up their weekend to work on it particularly refugees who have no obligation or duty about this but wished to help others. Imagine what could be done if DOJ put their resources and staff to the task