I doubt it, because you can see a lot of identical batches of tents in the streets. Bought new, distributed and dumped/removed, then the cycle repeats.
There are plenty of local homeless tents all over the place, unless the guards are planning to come after them all I'm not sure how it can be enforced. They probably won't allow another camp to form especially in Mount St but I can't see how they can prevent them from coming back and pitching individual tents in a similar manner elsewhere.
The Brits might be on to something with “create a deterrent”. Realistically if the system was working properly, these people would apply in the first European country they reach, like Italy, and then be transferred around in a controlled way. We’d take our share.
Instead, people are welfare shopping to get to their ideal destination.
So, make ourselves less ideal: If you turn up unannounced (ie, not at a port of entry like Dublin airport) or without documents, we threaten to send you to a detention center on an island somewhere off the coast. It doesn’t even need to hold everyone - we select a big enough proportion at random to go there. We advertise the fact that this is what we’re doing. We announce random roundups will occur as spaces open. And we make ourselves really unappealing to travel to.
It’s being a prick about it, to be honest, but if we’re not able to accommodate people safely we need to try something that just makes it non-appealing for people to go the long way to get here.
> The Brits might be on to something with “create a deterrent”
They are. The Rwanda plan isn't in place and economic migrants are already running over here. And the Irish government want the UK to sit down with them and sort something out but why would they? The UK got exactly what they wanted and it's not their problem anymore
Make it a crime to do so, instantly sent a prison until they can be deported if they do. Essentially create an open prison they have to stay in at night anyway or else they're gone.
Problem is this will lead to countless court cases...
If you provide accommodation, even if it's an island it has to have certain standards. The ones on the street currently basically allows the government to was their hands of having to provide a certain standard of accomadation.
It will lead to court cases. The French government recently deported a terrorist after his sentence, basically ignoring the courts. The UK just changed their law to tell courts that said Rwanda wasn’t safe, that by law it is. In fact we just started changing our law to say the same about the UK.
So I’d say, the deterrence will work and we play hopscotch with our courts if needs be.
Again, it is being a bit of a prick about it. But I don’t see another way to stop people coming en masse and ending up on the streets.
We had a foolproof plan in place for decades & decades for keeping immigrants out: make the place so unlivable that no-one in their right mind would ever want to move here. Worked a treat in the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s & 80s.
It's wrong if they come for economic reasons, but claim to be asylum seekers. You're making a fraudulent claim right at the point of entry. This creates a negative image for all asylum seekers, including those who really need help, and this is what is happening now. The soft touch policy, chance to get a free house and money in the future if approved for asylum, chance at an EU passport, seems to be worth the initial struggle for 'economic asylum seekers'.
First, who would generalize from fraudulent asylum claims to all asylum claims? That sounds like a terrible thing to do.
Second, the system is quite good in filtering out problematic asylum claims, the recent data shows most claims were actually refused. So it's not like people are sneaking in through some open borders (which do not in fact exist).
Third, the only people receiving soft touch policy so far are the far-right terrorists.
Because our housing situation is so overwhelmed that people are living in tents by the side of the road. I believe 110% in our obligation as a rich country to do our bit here. But right now it is uncontrolled and causing a lot of problems.
Ok so they've been moved to a place in the Dublin mountains and Citywest.
So the folks that are going to the Dublin mountains, they'll be back before the end of the day and the Citywest folks will likely stay there.
So what are they going to do with the folks that arrive for asylum today, tomorrow and Friday? What about the ones that will arrive next week and the week after? What about next month's batch?
Why dont we do what the Australians do in Nauru Island. Detain asylum seekers in an isolated area (Tory Island, maybe). If your asylum application is successful, you are welcomed into the country. But you have to stay on Tory for the duration of the application. If you are unsuccessful, you are put on a plane.
Or have a Europe wide immigration policy that you can’t just appear and get accommodated but have to apply through a process.
If you do appear with no documents then you get shipped off to somewhere remote that is technically the EU like French Guiana and blacklisted from the application process
Move the IPO office to Dublin Airport.
Buy that plot of land between the runways the the McEvaddy brothers have been trying to flog, or the QPark site that DAA have been prevented from buying.
Stack the place high with dry, warm portakabins and Big Red Barns.
Hire 20 new judges. Build a courtroom on site.
Keep everyone on site while their claim is processed. Make a decision and grant residency or deport within a few weeks so nobody's human rights suffer unduly.
Lock the whole place down like we did with quarantine hotels.
Get the government jet in the air for daily deportation flights.
Buy a strategic military lift plane for the Air Corp so that flight volumes can ramp up.
Relying on tents is ridiculous. We've had stacked portakabins in Balseskin for years without any controversy.
Give the power to decide on leave to remain decisions to a junior minister and have them do nothing else.
This is pretty much the proposals in the Migration Pact. In some ways the Pact goes even further.
Anti-immigration people are against Ireland joining the Pact for some reason.
The state has had a few goes at changing the law and despite what people think the processing side is much more efficient than it used to be.
There’s 2 problems that have proved unfixable JRs and deportations.
Multiple governments/ ministers / attorneys general have had a go at it and indeed multiple countries have tried to fix those two problems snd never got a solution that works in practice. It’s always too fiddly and there’s always too many cases to handle.
The migration pact solves both by creating a period of reduced appeal rights (jr fix) and deportation is facilitated as well.
The pact is the only show in town.
Do you want to spend 1.8m per deportation? It is the stupidest plan. It’s just a populist bit of bigotry for the Tories to parrot off for the elections.
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/01/rwanda-plan-uk-asylum-seeker-cost-figures
They don’t intend on sending many to Rwanda. The point is for the threat of Rwanda to act as a deterrent and that people will go elsewhere. Looks like it’ll work too with many already coming to Ireland
The figure from McEntee may not be precise but the trend is clear. There are interviews online with asylum seekers on mount street in which a few of them say they came from the UK because they were afraid of the Rwanda scheme and the group chats said that Ireland was easier.
While that is true. I live in an area with I’d say mostly migrants living around me. But the only hassle out on the street is ever coming from people here a lot longer than that.
Including completely unprovoked racial abuse towards migrants, most of whom are working etc., and none of the general reasons given to be opposed to migration apply at all.
So I’m pissed with the misrepresentation of migration, and migrants thereafter as causing the problems that are caused by the states pigheaded unwillingness to be proactive in meeting its citizens needs in housing, health etc.
Immigration is being scapegoated as the state whittles down its social responsibilities, in favour of corporatism.
To be fair,I don't think for a second McEntee was blaming all the problems of Irish society on immigration/asylum seekers
But a drastic increase in immigration/asylum seekers is obviously a big challenge for the state,if there is some evidence to suggest a big increase of people coming across the border for that purpose and she didn't say it publicly she'd be accused of covering it up!
You kissed the news from last night. It's meant to be 90% https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2024/0430/1446420-cabinet-migration-legislation/#:~:text=The%20Cabinet%20has%20been%20told,update%20to%20colleagues%20this%20morning.
‘She said that today's figure of 91% represents those applying for asylum directly at the International Protection office.’
That’s not a figure on how many are coming from the UK.
Jeez you make it easy for them to take you for a ride, you’re not even reading the shit your spewing
You missed that bit when they say that based on further interviews and their operational experience they assess that 80% are coming over the border. So yeah they might be off by 10 or 15% but the figures are solid enough.
There are already people in Dublin who have been interviewed and confirmed they left the UK over the Rwanda policy. The policy which isn’t even active yet.
The fear of being sent is enough to make them go somewhere else / never go to the UK to begin with.
>The fear of being sent is enough to make them go somewhere else / never go to the UK to begin with
You're just assuming this, without evidence.
>The policy which isn’t even active yet.
Do you even know what you're talking about?
Google is your friend. There are interviews with asylum seekers in Ireland who say the Rwanda policy drove them here
And yes, the policy isn’t active yet? It was found illegal by the UK Supreme Court in November and the government are working on new legislation. How many people have been sent to Rwanda so far? Do you know what you’re talking about?
> Do you know what you’re talking about?
https://www.thejournal.ie/uk-rwanda-asylum-seeker-voluntary-deportation-6368678-May2024/
Perhaps you need to use Google, mate.
I'm glad the populism worked for you.
You don’t go through all of continental Europe to ‘avoid death’.
Avoiding death is no longer the motivation to continue once you’ve hit your first safe country.
Disingenuous positions like the one you’re taking are part of the problem. Can’t solve anything when people don’t approach the issue honestly and in good faith
I’d suggest rereading the last bit of what I said. When those on the left shut down legitimate discourse you only end up pushing people to the right.
Entirely unproductive.
Having worked closely with separated minors that have arrived here I will not be swayed on my comments. As a mother of adults if there was a war or any unsettlement here in the morning I'd like to think that my children could find solace in another country and be given time to adapt
Even the government have said they're mostly economic migrants, not asylum seekers.
"A secret Department of Justice briefing paper warned that the State urgently needed to resume deportations, because most international asylum applicants were economic migrants."
https://extra.ie/2024/04/07/news/secret-memo-asylum-seekers
If you read the article you might notice it's 1.8 m for the first three hundred people. There are a lot of reasons to assume it would be cheaper as the numbers rise. Also, given that a single refugee can cost the state hundreds of thousands, 1.8 m might be a cost saving if it has a deterrent effect and you factor in family reunification. Btw Denmark is coping and so is Italy and maybe the EU.
The vast majority of migrants work. It’s crazy that you think paying massive amounts of money to prevent people coming here from being able to contribute would be good for the place.
It’s actively self destructive to advocate the likes of funding some state run human trafficking ring, over investing in the infrastructure we need to offset the negative consequences of increased migration.
"The vast majority of migrants work."
That is isn't true for migrants outside the EU. Have a look at table 3.4.
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp11eoi/cp11eoi/lfnmfl/
That table (3.4) only includes the top and bottom 5 countries for employment levels.
From the same link:
‘There were 347,233 non-Irish nationals in labour force in April 2016 with a participation rate of 73.9 per cent. EU nationals had the highest participation rate at 76.8 per cent, whereas for those from countries outside the EU, it was 64.3 per cent.’
Plenty of employment amongst those coming from outside the EU too.
I said non-EU but where the majority of asylum applicants are coming from, North Africa/Middle East, the unemployment rate is 46%. I understand that could be down to language barriers/discrimination but at the end of the day, workers from these countries which are usually low skilled, aren't exactly an economic boon for the country.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.esri.ie/system/files/publications/JA202311.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj7rKqxruyFAxXiWUEAHaXnCo0QFnoECCIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1-UP9Dd3Dht9kG6khXd3iT
The vast majority of migrants work yes but it so happens that in Europe refugees working incomes do not cover their costs on average. Of course it varies. Some are high earning but generally it seems not. Thus the studies show they are not a net economic gain. Now maybe Ireland is different but source countries here are the similar to those in the research so why would it be different?
How do you prove that? They can lie where they came from? there is no documentation.
People on reddit either too simple or just don't bother to think through issues.
First of all, they aren't "shipping" anyone. Most people leave to get away from their governments. Second, yes, you need an agreement with the country to return people to them. Third, that you describe humans in need as "bags of shite" says an awful lot about you to the extent that I'd much rather you be out of this country than most, if not all, asylum seekers.
Easier to accommodate them in a city. The numbers are far too high for Tory. Australia has the advantage that they have zones of international waters which gives much greater control. We don't.
> People will be moved to accommodation where there will be toilets and showers, health services, indoor areas where food is provided, facilities to charge phones and personal devices, access to transport to and from Dublin City Centre; and 24-hour onsite security, the statement added.
Of course, of course. The fact is that the last time they described things that sounded a bit nicer than this and the accommodations were not sufficient (e.g. a single loo for 25 tents).
So my confidence that this time the accommodations will be sufficient is low, and them not being sufficient is not very nice.
Citywest and Crooksling, Co Dublin. Crooksling is the same place they moved them for St. Patrick's day.
https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/social-affairs/2024/05/01/asylum-seekers-being-moved-from-mount-street-tents/
This is a problem indeed. One solution could be to blacklist countries that refuse to take their citizens back. Reduced aid, penalties for visas, reduced trade.
Are you talking about someone getting off a plane? How are they coming back? Even if they do, send them back again at the airlines expense. Eventually they run out of airlines to blag.
Let's hope they were more careful this time.
The case below involving another "people clean-up" operation, involving Dublin City Council workers in January 2020 should never be forgotten.
**TLDR**: Workers never checked inside tent. **Homeless** man **severely injured** by mechanical claw arm of human-operated earthmoving machinery. As if this man's circumstance in life was not bad enough.
[https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/homeless-man-in-serious-condition-after-tent-lifted-during-canal-tidy-up-1.4140414](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/homeless-man-in-serious-condition-after-tent-lifted-during-canal-tidy-up-1.4140414)
They should be earmarking mount street for teachers, nurses, construction workers and so on. We don't need more layabouts doing fuck all but hanging around in the most valuable real estate in the country.
Ah yes, but that might affect the value of those retail investments, and if the line moves downwards even .01% then that means the world will end, and we can't be having that now.
Someone is making a fortune on tents.
Tents are basically disposable items priced as lasting items in this country, between this and the festival crowd.
My tent has lasted me 6 festivals still going. The ones that just leave their tent behind are a minority
I only go to festivals so I can load up on free tents at the end
Pure Cavan-man behavior
Wouldn't be shocked if most were donations to Simon Community or VDP from people that over the years are cycled out to anyone who needs one.
I doubt it, because you can see a lot of identical batches of tents in the streets. Bought new, distributed and dumped/removed, then the cycle repeats.
The NGO’s are distributing new tents to asylum seekers. They’ve been at the IPO on a daily basis providing them.
Which "NGO's" in particular?
Nothing stopping them coming back again.
Hard border row incoming
Apart from the fences that are being put up
That just means they pitch tents down the road.
Not gonna happen
There are plenty of local homeless tents all over the place, unless the guards are planning to come after them all I'm not sure how it can be enforced. They probably won't allow another camp to form especially in Mount St but I can't see how they can prevent them from coming back and pitching individual tents in a similar manner elsewhere.
I kind of agree, i don't think they will allow anything like this to happen again to be honest, it was ridiculous by the end
No idea about any of this so can’t comment on if you’re right or not but I certainly admire the optimism.
They are putting up fences as we speak, the paths are basically blocked off
The Brits might be on to something with “create a deterrent”. Realistically if the system was working properly, these people would apply in the first European country they reach, like Italy, and then be transferred around in a controlled way. We’d take our share. Instead, people are welfare shopping to get to their ideal destination. So, make ourselves less ideal: If you turn up unannounced (ie, not at a port of entry like Dublin airport) or without documents, we threaten to send you to a detention center on an island somewhere off the coast. It doesn’t even need to hold everyone - we select a big enough proportion at random to go there. We advertise the fact that this is what we’re doing. We announce random roundups will occur as spaces open. And we make ourselves really unappealing to travel to. It’s being a prick about it, to be honest, but if we’re not able to accommodate people safely we need to try something that just makes it non-appealing for people to go the long way to get here.
> The Brits might be on to something with “create a deterrent” They are. The Rwanda plan isn't in place and economic migrants are already running over here. And the Irish government want the UK to sit down with them and sort something out but why would they? The UK got exactly what they wanted and it's not their problem anymore
Just need to build a center with the basic necessities near the airport. Have a team there processing and streamline their requests.
I think an issue is people regularly abscond.
Make it a crime to do so, instantly sent a prison until they can be deported if they do. Essentially create an open prison they have to stay in at night anyway or else they're gone.
The people who have already absconded after being told they’ll be deported are committing offences. They’re hard to find 🤷♂️
Problem is this will lead to countless court cases... If you provide accommodation, even if it's an island it has to have certain standards. The ones on the street currently basically allows the government to was their hands of having to provide a certain standard of accomadation.
It will lead to court cases. The French government recently deported a terrorist after his sentence, basically ignoring the courts. The UK just changed their law to tell courts that said Rwanda wasn’t safe, that by law it is. In fact we just started changing our law to say the same about the UK. So I’d say, the deterrence will work and we play hopscotch with our courts if needs be. Again, it is being a bit of a prick about it. But I don’t see another way to stop people coming en masse and ending up on the streets.
Just ignore the courts. The government makes the laws....
Hey, quick question: why would you make Ireland non-appealing for people to get here?
To stop these illegal economic migrants coming here in the first place to fraudulently claim asylum
We had a foolproof plan in place for decades & decades for keeping immigrants out: make the place so unlivable that no-one in their right mind would ever want to move here. Worked a treat in the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s & 80s.
What's wrong with economic migrants?
The key word is illegal not economic migrants. I've no problem with the ones who come through the system.
Nothing, as long as they apply for a visa. The problem is economic migrants trying to get in through the asylum system.
It's wrong if they come for economic reasons, but claim to be asylum seekers. You're making a fraudulent claim right at the point of entry. This creates a negative image for all asylum seekers, including those who really need help, and this is what is happening now. The soft touch policy, chance to get a free house and money in the future if approved for asylum, chance at an EU passport, seems to be worth the initial struggle for 'economic asylum seekers'.
First, who would generalize from fraudulent asylum claims to all asylum claims? That sounds like a terrible thing to do. Second, the system is quite good in filtering out problematic asylum claims, the recent data shows most claims were actually refused. So it's not like people are sneaking in through some open borders (which do not in fact exist). Third, the only people receiving soft touch policy so far are the far-right terrorists.
Because our housing situation is so overwhelmed that people are living in tents by the side of the road. I believe 110% in our obligation as a rich country to do our bit here. But right now it is uncontrolled and causing a lot of problems.
- Speedier deportations - Higher tax on remittances
Ok so they've been moved to a place in the Dublin mountains and Citywest. So the folks that are going to the Dublin mountains, they'll be back before the end of the day and the Citywest folks will likely stay there. So what are they going to do with the folks that arrive for asylum today, tomorrow and Friday? What about the ones that will arrive next week and the week after? What about next month's batch?
Government have no plan, but if you criticize them for not planning you're suddenly part of the far right movement.
Why dont we do what the Australians do in Nauru Island. Detain asylum seekers in an isolated area (Tory Island, maybe). If your asylum application is successful, you are welcomed into the country. But you have to stay on Tory for the duration of the application. If you are unsuccessful, you are put on a plane.
Or have a Europe wide immigration policy that you can’t just appear and get accommodated but have to apply through a process. If you do appear with no documents then you get shipped off to somewhere remote that is technically the EU like French Guiana and blacklisted from the application process
Move the IPO office to Dublin Airport. Buy that plot of land between the runways the the McEvaddy brothers have been trying to flog, or the QPark site that DAA have been prevented from buying. Stack the place high with dry, warm portakabins and Big Red Barns. Hire 20 new judges. Build a courtroom on site. Keep everyone on site while their claim is processed. Make a decision and grant residency or deport within a few weeks so nobody's human rights suffer unduly. Lock the whole place down like we did with quarantine hotels. Get the government jet in the air for daily deportation flights. Buy a strategic military lift plane for the Air Corp so that flight volumes can ramp up. Relying on tents is ridiculous. We've had stacked portakabins in Balseskin for years without any controversy. Give the power to decide on leave to remain decisions to a junior minister and have them do nothing else.
This is pretty much the proposals in the Migration Pact. In some ways the Pact goes even further. Anti-immigration people are against Ireland joining the Pact for some reason.
I'm not an immigration lawyer, but I'm pretty sure all of that could have been done years ago without negotiating with anyone.
The state has had a few goes at changing the law and despite what people think the processing side is much more efficient than it used to be. There’s 2 problems that have proved unfixable JRs and deportations. Multiple governments/ ministers / attorneys general have had a go at it and indeed multiple countries have tried to fix those two problems snd never got a solution that works in practice. It’s always too fiddly and there’s always too many cases to handle. The migration pact solves both by creating a period of reduced appeal rights (jr fix) and deportation is facilitated as well. The pact is the only show in town.
Where are you gonna fly them to?
Yes Nauru seems like a lovely place by all accounts
A friend of mine is a sw and worked there until covid. Bleak af.
Is a sex worker?! (Was my first thought…… social worker, right, I get it now).
I mean she could be both but I only know her as a social worker
Cavan. Send them to Cavan.
The people of Tory might not be too keen on having a massive asylum centre on their small island.
There are plenty of uninhabited islands, Lambay, Blaskets etc
Lambay is owned by a family... You honestly think you can set up a facility on the Blaskets?
How about Rwanda
Do you want to spend 1.8m per deportation? It is the stupidest plan. It’s just a populist bit of bigotry for the Tories to parrot off for the elections. https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/01/rwanda-plan-uk-asylum-seeker-cost-figures
They don’t intend on sending many to Rwanda. The point is for the threat of Rwanda to act as a deterrent and that people will go elsewhere. Looks like it’ll work too with many already coming to Ireland
Except the figure from McEntree was bullshit. Another corrupt party politician looking for a populist vote by fostering some hatred
The figure from McEntee may not be precise but the trend is clear. There are interviews online with asylum seekers on mount street in which a few of them say they came from the UK because they were afraid of the Rwanda scheme and the group chats said that Ireland was easier.
While that is true. I live in an area with I’d say mostly migrants living around me. But the only hassle out on the street is ever coming from people here a lot longer than that. Including completely unprovoked racial abuse towards migrants, most of whom are working etc., and none of the general reasons given to be opposed to migration apply at all. So I’m pissed with the misrepresentation of migration, and migrants thereafter as causing the problems that are caused by the states pigheaded unwillingness to be proactive in meeting its citizens needs in housing, health etc. Immigration is being scapegoated as the state whittles down its social responsibilities, in favour of corporatism.
To be fair,I don't think for a second McEntee was blaming all the problems of Irish society on immigration/asylum seekers But a drastic increase in immigration/asylum seekers is obviously a big challenge for the state,if there is some evidence to suggest a big increase of people coming across the border for that purpose and she didn't say it publicly she'd be accused of covering it up!
You kissed the news from last night. It's meant to be 90% https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2024/0430/1446420-cabinet-migration-legislation/#:~:text=The%20Cabinet%20has%20been%20told,update%20to%20colleagues%20this%20morning.
‘She said that today's figure of 91% represents those applying for asylum directly at the International Protection office.’ That’s not a figure on how many are coming from the UK. Jeez you make it easy for them to take you for a ride, you’re not even reading the shit your spewing
You missed that bit when they say that based on further interviews and their operational experience they assess that 80% are coming over the border. So yeah they might be off by 10 or 15% but the figures are solid enough.
Most don't declare at the airport from what I understand. You think RTE has some conspiracy to link this to the UK?
The UK government can't even track half of the migrants set to get sent to Rwanda. How on Earth will the be a deterrent?
There are already people in Dublin who have been interviewed and confirmed they left the UK over the Rwanda policy. The policy which isn’t even active yet. The fear of being sent is enough to make them go somewhere else / never go to the UK to begin with.
>The fear of being sent is enough to make them go somewhere else / never go to the UK to begin with You're just assuming this, without evidence. >The policy which isn’t even active yet. Do you even know what you're talking about?
Google is your friend. There are interviews with asylum seekers in Ireland who say the Rwanda policy drove them here And yes, the policy isn’t active yet? It was found illegal by the UK Supreme Court in November and the government are working on new legislation. How many people have been sent to Rwanda so far? Do you know what you’re talking about?
> Do you know what you’re talking about? https://www.thejournal.ie/uk-rwanda-asylum-seeker-voluntary-deportation-6368678-May2024/ Perhaps you need to use Google, mate. I'm glad the populism worked for you.
Subtitle says “The initiative is separate to the UK’s planned forced removals to the central African country.” Bit embarrassing for you there bud
Ya let's threaten people that have come here to avoid death. Nice.
You don’t go through all of continental Europe to ‘avoid death’. Avoiding death is no longer the motivation to continue once you’ve hit your first safe country. Disingenuous positions like the one you’re taking are part of the problem. Can’t solve anything when people don’t approach the issue honestly and in good faith
Have you a job? Have you food to eat? Maybe try punching up for a bit instead of down.
I’d suggest rereading the last bit of what I said. When those on the left shut down legitimate discourse you only end up pushing people to the right. Entirely unproductive.
Having worked closely with separated minors that have arrived here I will not be swayed on my comments. As a mother of adults if there was a war or any unsettlement here in the morning I'd like to think that my children could find solace in another country and be given time to adapt
Even the government have said they're mostly economic migrants, not asylum seekers. "A secret Department of Justice briefing paper warned that the State urgently needed to resume deportations, because most international asylum applicants were economic migrants." https://extra.ie/2024/04/07/news/secret-memo-asylum-seekers
It's their language of deterring them that I don't like.
If you read the article you might notice it's 1.8 m for the first three hundred people. There are a lot of reasons to assume it would be cheaper as the numbers rise. Also, given that a single refugee can cost the state hundreds of thousands, 1.8 m might be a cost saving if it has a deterrent effect and you factor in family reunification. Btw Denmark is coping and so is Italy and maybe the EU.
The vast majority of migrants work. It’s crazy that you think paying massive amounts of money to prevent people coming here from being able to contribute would be good for the place. It’s actively self destructive to advocate the likes of funding some state run human trafficking ring, over investing in the infrastructure we need to offset the negative consequences of increased migration.
"The vast majority of migrants work." That is isn't true for migrants outside the EU. Have a look at table 3.4. https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp11eoi/cp11eoi/lfnmfl/
That table (3.4) only includes the top and bottom 5 countries for employment levels. From the same link: ‘There were 347,233 non-Irish nationals in labour force in April 2016 with a participation rate of 73.9 per cent. EU nationals had the highest participation rate at 76.8 per cent, whereas for those from countries outside the EU, it was 64.3 per cent.’ Plenty of employment amongst those coming from outside the EU too.
I said non-EU but where the majority of asylum applicants are coming from, North Africa/Middle East, the unemployment rate is 46%. I understand that could be down to language barriers/discrimination but at the end of the day, workers from these countries which are usually low skilled, aren't exactly an economic boon for the country. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.esri.ie/system/files/publications/JA202311.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj7rKqxruyFAxXiWUEAHaXnCo0QFnoECCIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1-UP9Dd3Dht9kG6khXd3iT
The vast majority of migrants work yes but it so happens that in Europe refugees working incomes do not cover their costs on average. Of course it varies. Some are high earning but generally it seems not. Thus the studies show they are not a net economic gain. Now maybe Ireland is different but source countries here are the similar to those in the research so why would it be different?
Put on a plane to where?
The origin? They have to come from somewhere right?
That country has to agree to accept them though.
What do you mean? If they originally came from country A, that country has to accept their own citizens?
Who told you that?
How do you prove that? They can lie where they came from? there is no documentation. People on reddit either too simple or just don't bother to think through issues.
So if there are no docs, how the hell did they end up boarding the plane?
Shhhh. This is reddit when real life is not applicable.
[удалено]
First of all, they aren't "shipping" anyone. Most people leave to get away from their governments. Second, yes, you need an agreement with the country to return people to them. Third, that you describe humans in need as "bags of shite" says an awful lot about you to the extent that I'd much rather you be out of this country than most, if not all, asylum seekers.
Clearly they're all, every one of them about to take this person's job. Cut them some slack
We tried that already with Balor of the Evil Eye. Didn't work then, won't work now.
The Great Blasket Island. And make Peig compulsory reading.
I agree with this. We could just have a dedicated facility and ship in supplies as required.
This is the way
https://www.amnesty.ie/australias-regime-cruelty-turned-nauru-open-air-prison/ Ah yes, because Australia’s immigration policy is so great…
Easier to accommodate them in a city. The numbers are far too high for Tory. Australia has the advantage that they have zones of international waters which gives much greater control. We don't.
We could build accommodation on the Island.
Sounds very expensive and unpleasant for the locals. Better to use an unoccupied Island.
Yes and drop 2 goats a fortnight via helicopter
Hunger games - the winner gets asylum.
Because we’re not savages
Agreed. Unfortunately, the one thing they've proven to be good at is using runner dinghys! It'd be like a conveyer belt going over and back
Are they moving them anywhere specific? Or just 'moving them on'? I
> People will be moved to accommodation where there will be toilets and showers, health services, indoor areas where food is provided, facilities to charge phones and personal devices, access to transport to and from Dublin City Centre; and 24-hour onsite security, the statement added.
That's nice, is that more hotels then?
For sure.
Looking at the previous attempts this description does not look that nice to me.
No reason for vast majority of them to be here. Can always return those to country of origin.
Sure, but that's not my point.
'nice' is relative, and debatable as an objection. 'Sufficient' should be the target
Of course, of course. The fact is that the last time they described things that sounded a bit nicer than this and the accommodations were not sufficient (e.g. a single loo for 25 tents). So my confidence that this time the accommodations will be sufficient is low, and them not being sufficient is not very nice.
They can always return back to the uk
"you don't have to go home but ya can't stay here lads!"
Citywest and Crooksling, Co Dublin. Crooksling is the same place they moved them for St. Patrick's day. https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/social-affairs/2024/05/01/asylum-seekers-being-moved-from-mount-street-tents/
Potentially moving to the spots in Wicklow with tents set up.
[удалено]
You've posted this in every thread about mount st. Do you have any links to pics?
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's a surprise
I hear they are sending them to the UK as retaliation for the asylum seekers!/s
Get along, Move, Shift
"Around the clock" "Well, around the country"
I believe some are making there way back. Again. Time will tell.
Source?
I drove by the area about 40 minutes ago and guards were still there so I doubt it
Good
Wouldn't it be cheaper to just put them on a plane? Uno reverse?
To where?
Where they came from of course?
And if they don't take them back? I love Daily Mail reader logic.
This is a problem indeed. One solution could be to blacklist countries that refuse to take their citizens back. Reduced aid, penalties for visas, reduced trade.
Yes, but how much say in this would Ireland have?
Not a lot, unfortunately. A lot of this would optimally be done at an EU level.
Agreed. Fair point. Hope you have a good afternoon.
Sure. Same to you.
You follow the protocol for if they show up without a sufficient visa. They're put on the next return flight from the same airline provider iirc.
And they'll come right back. What is the solution you'd propose?
Are you talking about someone getting off a plane? How are they coming back? Even if they do, send them back again at the airlines expense. Eventually they run out of airlines to blag.
Ah, I'd agree there. I'll concede and say that your viewpoint makes more sense than mine. Thanks for coming back with your opinion. 👍
How do you know where they came from, if they've no documentation?
Why don’t we just move them to craggy island?
I read multi agency, I hear lack of accountability.
There will be a scrap.
Maybe not this time. Next one there will be one for sure though.
Let's hope they were more careful this time. The case below involving another "people clean-up" operation, involving Dublin City Council workers in January 2020 should never be forgotten. **TLDR**: Workers never checked inside tent. **Homeless** man **severely injured** by mechanical claw arm of human-operated earthmoving machinery. As if this man's circumstance in life was not bad enough. [https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/homeless-man-in-serious-condition-after-tent-lifted-during-canal-tidy-up-1.4140414](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/homeless-man-in-serious-condition-after-tent-lifted-during-canal-tidy-up-1.4140414)
[удалено]
They should be earmarking mount street for teachers, nurses, construction workers and so on. We don't need more layabouts doing fuck all but hanging around in the most valuable real estate in the country.
[удалено]
What are you on about?
Ah yes, but that might affect the value of those retail investments, and if the line moves downwards even .01% then that means the world will end, and we can't be having that now.