Say you're a taxi driver cruising along the Boyne Valley. Lashing rain, Knowth and Dowth shrouded in 40 shades of grey, windscreen wipers turned to frantic. A woman with no winter coat and a toddler strapped to her back flags you down. You peer out at her face and notice it's neither white nor olive. What do you do?
Or you're David Trimble driving down from Belfast in a new ministerial limousine and you see the same woman. If you give her a lift without asking certain questions, you'll risk being fined heavily as a trafficker in illegal immigrants. John O'Donoghue wants to stop the growing market in human trafficking and he's right. But means and ends are getting confused. His current amendment to the Immigration Act will turn some of us into the equivalent of immigration officers. For our own protection, it may be simpler to look the other way.
Today starts the signpost week during which Bertie Ahern must put manners on the political and administrative crisis in refugee and immigration services - this on top of a no confidence motion his Justice Minister will barely scrape through, and an Alf Garnett outburst that makes Ivor Callely's position as Eastern Health Board chairman untenable. Other ministers and backbenchers are gripped by myths about the current crisis, and the figures supplied through official sources won't help put things straight.
What should be a humanitarian, labour and social issue may be turned into a political football where party points-scoring will determine the shape of policy to come. The Taoiseach needs to take an overview. Myth One asserts that the rising numbers in applications for asylum came from out of the blue - the "don't blame me, guv" version of why people get left out in the rain and end up costing the State many more thousands of pounds than they would if their applications were dealt with more quickly. Myth Two claims that Ireland operates the most humanitarian policy possible towards asylum-seekers. Myth Three claims the only alternative to the current position is to behave like bleeding hearts and throw Irish borders open to everyone, everywhere.
These myths must be challenged. Myth One falls on the basis of the Department of Justice's own figures. Contrary to its tenets, increases in applications have shown, in fact, a consistent, predictable trend over the past four years, with a particular hump arising between 1996 and 1997. This year applications increased incrementally by 871 over 1998; 1998 showed an increase of 743 over 1997. In 1996, the increase was 755. The hump of 2,704 extra applications happened in 1997.
Thus, even if the catechism of cliches recited by officials is realised by a monthly rate of 1,000 new applications in November and December, the out-turn for 1999 merely will match that of 1997 - two years before work permits were allowed in principle . Providing work permits does not, therefore, seem to have unduly affected the rate of new applications.
Almost 3,000 people withdrew their applications for various reasons, reducing to only 12,279 the total net applications received between 1996-1999. Yet, despite increasing the number of serving staff from 4.5 to 112, there seems to be no noticeable improvement in efficiency. Why? The number of staff has increased by a factor of around 25, whereas the number of applications has increased only by a factor of five. However, no advisers have been employed to work on immigration policy as such, nor have forums, debates or scheduled consultations with NGOs and the public been set up, as for example was successfully managed by David Andrews in the run-up to the White Paper on Foreign Policy.
In addition, figures claiming that approximately 8,150 cases are in hand do not reflect the number of individuals but rather a system of double accounting that includes people twice - once for their first application, next for their appeal. Two separate sets of figures relate to the number of applications refused this year - either 140 or 4,080. Either way, it is impossible to interpret the total figures in any meaningful way. They don't add up, however you tackle them. The Taoiseach needs to determine whether what a Departmental spokesman described as "algebra" represents poorly compiled figures or deliberate obfuscation.
Myth Two starts shattering when we discover that most applicants no longer have access to professional legal advice unless they make an appeal. At first-stage negotiations, they can avail of a law clerk's services only. Law clerks will guide them through procedures but have no professional qualification in advocacy or human rights law. My extrapolations estimate some 1,815 appeals cases are now outstanding.
Myth Three, the bleeding heart alternative, is empty rhetoric. Does anyone seriously believe in promoting no immigration or asylum policy? Labour force projections indicate a need for some 200,000 extra workers over the next 10 years, with no plans as yet how to source them.
Minister of State Tom Kitt's suggestion of finding workers in central and eastern Europe simply front-loads the opening-up of labour that will happen anyway as a result of EU enlargement. Such workers are white. Fewer than 6,000 non-EU nationals currently work on permit here. No legitimate channels for non-EU, non-specialist workers open a legal doorway into this State, which fosters false claims and illegal trafficking. From an employer's perspective, you can't appoint unconditionally the best person for the job: you must appoint the best white, European person and hope things work out.
Amendments such as the trafficking proposal don't alleviate human exploitation: they drive it further underground, where the cost and the risks to immigrants and asylum-seekers are dangerously heightened. Immigrants are assumed guilty unless they can prove themselves innocent, which reverses the normal judicial process.
If the Government is seriously concerned about human trafficking, then a spirit of policy partnership might link targeted increases in overseas aid to those countries where people are desperate enough to place themselves in such a position. A quota system, informed by Ireland's diplomatic and cultural relations with non-EU countries, seems an obvious innovation.
"Will we seize this opportunity . . . or will we wallpaper over the obvious cracks in our refugee policy?" John O'Donoghue's 1995 words come back to haunt us one more time.
Medb Ruane can be contacted at mruane@irish-times.ie