Ireland’s government is set to introduce a major immigration crackdown, as it comes under intense pressure to tighten its asylum laws. The move comes following calls from Sinn Fein for the country to quit the EU’s refugee relocation scheme.

The country welcomed almost 150,000 refugees in the twelve months up to April 2025, according to data from the Central Statistics Office. This represents a 16-year high and was also the third successive 12-month period where more than 100,000 people immigrated to Ireland. With the UK planning its own crackdown on immigration, Ireland’s government has been urged to follow suite to prevent a further influx of migrants.

The government is set to propose three new measures to curb migration at a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, the Irish Independent reports.

As part of the proposals, asylum seekers who are currently in jobs may have to pay between 10% and 40% of their weekly wage to cover accommodation costs provided by the state.

The measure would mean that those earning a weekly income of up to €150 would have to pay €15 towards their accommodation.

Those earning up to €340 a week would contribute €83, while people on a weekly income of €600 or more would pay €238.

If the policy is passed at tomorrow’s Cabinet meeting, the scheme could be up and running by 2026. The measure was introduced by Justice Minister Jim O’Callaghan and the junior Minister for Migration Colm Brophy.

Other proposals under discussion will include the tightening of rules governing family reunification, as well as increasing residency requirements for citizenship.

Migrants will have to have lived at least five years instead of the current three before they can apply for Irish citizenship under the new measures.

Taoiseach Micheál Martin said Ireland has always adopted a “humanitarian approach” to immigration but the changes were necessary.

Addressing reporters at the G20 summit in South Africa on Sunday, he said: “It’s fair and it’s robust and it’s also aligning with what’s happening elsewhere.

“Ireland cannot be an outlier in terms of benefits and so on, compared to other jurisdictions.”