The last several days have bore witness to a bitter political conflict between London and Dublin, a clash seemingly capable of dragging Anglo-Irish affairs back into the dark days of Brexit. Both parties may have anticipated some political gains from this altercation, although it will yield short-term benefits at best. As Thursday’s local election results aptly showcased, Rishi Sunak has significantly weightier issues at hand. Meanwhile, Simon Harris’s administration in Dublin may have unknowingly created an added burden for themselves that they might end up regretting.
It began with the Irish Government pulling the trigger. Minister for Justice Helen McEntee, subjected to increasing scrutiny from allies and adversaries alike, informed the Oireachtas justice committee last week that 80% of asylum seekers were entering the country through the unrestricted border with Northern Ireland. The statistics sparked a mild curiosity at the committee but made significant news thereafter.
The inflated volume of migrants from the North became a subject of concern for committee members as McEntee explained that following a recent High Court verdict, they were unable to send people back to the UK as initially agreed between the two governments.
McEntee stated, “Thanks to a recent court judgment, repatriations to the UK have been put on hold. The High Court’s decision will be addressed. I will introduce a miscellaneous provisions Bill in the coming weeks to tackle this issue, allowing for the repatriation of individuals.”
The decision by the High Court was only made recently, on March 22nd of this year – mere weeks ago. However, this ruling was not the reason for the temporary halt in returns to the UK, contrary to the version given to the committee by McEntee.
As it transpired this week, there seems to be more to this story. Contradicting McEntee’s account given to the justice committee, the arrangement to repatriate asylum seekers between Ireland and the UK has not really been in force for quite some years now. There were some returns prior to Covid, none thereafter. The High Court’s judgement was handed down only recently, hardly a month ago. McEntee’s Department simply never resumed the returns after the pandemic hit.
Over in Jordan, Tánaiste Micheál Martin caught wind of the news, spotting the so-called “Rwanda effect” – the upheaval caused by the harebrained scheme of the British Government to deport unlawful migrants to the central African nation.
A definitive impact is currently being felt in Ireland due to UK actions, which some believe were meant to induce fear, according to an official statement. Rishi Sunak, who is facing significant pressure, agreed wholeheartedly with the Tánaiste, showing a sense of eagerness that could be likened to the Rwanda effect.
Simon Harris made a bold proclamation that Ireland will not become a loophole for other countries grappling with immigration challenges. Over several days, there were continued exchanges of comments between the two prime ministers. When foreign secretary, James Cleverly, cancelled a meeting in London with McEntee, her response was to completely abandon her trip and choose to remain at home for meet-ups with her high-ranking officials. This evidently came as a surprise to some of these officials who had already arrived in London for these now forsaken appointments.
Many in Ireland, including politicians and influential individuals, criticised the British for engaging in political gamesmanship. Their criticism was valid, with Sunak grasping at any potential lifeline as his situation continues to worsen. However, the Irish government cannot claim innocence when it comes to engaging in political manoeuvres. Simon Harris is well aware that Leo Varadkar’s hardline approach during Brexit negotiations secured high approval ratings. He is also aware that standing up to longstanding rivals is often a sound political strategy for any Taoiseach.
Although this might make for good politics, it doesn’t always translate to effective governance. The Coalition’s actions this week revealed a lack of any discernible long- or medium-term strategy. Announcing that returns to the UK would resume in a few weeks following the passing of emergency legislation is only plausible if the UK is prepared to accept them, which is currently far from the case.
A rational approach to managing immigration politics will necessitate more foresight than is currently being demonstrated. Politicians must be cautious in how they move forward. The government, which has struggled to create a system for removing individuals who have overstayed their welcome, has now committed to deportations. If it proves unsuccessful, it will be seen as a public and politically damaging failure. Due to these developments, whether intentional or not, the implementation of a more stringent asylum system has become a political imperative. While this may not be an attractive prospect, it appears inevitable.
The unfortunate truth is that practical and well-thought approaches are necessary when dealing with situations like the recent expulsion of individuals from their tents on Mount Street. When this action was taken on Wednesday, it sounded like a sensible and firm action. However, the reality on Thursday painted a picture of poor planning as newcomers were left questioning their options, seemingly, the plan didn’t extend past cleaning up Mount Street. While this might be a required step, it hardly seems enough. Plans should be made to determine the fate of the constant arrivals, rather than simply leaving them to fend for themselves.
Actions like this tend to fuel the narrative that ‘Ireland is at capacity’. This certainly doesn’t herald a favourable outcome. Effectively steering the political discourse around immigration—which is undoubtedly a present reality and will be a key issue in impending elections—calls for more foresight than displayed here. It is crucial for lawmakers to tread carefully.
It is entirely valid to discuss immigration and to hold different political views on the matter. Of course, it is. However, bearing in mind how such debates have proven to be polarising and damaging in numerous EU nations and the UK, such discourse should be approached with sensitivity, tact, honesty, and far-sightedness. Alas, it seems that this is precisely what’s missing from the current approach.