Over half of those left at controversial Athlone asylum facility could begin to leave next week
At the High Court on Monday, senior counsel Aoife Carroll, for the government, told Ms Justice Emily Farrell that of the remaining 125 people at the accommodation centre, 70 people had received offers of alternative accommodation and that the court should know their answers next week.
Advertisement
Last month, Ms Carroll told the court that 137 people were in emergency accommodation at the facility, but that figures were dropping as alternative accommodation was being sought.
The High Court action was taken by Independent Ireland councillor for Athlone-Moate District Paul Hogan, who successfully applied to the court in December for a judicial review, arguing that the expedited development was unlawful. The State has conceded to the court that the statutory instrument used to expedite the construction of the facility was "invalid" and is working on repairing legislation.
A Statutory Instrument is a secondary legislation made by a Minister, modifying or supplementing existing laws.
Cllr Hogan is taking the case against the office of the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth.
Advertisement
Cllr Hogan claimed the Minister failed to adequately "screen" the project for potential environmental impacts and that the Minister lacked the expertise to carry out such assessments in such an expedited manner.
Protests have been held in Athlone over the plan to further develop army-tent accommodation for a possible 1,000 asylum seekers.
Last month, Ms Justice Farrell said she would defer judgment, quashing the use of the Statutory Instrument used to develop the emergency accommodation at Lissywollen in Athlone, Co Westmeath.
Ms Justice Farrell had said she wanted to wait for updates and to see draft legislation from the Oireachtas. The government submitted it intended to remedy the legal issue over the bypassing of environmental assessments for the accommodation.
Advertisement
Today, Ms Carroll said the department was continuing to work to reduce the number of people at the facility, but that there was "significant pressure" on the system.
Regarding the repairing legislation, Ms Carroll said "we have not made the progress hoped".
Ms Carroll said that "significant work" had been done on a general scheme and that it was hoped this would go for drafting in preparation for legislation.
Ms Carroll again asked for the court not to make final orders in the matter and to maintain the status quo pending the legislation, which is hoped to be put to the Dáil in November.
Advertisement
Ms Justice Farrell adjourned the matter to next week but warned she could not keep deferring final orders when the government had "ample opportunity" to put legislation before the Dáil.
David O'Brien BL, for Cllr Hogan, said the government indicating "loose dates" had been "a regrettable motif" in the case.
Any November date for the legislation to come before the Dáil, which was indicated to the court in May, had been initially "unrealistic... now, it is at the point of untenable" and his client was left "without a modicum of explanation", he said.
Cllr Hogan claims the ministerial process employed was "unlawful, irrational and a breach of fair procedures".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
5 hours ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's charm is lost on Britain, but he has won Trump's heart
You couldn't help but get the impression that Trump found opening a new golf course at least as important as running a country. I can't actually recall any past president combining the launch of his own private business venture with the office of the presidency in this fashion but there we are. It's a new world order. He did make the point in his celebratory speech that stopping a war was, after all, rather more valuable an achievement than creating a golf course so perhaps that's reassuring. What had become clear once again on this visit – which had been described as a private holiday but was, in fact, the scene of some major diplomatic developments – was that our own dear Prime Minister was far and away the US president's favourite foreign leader. We must, of course, be grateful for this fact even if we do find it totally mystifying. Sir Keir's charm may be lost on the home audience but he is the undoubted favourite of the Trump White House and this is not solely because he is the messenger for our Royal family whom the president obviously adores. No, it is the Starmer personality itself which appears to have won Trump's heart. Why? My own guess, borrowing on my recollection of American responses to various brands of foreign behaviour is that Starmer's personality represents what Americans tend to regard as quintessential Britishness: a preternatural calmness in the face of difficulties (which is to say, a face that remains expressionless at all times) and a sycophantic courtesy which somehow manages to remain dignified. We got a hint of this when Trump referred to Sir Keir's 'beautiful accent'. Perhaps the contrast with the Macron vanity and arrogance has helped too, but whatever it is, we must acknowledge that the Starmer magic has pulled off a pretty favourable result. And ironically enough, it is precisely our separateness from the European Union – which Sir Keir is trying to undo – that made this favoured position possible. Rather less happily for the Starmer government, the president offered some advice on how to pull the UK out of its spiral of decline. Stop the boats and cut taxes was the magic formula, Mr Trump suggested presumably in a spirit of helpfulness. The problem with this counsel is that both those things are almost impossible to achieve at the moment and they are, as it happens, precisely what the most threatening Opposition parties are urging. That was rather tactless and it suggests that this alliance with Trump's Right-wing Republicanism is not going to be an easy ride. But whatever it was in Starmer's approach that did it, he is currently able to influence the Trump White House at a time when global affairs are dangerously inflamed. That may or may not be an enviable position to be in. On the Middle East and Ukraine, as well as the economic future of the West, the moral responsibility of being the 'Trump whisperer' is going to be daunting.
BBC News
6 hours ago
- BBC News
Justin Kelly: New Garda Commissioner announced
The Irish Government has appointed a new Garda Commissioner who will be in term for five Kelly was appointed by the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, Jim O'Callaghan and will replace former Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) deputy chief constable Drew Harris. A three-week recruitment campaign was held by publicjobs (formerly the Public Appointments Service) in May, including an international search for suitable candidates, which resulted in 14 was appointed to his current role as Deputy Commissioner Security, Strategy and Governance in October 2024. The new commissioner will take up the role on 1 September 2025 with Commissioner Harris continuing to lead An Garda Síochána until that selection process included two interviews and a presentation by candidates as well as a detailed psychometric assessment. Harris will retire after 41 years of service to policing on the island of Ireland, including a total of seven years as Garda O'Callaghan said: "The role of Garda Commissioner is one of the most challenging and impactful leadership positions in Ireland's public service and the appointment process was suitably rigorous."O'Callaghan said he was satisfied that Kelly is both qualified and "particularly well suited" to the role.
Telegraph
6 hours ago
- Telegraph
Some of Britain's judges make even David Lammy look sensible on immigration
'I have never made but one prayer to God,' wrote Voltaire; 'a very short one: Oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it.' One can rarely hope for more in politics. But what Voltaire neglected to mention is the darker irony; that someone may yet come along who is so jaw-droppingly awful that your enemies begin to look sane by comparison. Nobody believes Labour is effective – or even especially dedicated – to solving Britain's ever-increasing immigration problems. According to YouGov, just 11 per cent of people believe Keir Starmer's party would be best at handling asylum and immigration – an all-time low. Reform, who have only recently been added to the survey, currently stand at 36 per cent. But as untrusted as they are, Labour may yet prove to be a restraining force on the worst excesses of Britain's immigration system. Foreign Secretary David Lammy – who once told The Guardian that it was 'morally wrong to take the view that anyone making their way across the Channel is illegal' – is currently playing the part of immigration hardliner after deciding to block a family from Gaza from settling in the UK under the Ukrainian refugee scheme. Earlier this year, in news broken by The Telegraph, Judge Hugo Norton-Taylor permitted a Palestinian family of six to settle in the UK under the Ukraine Family Scheme. In January last year, the family submitted their application using the Ukraine scheme's form, arguing that it best reflected their circumstances and that their case was so 'compelling and compassionate' it warranted approval outside the scheme's formal rules. A lower-tier immigration tribunal initially rejected their claim, stating that it fell outside the scope of the Ukraine programme and that decisions about which countries qualify for resettlement schemes rest with Parliament. However, upper tribunal judge Hugo Norton-Taylor overturned that ruling, allowing the appeal and granting the family entry to the UK based on their Article 8 right to family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. Since then, Lammy's Foreign Office has denied the family the consular support they need to leave Gaza and travel to a neighbouring country, where they could apply for UK visas at an application centre. In a ruling on Monday, High Court Judge Mr. Justice Chamberlain sided with the family. He stated that the Foreign Office's June decision to withhold consular assistance was 'flawed' and 'irrational' and must be reconsidered, as the family had 'very little food and no effective sanitation' and remained 'at constant risk of injury or death'. The rulings of judges such as Chamberlain and Norton-Taylor show how detached from the British public Britain's 'lanyard class' has become – the self-congratulatory bureaucrats and elites who inhabit a liberal bubble insulated from the practical consequences of their decisions. Labour, however, are not so lucky. In such circumstances it's hard not to see the parallels with Voltaire's ridiculousness; the judiciary's positions have become so absurd that they have forced Labour to become the hardliners. As dangerous and heart-rending as the situation in Gaza is, the answer is not – as it has never been, to any humanitarian crisis – to allow huge flows of refugees into Britain. Yet the decisions of these judges seem to be setting a precedent for Palestinian refugees to enter the UK – despite there being clear and repeated indications from Government and politicians that this is not their intention. As I wrote recently, our immigration rules are collapsing under a combination of legal activism
