Sharon Keogan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

This document on the crisis and force majeure regulation is 83 pages long. I am not too sure whether anyone in the Department has read it or if any fluent or native speaker has read it. I refer to the review of the crisis and force majeure regulation, which is nothing short of legally ambiguous phrasing, at best. At worst, it is an insult to speakers of the English language. It is of crucial importance that language within legislation is clear. Judges, courts, lawyers, police, border control agents, social workers and all kinds of departmental officials will depend on these documents when ruling on and enforcing the wording of these documents when they come into law.

Let us start on page 4 of the text of the proposal for the crisis and force majeure regulation. There is a problem with every single page, but let us go to this page first. Paragraph 3 on this page has a sentence that reads: "the Union has at its disposal specific rules to effectively manage migration, in particular the triggering of a mandatory solidarity mechanism and that all the necessary measures are put in place to prevent crisis to happen". That is awful English. It should say, "from happening". Moving to page 24, paragraph 40 states that, "The Member State[s] facing a situation of crisis or force majeure may need more time to be able to take decisions on their applications without allowing entry into the territory". It should not say "without", but, rather, "before". Otherwise, a literal reading could be interpreted as preventing entry if more time is needed. The problem is that this sentence is far too unclear. The document is littered with sentences of this nature. It is actually gibberish, to tell the truth. I want to know how this document can be transposed into Irish law when it is not coherent. That is the first question.

I turn now to the other document. I struggled to get through all these texts, but I did get through two of them with the help and support of several people. Paragraph 47 of this document on the asylum and migration management regulation states that:

The scope of the definition of family ... should ... reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants [should] often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, ... [and] before their arrival on the territory of the Member State.

What is the "reality of current migratory trends" and why should our definition of "family" be redesigned to fit this vague criterion? Regarding the reference to "families formed outside the country of origin", who is to decide whether a family has been formed? Are there objective criteria like marriage or a civil partnership? If this happens outside the country of origin, how would it be proved? Moreover, will the EU Commission be in the role of deciding what is the definition of a family? Will that durable relationship that you all wanted to get in on 8 March now become part of this?