In September of this year, the government approved priority drafting of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2026. It’s now before the Oireachtas Justice Committee for pre-legislative scrutiny. The Bill is not yet law, and there is still time to question its consequences. As someone who has been through the citizenship application process and as an activist working for LGBTQ+ migrant minorities, I see how these changes would make citizenship harder to reach for the people who most need its security.

The draft suggested some significant changes; these need to be explained in detail by the government. The standard residence requirement is raised from five to eight years, including two years of continuous residence immediately before applying. Applicants have to face language and civic knowledge requirements and new financial self-sufficiency conditions. Spouses and civil partners of Irish citizens would face a five-year qualifying period instead of three. The proposals also introduce broader power for citizenship revocation.

As a migrant, now an Irish citizen, an artist and an organiser working with LGBTQ+ migrants and asylum seekers for over 10 years, I see the people behind these numbers. From a humanistic view, I think citizenship should not be a reward handed out at the end of prolonged scrutiny. For many in the community, citizenship is the moment they can finally stop fearing the loss of their life. 

The government argues that citizenship should reflect sustained integration and economic independence. But do we have any evidence that suggests longer waiting periods and financial tests create better integration? Or is it a mythical assumption? 

The draft must also be examined through human rights and Ireland’s commitment to them. Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognises everyone’s right to a nationality. Article 34 of the Refugee Convention calls for states to facilitate refugees’ naturalisation. The European Convention on Human Rights protects private and family life and prohibits discrimination in the enjoyment of Convention rights.

The proposed financial requirements particularly concern me. The precise income thresholds, excluded welfare payments and housing supports remain to be determined through regulations. Yet the direction is clear: economic circumstances could become another measure of belonging.

This Bill risks reinforcing a toxic division between ‘good migrants’ and ‘bad migrants’. The good migrant is only from well-paid sectors, never ill, not disabled, never poor, never needs support, never vulnerable, and never asks for too much. People who do not fit this image must wait longer or prove more.

Income, health, ability or usefulness to the State should not determine dignity and belonging.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Queer Asian Pride Ireland (@queerasianpride.ie)

Migrant artists and the future of Irish culture
As a migrant visual artist and filmmaker practising in Ireland, I see the potential long-term consequences for our arts and film sectors.

Creative work rarely provides steady income in Ireland. Artists survive through short contracts, grants, commissions and periods without income. Many established Irish artists rely on welfare between projects. It is how the sector works.

Migrant artists start further back than many Irish-born or EU peers; there is no comparison or equality. We receive less institutional support, earn less predictably and face inequalities in accessing funding. A minimum-income requirement could turn these existing disadvantages into barriers to citizenship.

The proposed two-year continuous-residence requirement also raises concerns for artists working internationally. Festivals, residencies, film productions and collaborations require travel. Without citizenship, many migrant artists already depend on immigration permissions that must be renewed, making long-term projects harder to pursue.

If diverse storytellers cannot build secure lives here, Irish culture will become less diverse.

The government must clarify how artists’ grants, irregular income and Basic Income for the Arts payments would be treated under the proposed financial requirements.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by QueerMyths (@queermyths)

Migrant women experiencing domestic violence
As an ally, I am deeply concerned about migrant women experiencing domestic violence while holding immigration permissions dependent on their partners.

Leaving an abusive relationship can mean losing financial security, housing and sometimes the immigration arrangements on which a person has relied. Many victims avoid reporting, fearing the immigration consequences. 

The proposed spousal citizenship route has different financial conditions from the ordinary naturalisation route. However, survivors who leave abusive partners may no longer qualify through that relationship and could face additional barriers under the standard route.

In Ireland, many domestic violence refuges are operated by charities. If certain charitable accommodation or housing assistance is included in the prescribed restrictions, survivors could be disadvantaged for seeking safety.

The government has not established that a single night in a refuge would automatically disqualify someone. That must be explicitly addressed and explained before legislation progresses. People must be informed of these micro changes. 

Longer qualifying periods may also prolong insecurity for people whose immigration status depends on a controlling partner.

Ireland’s Zero Tolerance strategy on domestic, sexual, and gender-based violence and its commitments under the Istanbul Convention must mean something in practice. No survivor should have to choose between personal safety and a secure future in Ireland.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Queer Asian Pride Ireland (@queerasianpride.ie)

Trans migrants and asylum seekers
For trans people who fled countries where their identities are criminalised or erased, citizenship can offer essential security and recognition.

Many trans migrants still carry identity documents that do not reflect who they are. Every job application, tenancy agreement or bureaucratic check can force them to disclose and explain their identity again.

Trans migrants also experience discrimination in employment and housing. Financial self-sufficiency requirements could disadvantage people whose economic insecurity results directly from that discrimination.

For trans asylum seekers, questions about reckonable residence and accommodation provided through the international protection system require particular attention. Time spent under certain immigration permissions may not count towards citizenship, creating additional years of uncertainty.

The trans-inclusive learning opportunities are limited in Ireland, which could create barriers for language and civic tests. 

I have worked with trans asylum seekers who avoid shared spaces for their own safety. Their experiences must be considered when designing these requirements.

I am equally concerned about proposed expanded revocation grounds relating to public policy, public order and national security. These must be narrowly defined, with strong safeguards, so that queer and trans migrants can exercise their rights to expression and peaceful protest without fear about their citizenship security. As it is, migrants in Ireland underreport racism and discrimination to avoid consequences; this would add more ambiguity and confusion. 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Queer Asian Pride Ireland (@queerasianpride.ie)

LGBTQ+ migrant spouses and partners
Ireland voted for marriage equality in 2015. This Bill risks making that equality harder to experience for couples where one partner is a migrant.

The proposed spousal route would require five years of marriage or civil partnership and five years of qualifying residence, including two years of continuous residence immediately before applying.

Queer relationships do not always follow the same path as heterosexual relationships. Some couples met in countries where they could not marry, live openly or safely document their relationship.

Often, queer couples have had to hide their relationships. Separate addresses, missing paperwork or years spent living discreetly should not erase the reality of a shared life.

Ireland’s housing crisis also means couples sometimes live apart because of employment, costs or family responsibilities. Cohabitation requirements can create difficulties for them.

De facto partners do not have the same naturalisation route as spouses or civil partners. Long-term queer couples who cannot or choose not to marry may therefore face the longer standard residence requirement.

The law should recognise durable relationships in different forms and allow flexible evidence of shared lives.

What I hope
The Justice Committee should not allow this Bill to proceed without serious examination of its human consequences.

The government must publish the evidence behind these changes and conduct a comprehensive equality and human rights impact assessment.

Welfare, housing assistance, sexuality, gender identity, illness, disability and escaping violence must never become reasons to punish vulnerable people. Domestic violence survivors need explicit protections. Refugees and stateless people deserve accessible and faster routes to citizenship.

All families, including de facto and same-sex partners, should be recognised. Revocation powers must have clear definitions, independent oversight and effective rights of appeal.

Above all, migrant-led, LGBTQ+-led and asylum seeker-led organisations must be meaningfully consulted.

For many people in our communities, citizenship is a life-saving assurance. It means the freedom to plan, create, love and live without constant uncertainty.

Ireland knows what emigration costs. We should not make belonging harder for those who have chosen to build their lives here.