Ministers accused of giving ‘half the picture' on refugees as more than 40% get positive decisions
More than 40 per cent of asylum seekers were granted International Protection or permission to remain in the last year, a higher proportion than suggested by Ministers in recent weeks.
The Government has been accused by campaigners of presenting 'only half the picture' in public statements on refusal rates.
An analysis of
Department of Justice
data highlights that almost twice as many applicants ultimately gained protection in their final outcomes compared to the figures that Minister for Justice
Jim O'Callaghan
and Minister of State for Migration
Colm Brophy
chose.
In February, Mr O'Callaghan said 'too many' people were applying for asylum who were 'not entitled' to it, citing an 80 per cent refusal figure that applies only to first decisions and not appeals. Mr Brophy has also cited the rate.
READ MORE
In the 13 months to April, 43 per cent of decisions on asylum applications resulted in the individual getting refugee status, subsidiary protection or permission to remain, data published in the department's monthly International Protection Summary reports shows.
Mr O'Callaghan said 80 per cent of asylum seekers' applications were 'refused in the first instance' in January. He said more than 65 per cent of the 14,000 applicants last year were rejected at the first instance.
[
International protection overhaul an 'important step' in wider reform, Minister says
Opens in new window
]
However, when appeals decisions are included, the 2024 rejection rate falls to 58 per cent, according to department's reports.
When a person applies for International Protection, a 'first instance' decision is reached as to their eligibility for refugee status, subsidiary protection or permission to remain on humanitarian grounds.
If their application is rejected, they have a right to appeal and may be granted permission to remain.
Data from the department on first-instance decisions show that to the end of April, of the 7,269 asylum applications, 75 per cent were refused. However, when appeals results are included, the refusal rate falls to 62 per cent.
Last year, of the 14,125 asylum applications processed, 9,207, or 65 per cent, were refused at first instance. The inclusion of appeal decisions brings the refusal rate down by 7 per cent.
[
More than 15,000 international protection appeals could be lodged this year, Minister told
Opens in new window
]
In some months, more than half of decisions were to grant status – notably in August 2024, when the grant rate was 59 per cent, April 2024, when it was 53 per cent, and in May 2024, when 50 per cent of decisions were positive.
Nick Henderson,
Irish Refugee Council
chief executive, said its analysis found 42 per cent of decisions since January 2024 were to grant International Protection or permission to remain.
'The final, overall recognition rate is considerably higher than the rate cited by the Government and some Opposition spokespersons.
'It is essential that data is presented accurately and not selectively... Referencing only first-instance recognition rates ... presents only half the picture.
[
'I was very upset about how Coolock came across': Locals believe handling of asylum-seeker centre plan a 'disaster'
Opens in new window
]
'Second, selectively citing the lower rate risks creating a false impression that the vast majority of applicants do not need protection – when that is not the case.'
A departmental spokesman said: 'The figures quoted by the Minister refer to first-instance decisions.
'Many cases in the system are currently being processed under an accelerated procedure and overall, there has been a significant increase in throughput in the
International Protection system
too. It is therefore likely that the final determination figures will eventually 'catch up' and, in time, align more proportionally with first-instance decisions.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
Revelations show appalling personal behaviour among some CHI medics
With the very future of Children's Health Ireland up for discussion in Government, further revelations about a toxic work culture operating in part of one of its hospitals will bolster the case of those who believe the organisation should simply be subsumed into the Health Service Executive . Even among those who favour its continuation as an independent entity, there are serious doubts as to whether CHI, which is responsible for the governance and operation of the three paediatric hospitals in Dublin – Temple Street , Crumlin and Tallaght – is fit for the job of running the new national children's hospital. Waves of scandal and controversy have overwhelmed the organisation in recent months. A recent report found that most hip surgeries carried out on children were unnecessary . Prior to that, it emerged that devices not cleared for surgical use were inserted into children suffering from scoliosis – the management of which has been another long-running controversy. READ MORE Its chairman and four board members have resigned. The revelations today have been quietly circulating in senior health and political circles in recent days, where they have shocked even the most hardened veterans of scandals in the health services. They paint a picture of an almost unbelievably toxic culture that was operating in a part of one of the CHI hospitals – to the extent that 'numerous participants' who took part in the confidential survey process 'expressed concern for the emotional and physical wellbeing of colleagues working in the service'. [ Report reveals 'toxic culture' among consultants at CHI hospital Opens in new window ] Repeatedly, throughout the report, the conclusions of the observers and the testimony of the employees who participated in its inquiries show that a culture of extreme toxicity characterised the operations of part of the CHI hospital. While one consultant – who is not identified by name in the report – features prominently, there are also complaints about other consultants and a hospital management unable or unwilling to deal with the consequences of the behaviour of some senior medics. Relationships between certain senior clinical figures deteriorated to the extent that one consultant instigated a legal action for defamation against another. 'It is reasonable to assume that such a case can only arise as a result of the fraught relationships within the ... service,' the report notes. 'Fraught relationships' seems to be something of an understatement. The toll on medics who were training under some of the consultants was especially acute. They spoke of 'bullying' and 'harassment', being subjected to 'humiliating and intimidating experiences' and of an 'environment where an individual feels they may be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns or mistakes'. The report also includes details of how the National Treatment Purchase Fund (NTPF) may have been abused by the manipulation of waiting lists. Pointing to a greater number of patients seen in private time slots than at public clinic, it asks: 'Was throughput prioritised over patient care in NTPF clinics, noting there is a €200 fee per patient, or are the public outpatient clinics failing to operate at full capacity?' Yesterday, the Sunday Times reported that Minister for Health Jennifer Carroll MacNeill had ordered a full audit of governance and practices at CHI. There are very clearly significant systemic failings in parts of the organisation and in the hospitals for which it is responsible. But the revelations today show something else too: appalling personal behaviour by some senior medics which damaged the care that patients in the hospitals received. Some trainees felt punished and excluded, belittled and victimised, to the extent that some felt that the experience – 'working in a hostile environment', as one said – had a detrimental effect on their lives. Aside from the personal consequences for people subjected to the behaviour of some senior colleagues, the report points out repeatedly that it creates an atmosphere that damages the care of patients. Aside from individual instances detailed in the report, the toxic relationships also poison the atmosphere where people are supposed to be working together for the benefit of the patients. 'The communication style, accusatory language and indeed unprofessional antics that continued over this period add to further compromise interpersonal relations, heighten levels of mistrust among colleagues and ultimately are a distraction from patient-centric care,' it found. 'Consistently throughout this examination, it was found that participant experiences reflected a culture in which challenging behaviour appears to be the norm,' the report found. 'It is critical that an organisation takes time to reflect on and own the culture that exists and then seeks to address the issues and bring about the required change.'
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
Fund set up by Micheál Martin 20 years ago to cut hospital waiting lists under fresh scrutiny
In February, Jennifer Carroll MacNeill became the latest Minister for Health to announce a new initiative to reduce the amount of time patients have to wait for treatment in public hospitals . The Irish health system has been struggling for years to deal with growing waiting lists with bed and staffing capacity lagging behind demand. The answer for successive governments has been to either use the private sector or to get existing personnel to do more in their own time, while the Health Service Executive moved to increase its own resources. The amount of money allocated to these initiatives has been staggering. The Minister's plan in February involved a €420 million investment, including €190 million for the HSE and €230 million for the National Treatment Purchase Fund (NTPF) – the organisation established by Micheál Martin 20 years ago to buy treatment for public patients. READ MORE Between 2022 and 2024 under Stephen Donnelly , about €1.23 billion was allocated to the HSE and the NTPF. Government funding was essentially spent in three ways. First, it allowed the HSE to appoint more staff to increase its own capacity. Second, it allowed the NTPF to buy care in private facilities. Third, it allowed for what is known as 'insourcing', where health service personnel are paid by the NTPF or other entities to provide treatment outside normal hours in public hospitals for those on waiting lists. A recent internal report carried out by children's healthcare group CHI , has led to more intense scrutiny of the various waiting list initiatives. The report alleged that a doctor had delayed operations on children before eventually they were treated at weekend clinics that he was operating separately. In the Dáil, the Taoiseach said the CHI report 'makes for shocking reading of the most profound kind, which not just goes to the heart of the misuse of NTPF funding but more seriously raises fundamental concerns at that time about safety for children receiving surgery'. Cian O'Callaghan of the Social Democrats told the Dáil that the report found the consultant earned more than €35,000 by keeping very young children on a waiting list for years. 'They were eventually treated using the NTPF when they were transferred to the consultant's weekend clinic, but they could have been treated by other doctors years earlier. When all of this was discovered, it was kept a secret and the consultant was allowed to retire and sail into the sunset.' The Minister and HSE chief Bernard Gloster had been kept in the dark about the report but were given copies last week. There have been other controversies surrounding waiting list funding. On April 18th, Mr Gloster directed his senior leadership team to halt, for the present at least, aspects of the 'insourcing' arrangements. He commissioned a survey to establish the dependency of the health system on such practices and to ensure 'there were no unintended consequences'. Mr Gloster suspended insourcing where staff were 'engaged, hired or paid' by separate entities on initiatives in their area of work. Insourcing was only permitted in cases where the HSE directly engaged its own staff through payroll. His instructions followed discussions with Ms Carroll MacNeill and followed an internal audit report, details of which were revealed in The Irish Times last September. The HSE internal audit found two companies which received more than €1.5 million between them in contracts awarded by University Hospital Limerick without a competitive procurement process were owned or part-owned by employees at the facility. A third company, which received a contract of nearly €400,000, had a HSE employee at a different hospital as a director. Auditors stated €14.2 million was paid out to third-party providers by University Hospital Limerick in 2023 under the Government waiting list initiative without an open procurement process. Auditors said there was no evidence of the HSE employees being involved in the awarding of the contracts. In May, Aontú leader Peadar Tóibín told the Dáil in one case a consultant created a firm to read scans and 'used the hospital public waiting lists to then funnel work through rostering into his own private company'. The NTPF said it was deeply concerned at the CHI internal report. It said it had never received any complaints about hospitals or doctors. Last year, the fund paid €155 million to private hospitals and about €80 million to public facilities. It seeks private hospitals to tender for packages of care and it then attempts to match this capacity with those waiting longest in public facilities. Sara Burke, associate professor of health policy at Trinity College, said the NTPF and the various waiting list initiatives were initially established more than 20 years ago as temporary measures while the State built up its own public capacity. They had, however, become permanent, integral parts of the system, she said. 'Given the amounts of money now being allocated, there is a need to look at how transparent the arrangements are and the governance of these schemes,' she said. The Opposition is now calling for reforms. David Cullinane of Sinn Féin said there were concerns about potential conflicts of interest and called for a centralised system which would see patients referred to a hospital rather than an individual consultant. 'We have to ask genuine questions about what work some consultants are doing from Monday to Friday to carry out public procedures. We need to contrast that with the so-called blitzes and private clinics they are organising and running, while charging €200 for each client they see and making very handsome amounts of money.' Marie Sherlock of the Labour Party said she was uncomfortable about how the current arrangements had grown, the dependency on it that had developed and 'the ability of the public system to wean itself off it'. Mr Tóibín questioned the safeguards in place against conflicts of interest. 'Last year 80,000 public patients were treated in private hospitals at a cost of €100 million. The majority of these treatments should have been done in the public system.' Ms Carroll MacNeill told the Dáil she would be taking further steps to remove the anomalies, which she said existed 'because of the overhanging mix of public and private activity'.
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
Report reveals ‘toxic culture' among consultants at CHI hospital
A 'negative and toxic' work culture at a hospital run by Children's Health Ireland (CHI), in which multiple staff complained of 'unprofessional and disruptive behaviour from consultants', contributed to the undermining of care and treatment for sick children, an internal report has found. The CHI report also noted one consultant had taken a legal action for defamation against another. The report, which also revealed possible misuse of the National Treatment Purchase Fund , was compiled in 2021-2022 but was only given to the Department of Health last Monday. It paints an astonishing picture of the work culture in parts of one of the best-known hospitals in the country, where relations between some staff and between some staff and management had deteriorated to the point where 'challenging behaviour appears to be the norm'. READ MORE 'Numerous participants expressed concern for the emotional and physical wellbeing of colleagues working in the service,' it said. In some cases, it identified where the work culture and the interpersonal difficulties which characterised some key relationships had led to shortcomings in the case of patients. 'Dysfunctional relationships played a significant part in leading to two ... cases both of which led to surgeries evolving with complications and ultimately children having prolonged recoveries,' it said. 'Feedback from participants all describing an environment and working life that is adversely impacted by the 'negative' and 'toxic' culture that exists in the department.' [ Revelations show appalling personal behaviour among some CHI medics Opens in new window ] While the report did not identify the staff members involved by name, it laid out in detail how a small number of people were involved. 'Across multiple participants there was one consultant identified consistently as creating a psychologically unsafe environment not conducive to learning,' it said. 'Two specific examples where this consultant's behaviour and actions reportedly had a significant impact on trainee careers and/or wellbeing were staunchly brought to the attention of this examination through participant interviews.' In some cases, the behaviour led to the departure of other staff members. Three members of staff who left one department in the hospital all said they left 'for one reason only – bullying'. Staff members – including some highly skilled medical professionals who were training for senior roles – said one consultant would 'punish and exclude you, belittle you and say you were no good. I felt fearful, felt unsafe to ask [the consultant] for help.' 'There's a lot of people who have come across [the consultant's] path and it has had a detrimental impact on their lives,' said another. After giving examples of one consultant's behaviour, the report noted: 'The above reflections from very personal experiences appear to highlight a pattern of abrupt, unprofessional, intimidating and volatile behaviour. 'Behaviours displayed by this consultant appear to be consistent with and reflective of conduct that has been identified as leading to and creating a psychologically unsafe environment, that is an environment where an individual feels they may be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns or mistakes.' The effect on trainees was especially acute, the report said, quoting one member of staff who said: 'Since I started I have been experiencing a lot of bullying/harassment mainly from two consultants ... I feel that I am working in a hostile environment, waiting to be victimised. I am subjected to humiliating and intimidating experiences. They are always undervaluing my performance. 'It has reached a stage that it is affecting my self-esteem, confidence and performance at work in hospital and also at home affecting my family life. The thought of doing on call with these consultants makes me so nervous and stressful.' CHI did not respond to a request for comment yesterday.
