Augmenting social welfare for asylum seekers in Ireland

ABSTRACT

Lessening perceived pull factors and preventing alleged abuse of welfare systems is proffered as the key rationale for significantly limited weekly social welfare payments for persons claiming asylum. Despite these narratives continuing to dominate parliamentary, Government, judicial and public thinking for almost two decades, between 2016 and 2019, weekly payments to asylum seekers in Ireland doubled, albeit starting from an extraordinarily low level. This article presents the first comprehensive description, analysis and critique of how and why this doubling of weekly social welfare payments for asylum seekers occurred. Framed within the context of a Government sponsored reform initiative, the reasons for weekly payment increases to asylum seekers is multifaceted. Rather than being able to trace policy proposals through publicly accessible information, extensive reliance was made on obtaining documentation through the Freedom of Information Act. The interactions of political expediency, legislative reform, and implementing reform proposals, all contributed to further protection of social welfare rights for asylum seekers in Ireland. Nevertheless, these advances must be viewed in light of continuing rejection of equal applicability of social assistance law to persons seeking asylum.

KEYWORDS:

• Asylum seekers
• social welfare law
• social welfare policy
• direct provision
• Ireland
• governance
• freedom of information
• law reform

Acknowledgments

This article was mainly completed while I was European Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities (IASH), University of Edinburgh in October/November 2019. All documentation granted to me under the FOI Act over the last twenty years on the system of direct provision, is available on the Exploring Direct Provision project website: www.exploringdirectprovision.ie. The project website would not have been possible, but for the significant work undertaken by Róisín Dunbar and Danielle Curtis, who ably assisted in this endeavour as project assistants. With thanks to editors and reviewer, whose comments assisted in improving the initial submission. Errors remain mine.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was disclosed by the author.

Online Materials

All Freedom of Information Act materials referenced in this article can be accessed on an online database, Exploring Direct Provision, www.exploringdirectprovision.ie.

Notes

1. Since June 2018, this payment is now formally known as ‘daily expenses allowance’ (S.I. 230/2018 2018, Reg. 2(1)), despite being paid weekly. For ease, I will utilise the name of the allowance as it is more widely known, direct provision allowance.

2. Comparing the full rate of the payment Supplementary Welfare Allowance (a social assistance payment available where entitlement to other social assistance contingency payments is not established), the cash payment to single asylum seekers has ranged from just under 20% of the full SWA rates in 2000, 14.1% in 2004, 9.6% in 2008, and 14% in 2014 (due to onset of the recession, there was a reduction in the core SWA rate). The percentage differential was similar for asylum seeking couples with or without children. Further particulars of percentage differentials were considered in the McMahon Files (2015b).

3. The McMahon Files were not obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (2014). As part of freedom of information (FOI) request 156/496/2016 a quote of €1,400 was made to receive the files that were requested. The McMahon Files were therefore obtained through other means. There may be some gaps in how proposals for increases to social welfare payments came about, developed or were formulated. Nevertheless, the totality of files I have access to indicates a high degree of narrative certainty.

4. Not contained within the FOI documentation released, this request was made by the Children’s Rights Alliance after a Department of Social Protection official by telephone requested them to send a letter asking for a €6 increase in late May 2017. This is based on information I received from a person with knowledge of the issue, however there is no documentary evidence to substantiate this.

Additional information

Funding

Liam Thornton acknowledges the European Fellow funding from the Institute of Advanced Studies in the Humanities, University of Edinburgh. Liam acknowledges University College Dublin Seed Funding grant (SF1697) that offset costs for numerous Freedom of Information requests and Internal Review Appeals. The Seed Funding also allowed the creation of an online repository of all FOI materials obtained for this article, as part of the Exploring Direct Provision project (www.exploringdirectprovision.ie).