Crooksling ought to be a turning point for international protection applicants
Homeless international protection applicants were moved from their makeshift camp on Mount St in Dublin to a completely inadequate site in Crooksling, Co Wicklow, with similarly flimsy tents to shelter them from the weather.
Roderic O’Gorman said on Sunday that there was no attempt to take homeless protection applicants in Dublin out of the public eye in advance of St Patrick’s Day, when they were transported, on Saturday morning, from Mount St to a site in Crooksling, Co Wicklow.
The Integration Minister also said it was in people’s best interests to move to a better site. The facts, unfortunately, suggest otherwise. And perhaps what matters is not intention but the manner in which people were treated and what they experienced on Saturday.
No notice was given to the protection applicants on Saturday morning and they were given very little, if any, information about where they were going.
There was also no communication with the volunteers and organisations who had been supporting the men in the Mount St area. In the absence of State action, volunteers had been one of the crucial supports for people. In one of the most shocking images of the day, after people left, tents were then slashed by contractors, presumably to prevent their use by other people.
This is the second time that at least some of the men had been moved. After the snow on March 1, some homeless protection applicants had been accommodated for the weekend and then put back out on to the street. The Irish Refugee Council strongly criticised this and described it as appalling. Given that experience, there was a duty on Government to handle this move well.
Then there was the location: They were taken to a site that, on February 4, had been subject to a significant fire. Arson is suspected but no arrests have been made. Despite the men being moved without warning, protestors were either there to meet them or quickly on the scene thereafter.
In short, people were taken to a place which may have been set on fire previously, and far-right activists were outside. These facts alone raise huge concern.
Then there were the conditions behind the corrugated gate.
There are mixed reports of what was and is currently being provided. We met one person yesterday who had come down to Dublin to try to use a shower after reporting that the showers at Crooksling were not working. Of most concern was that people were given a flimsy tent to sleep in, very similar to that which they were using in the Mount St area.
These are not the army-style tents used elsewhere to accommodate larger numbers of protection applicants. Those army tents, which are not without significant problems, can at least be heated and are sturdier against the wind and rain. Instead, we see completely insufficient, almost disposable coverings, the likes of which barely withstand a couple of nights in decent weather.
We have said since the summer of 2022, when they were first used for refugees from Ukraine, that tents of any kind do not meet the requirement of providing accommodation.
We certainly do not believe a tent like this meets the definition of accommodation required by law, and have grave concerns that this could become the norm and that the State deem the men in Crooksling now ‘accommodated’.
All the above led to the Irish Refugee Council saying that there was an attempt to put this issue out of sight, out of mind. It also left the bigger picture unresolved and unaddressed: A total of 1,308 people in the protection process are without accommodation. Not all homeless people are in the Mount St area, and Crooksling is not a cure to this bigger issue.
The solutions? Capacity exists within both the International Protection Accommodation Services (IPAS) and the Ukrainian accommodation system. The Government is right to reserve some spare capacity but the time to trigger its use is now.
In response to an unprecedented crisis, all levers must be pressed. Media reports last week cited 500 beds free in the Ukraine accommodation system — paid for by the taxpayer, and yet empty while people battle the elements in flimsy tents.
Secondly, other government departments need to play a part. The responsibility to accommodate is on the State, not just on one government department. Despite its protestations, the Department of Housing needs to play its part. While they are insistent that homeless protection applicants are the sole responsibility of Mr O’Gorman’s department, there is no excuse for their lack of co-operation in response to this crisis.
With over 6,000 people who have permanent permission to remain in the State living in IPAS accommodation due to the housing crisis, the Department of Housing needs to step up its co-ordination and support to the Department of Integration.
There is a significant bottleneck in IPAS accommodation and, without people with status or Ukrainians moving into the community because of the housing crisis, this situation risks being inevitable.
Mr O’Gorman said on Sunday that his department was working closely with other departments, such as the Department of Public Expenditure, to ensure that capital support be provided to fund State-run reception centres. It sounds like the ball is in the court of the Department of Public Expenditure to agree to, and fund, the plans put forward by the Department of Integration for long-term accommodation.
We do not know exactly what is in those plans, but they will likely be a test the Cabinet’s willingness to consider and support long-term alternatives. We are concerned that, with elections looming, politicians become more swayed by the vagaries of short-term electoral politics than long-term constructive policies.
Reliance on emergency accommodation puts the State in a vicious circle: IPAS is reliant on one mode of delivery (emergency accommodation in the hospitality sector, repurposed offices, industrial buildings, and other unsuitable locations), which means it must find increasingly random locations at short notice which can bring opposition. Reliance on this mode gives an impression of false scarcity.
There are other ways of providing accommodation that we and others have put forward that can benefit all, cost less money, and provide better chances at integration.
Then there is the Mount St situation. As of yesterday, 30 tents are once again pitched in the Mount St area. It is likely, given the total number of people without accommodation, that this number will continue to grow.
Based on the current Government response, homelessness will persist and Mount St will be a focal point whether the authorities approve of it or not.
Remarkably, Dublin City Council said in a statement on Friday that it was “not the responsibility of Dublin City Council to provide temporary public toilets at this location”. This is despite portaloos being placed around the city for St Patrick’s Day, and the council’s part in clearing and destroying tents at the weekend.
Given the obvious and serious issues at Mount St, a portaloo or two seems the least the council can do. Failure to do so is deeply concerning.
Finally, there is the important point of the law and our legal obligations. Further to litigation brought by our law centre, two High Court judges have confirmed that Ireland has an obligation to accommodate people seeking protection. In the words of Justice Ferriter in December 2023, the State remains under a continuing, mandatory obligation to provide international protection applicants with basic needs including accommodation. We ignore these obligations at our peril.
- Nick Henderson is the chief executive of the Irish Refugee Council
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
