The Issue of Travellers.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 5:43am

I could be wrong but as far as I know you have to go to your local post office to collect it. The PPS number was introduced in 1998, not the early 90s as Pete said. It may be redundant now (can you prove this) but was it reduntant in the early 90s?

The PPS name was introduced in the late 90s, however before it was known as PPS it was known as an RSI number. RSI cards were issued in the early 90s.

How do you know that most travellers work, surely working in a steady job implies you too must be settled.

Francie Barret lived on the same halting site in Galway for years, he works, trained at sports and went on to represent the country in the Olympics. None of his family drink or smoke, yet even though him and his family have lived in the same place for many years, they still consider themselves travellers. Do you really think that someone must morph themselves into something they are not in order to find work in this country, being settled or traveller is not a choice it is how you are born, the same way some people are born black, or brown.

No I never made such comments, I have in fact argued that travellers are no different to anyone else in this country and that it is their insistence on keeping their children out of education that is holding them back.[/quote]

As I keep telling you even members of the travelling community who complete their education are discriminated against when it comes to finding work, it is alot harder for a traveller to find work than a settled person, and those that do leave school usually do so to get involved in whatever business their family is involved in.

Richard Branson left school early, If he were a traveller in Ireland do you think he would be in the position he is in today?

f you believe an anarchist newletter over the rest of the media in Ireland then the comment was warranted. Maybe THEY just want you to think that the tin-foil hats are useless so that you take them off? I would leave it on to be safe.

still throwing out insults i see.

I didn't ignore it I pointed out why it was justifiable to put the halting sites in rubbish locations.

It was the same philosophy that was behind the likes of the ballymun towers in Dublin and O'malley park in Limerick. Ballymun has been demolished and O'malley park is being depopulated. your idea of putting disadvantaged people in ****hole locations has failed before, why should it prove successful when dealing with travellers.

besides, they are not in ****hole locations because they are poor and illiterate, they are in ****holes because they are travellers. no other reason. do you think city councils would build council houses which were falling down, or build unsafe houses? no they wouldnt.

My point was that he can stop being a traveller, meaning that travellers are not a race. Although somewhere the argument for travellers being a race changed to them being an ethnic group,

In all the 57-page traveller bashing threads on boards.ie I have never claimed that travellers were a separate race, ethnic group maybe, the UN stated that the concept of Irish travellers being a separate ethnic group should be looked into futher. If it were up to me personally then I would say yes they are a separate group as they meet the criteria.

As for suddenly not being a traveller anymore, could you stop being Irish? come back and tell us how long it takes. you cannot just stop being what you are.

If he goes for a job in the city and settles, then he is not a traveller anymore. You cannot change your race, I can't stop being white, a black guy can't stop being black (with one exception) but a traveller can stop being a traveller.

Being a traveller is more than just being on the road, it is the traditions, the language, the herritage that also comes with it. so while a traveller might choose to live in the same place for many years, they still consider themselves travellers. your belief that a traveller can suddenly change into a settled person like superman going into a phonebox when he buys a house is very simplistic.

If a traveller gets a job and all the rest, yes he is still a traveller if he choses. But then he can buy his own halting site and not bother anyone.
Again I'm asking here again, can someone show me some of this traveller culture?

yeah but will he get planning permission for said halting site?

and what aspect of traveller culture would you like to know? also i suggest that you look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Travellers and follow the links at the bottom.

FTA69 · 17-11-2005 1:05pm

It's a sad reflection on this board that someone can get away with referring to a vulnerable minority with a highly abusive racial slur without the mods taking action, or the man in question even apologising. I'd say the reaction would be different if it was one of those Stormfront nutters on spouting about Nigerians.

gurramok · 17-11-2005 2:56pm

They are not vulnerable, they choose their lifestyle.
Its further enhances the view that all minorities should be integrated, they should make an effort to settle into housing in ANY area rather than living on the side of the road.
Having a ghetto situation is wrong imho.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 6:06pm

gurramok wrote:

They are not vulnerable, they choose their lifestyle.
Its further enhances the view that all minorities should be integrated, they should make an effort to settle into housing in ANY area rather than living on the side of the road.
Having a ghetto situation is wrong imho.

who are you to tell people how they should live. Some do choose to move into houses, some do not, but that decision should be up to them and not you or me or anyone else.

And labeling travellers as tinkers and pikeys and whater slur you can come up with, being acceptible, when labeling other minorities is not, does make them more vulnerable.

gaf1983 · 17-11-2005 6:59pm

billy the squid wrote:

Richard Branson left school early, If he were a traveller in Ireland do you think he would be in the position he is in today?

Richard Branson left school early and went on to become a very successful and wealthy entrepreneur. However, he would be among an exception of early school-leavers that manage to be financially more successful than those that stay in education. I don't know if he would be in the same position he is in today if he was an Irish traveller - I suppose as long as he had the same ambition, work ethic and luck that he has had in his career not being an Irish Traveller I reckon there's a reasonable chance that someone like him would succeed irrespective of their gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age (does not apply to a person under 16), disability, race, or membership of the Traveller community.

If a person in Ireland feels they are being discriminated against on any of 8 those grounds listed in the previous paragraph, they can seek recourse by applying for a remedy at the Equality Authority.

http://oasis.gov.ie/employment/employment_rights/equality_authority.html

The Equality Authority,
Clonmel St,
Dublin 2.
Telephone: 1890 245545 or (01) 4173333,
Fax (01) 4173366,
Text Phone (01) 4173385,
E-mail: info@equality.ie.

Equality Tribunal
3 Clonmel Street,
Harcourt Street,
Dublin 2,
Tel: (01) 477 4100
Lo-Call: 1890 34 44 24
Fax: (01) 477 4141

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 7:07pm

If a person in Ireland feels they are being discriminated against on any of 8 those grounds listed in the previous paragraph, they can seek recourse by applying for a remedy at the Equality Authority.

The problem is though, for a member of the travelling community, claiming discrimination brings out the tabloid-reading biggots in irish society, and can lead to more hastle then they need. While people claiming discrimination on the grounds of race, creed, sexual orientation, and dissability are looked upon more favoribly in the media, and in society in general.

example

"bastard travellers had my local shut down 'cos they couldnt get served there"

versus

"ah well its the pubs own fault for not letting that poor misfortunate blind man into the pub"

gurramok · 17-11-2005 7:33pm

billy the squid wrote:

who are you to tell people how they should live. Some do choose to move into houses, some do not, but that decision should be up to them and not you or me or anyone else.

And labeling travellers as tinkers and pikeys and whater slur you can come up with, being acceptible, when labeling other minorities is not, does make them more vulnerable.

Whats wrong with integration?..If it was a ethnic minority such as another race, you'll be screaming for them not to be excluded from society.
By living in a choice filled ghetto existence, its harder for the group to integrate and feel the benifits of a normal society like we have.

The vulneralibilty is experienced by settled people who live in fear of the said group occupying lands and destroying them where you and I have to pay for the clean up through our taxes.

Where did i make slurs and labelling, please point them out else i'll report your post.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 7:40pm

gurramok wrote:

Whats wrong with integration?..If it was a ethnic minority such as another race, you'll be screaming for them not to be excluded from society.

Excluding them from society and forcing them to live a life they choose not to live are two different things though. If members of the travelling community want to be left alone then they should not have intergration forced upon them, however intergration with the settled community should be an option open to them.

By living in a choice filled ghetto existence, its harder for the group to integrate and feel the benifits of a normal society like we have.

what is normal?

The vulneralibilty is experienced by settled people who live in fear of the said group occupying lands and destroying them where you and I have to pay for the clean up through our taxes.

you also pay for the building and upkeep of drug-filled council housing estates too. but there is less objection to a drug filled housing estate because the people living there, well, at least they are not tinkers, right?

Where did i make slurs and labelling, please point them out else i'll report your post.

I never said you personally did, just take a look at the threads here and the one in Afterhours (which I'm sure the moderators are aware of but have done nothing about) and you will find frequent use of the terms "tinker" and "pikey."

It is the one minority in this country where it is ok to rip the piss out of and get away with.

mcgarnicle · 17-11-2005 7:54pm

billy the squid wrote:

The PPS name was introduced in the late 90s, however before it was known as PPS it was known as an RSI number. RSI cards were issued in the early 90s.

Yes I know, but as far as I know you still have to collect the dole at your local post office, I have never been on it so I'm not sure.

billy the squid wrote:

Francie Barret lived on the same halting site in Galway for years, he works, trained at sports and went on to represent the country in the Olympics. None of his family drink or smoke, yet even though him and his family have lived in the same place for many years, they still consider themselves travellers. Do you really think that someone must morph themselves into something they are not in order to find work in this country, being settled or traveller is not a choice it is how you are born, the same way some people are born black, or brown.

My question was how do you know most travellers work. Not do you know if some boxer's parents work.

billy the squid wrote:

As I keep telling you even members of the travelling community who complete their education are discriminated against when it comes to finding work, it is alot harder for a traveller to find work than a settled person, and those that do leave school usually do so to get involved in whatever business their family is involved in.

Most travellers don't complete their education, few even get a Junior Cert, less than 15%. Any person with an education that gets to JC or less will have a hard time getting a job. It's not because they are travellers, it's because they have a rubbish education. Also travellers that do get jobs rarely remain settled and in that job for good, obviously an employer will prefer someone who isn't just going to up and leave. It doesn't matter why they leave school, all kids should have to stay in school till they are at least 16. Taking them out to work in the family business is no excuse.

billy the squid wrote:

Richard Branson left school early, If he were a traveller in Ireland do you think he would be in the position he is in today?

If Richard Branson was from Austria do you think he would be in the position he is in today? That is a senseless question.

billy the squid wrote:

It was the same philosophy that was behind the likes of the ballymun towers in Dublin and O'malley park in Limerick. Ballymun has been demolished and O'malley park is being depopulated. your idea of putting disadvantaged people in ****hole locations has failed before, why should it prove successful when dealing with travellers.

I would put down money that in ten years the new Ballymun will be a kip just like the old one. The location doesn't make an area a hell hole to live in, it's the people in it that ruin the place for the decent people there. It has failed because the people messed it up. Just like travellers mess their sites up and as one poster pointed out earlier, mess up the halting sites provided for them.

billy the squid wrote:

besides, they are not in ****hole locations because they are poor and illiterate, they are in ****holes because they are travellers. no other reason. do you think city councils would build council houses which were falling down, or build unsafe houses? no they wouldnt.

You said they build the halting sites near rivers and train tracks etc, not that they were badly built. Of course cheap housing is on cheap land, how else can it be cheap? If travellers want free halting sites they can accept it will be on crap land or buy their own sites. Just like people looking for cheap housing.

billy the squid wrote:

In all the 57-page traveller bashing threads on boards.ie I have never claimed that travellers were a separate race, ethnic group maybe, the UN stated that the concept of Irish travellers being a separate ethnic group should be looked into futher. If it were up to me personally then I would say yes they are a separate group as they meet the criteria.

So if you don't think they are a race you will agree that the police should not be wrongly accused of racism when dealing with them?
Where does the UN state this? Like I already said the deffinitions for an ethnic group are ambiquous at best. I pointed out some deffinitions that prove to me they are not an ethic group, while you seem to have seen others that prove to you they are an ethnic group. If it were up to me personally they would not be a seperate group as they do not meet the criteria IMO.

billy the squid wrote:

As for suddenly not being a traveller anymore, could you stop being Irish? come back and tell us how long it takes. you cannot just stop being what you are.

As I have said a few times already in my oppinion you can stop being a traveller, to be honest I don't think it would be very hard. Yes you can stop being Irish, American history is full of examples of this. Theodore Roosevelt was very passionate about this as he resented people claiming dual nationality, he himself pointed out that he was American not Dutch-American. If you want to learn more about this I recomend his book American Ideals and other essays in the essay "True Americanism" for example one "American, born in Germany" as Roosevelt described him wrote the following - "We know as well as any other class of American citizens where our duties belong. We will work for our country in time of peace and fight for her it in time of war, if a time of war should ever come. When I say our country, I mean, of course, our adopted country. I mean the United States of America. After passing through the crucible of naturalization, we are no longer Germans; we are Americans. Our attachment to America cannot be measuered by the length of our residence here. We are Americans from the moment we touch the American shore until the day we are laid in American graves. We will fight for America whenever necessary. America, first, last, and all the time. America against Germany, America against the world; America, right or wrong; always America. We are Americans." he also lists various Irish immigrants who became American, devoting themselves fully to America.

billy the squid wrote:

Being a traveller is more than just being on the road, it is the traditions, the language, the herritage that also comes with it. so while a traveller might choose to live in the same place for many years, they still consider themselves travellers. your belief that a traveller can suddenly change into a settled person like superman going into a phonebox when he buys a house is very simplistic.

The language is now spoken by only a few older travellers and from what your links show the culture consists of some story telling and 13 yr old girls marrying 20 something men. If they still consider themselves travellers then they are travellers, if they decide they are not then it is simple to stop being one.

billy the squid wrote:

yeah but will he get planning permission for said halting site?

Depends where he wants to build it, just like any settled person applying for planning permission

billy the squid wrote:

and what aspect of traveller culture would you like to know? also i suggest that you look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Travellers and follow the links at the bottom.

Well according to those links traveller culture consists of 13 yr old girls marrying 20 something men (should be illegal) and people telling stories, fantastic.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 8:17pm

Well according to those links traveller culture consists of 13 yr old girls marrying 20 something men (should be illegal) and people telling stories, fantastic.

First off, link to that claim. as the last time I checked the legal age for marriage was not 13. and there is no church in this country who will marry a 13 year old to anyone. oh wait, another baseless claim.

[qute]Depends where he wants to build it, just like any settled person applying for planning permission[/quote]

Find me a planning application to build a halting site where the application was accepted so. if you think it is that easy.

The language is now spoken by only a few older travellers and from what your links show the culture consists of some story telling and 13 yr old girls marrying 20 something men. If they still consider themselves travellers then they are travellers, if they decide they are not then it is simple to stop being one.

again 13 year olds getting married is illegal in this country, you have yet to provide evidence of this.

As I have said a few times already in my oppinion you can stop being a traveller, to be honest I don't think it would be very hard. Yes you can stop being Irish, American history is full of examples of this. Theodore Roosevelt was very passionate about this as he resented people claiming dual nationality, he himself pointed out that he was American not Dutch-American.

yet you still have people calling themselves irish-american italian-american african-american. even though they have never been born in Ireland, italy, or africa. tell me was theadore rosevelt born in holland? the Irish who went to america still had their accents also, they didn't just develop an american one the minute they landed on ellis island.

So if you don't think they are a race you will agree that the police should not be wrongly accused of racism when dealing with them?

Is unfair discrimination and abuse more acceptable than racism?

You said they build the halting sites near rivers and train tracks etc, not that they were badly built. Of course cheap housing is on cheap land, how else can it be cheap? If travellers want free halting sites they can accept it will be on crap land or buy their own sites. Just like people looking for cheap housing.

the land is only as crap as the facilities. if it is near a river or railway line there should be sufficient protections like walls or fenses blocking them off.

If there was open access to a DART line or a railway track going through or past a housing estate you can be sure that the local council would do something about it. a toilet, shower facilities, electricity, and protection from danger, it isnt a lot to be honest.

If Richard Branson was from Austria do you think he would be in the position he is in today? That is a senseless question.

not really, Richard branson had opportunities opened to him even though he left school early, you were claiming that people do not have opportunities open to them because they leave school, this is not the case.

Yes I know, but as far as I know you still have to collect the dole at your local post office, I have never been on it so I'm not sure.

post offices are linked up by computer to the social welfare office to the best of my knowledge, ive never been on it myself either so dont quote me on that.

gaf1983 · 17-11-2005 8:23pm

Before I start into my post, I'm going to apologise and say that I have only read the first and last page of this thread, so if I'm repeating anything said by other posters, I am sorry.

Travellers are a small indigenous minority, documented as being part of Irish society for centuries. Travellers have a long shared history and value system which make them a distinct group. They have their own language, customs and traditions

- this quote is taken from the wikipedia article on Irish Travellers, originally from Pavee Point.

Being a Traveller follows from the generations. It's in our backgrounds. I'm proud I'm a Traveller - you feel free. If a person says to me, "what are you?" I'll say I'm a Traveller. I don't think Travellers should die out - they should always be there. We've our own values and traditions - tinsmiths, markets and begging. They should be kept going. Traveller children can be reared with a language no one else can understand. Our kids are better off being Travellers because most of them don't go off to pubs and discos and marry settled people - they've more enjoyment and freedom and they see more - visiting off down the country.

Kathleen McDonagh

- this quote was on the Pavee Point website in a section called "Traveller Voices: An insight into Traveller culture in Travellers own words."

Culture, in its broadest sense, ist the way of life of a people. The term tradition encompasses anything handed down or transmitted down from the past to the present, such as long-standing customs and practices, social or political systems, values and beliefs, language, and so on. The term tradition denotes a continuity with the past, although the line between the traditional and the merely fashionable is often indistinct.

Do we all accept that Irish Travellers have their own tradition and culture as distinct from the rest of the population? It seems that they do.

My belief, however, is that their culture is not necessarily serving their best interests. Cultures and traditions come and go. For instance, after the Balkan Wars of the 1990s the Croatian government devoted much of its resources trying to show how it had a culture separate and distinct from the Serbian one it had seemed fairly similar to during the years when Yugoslavia was all one country, they published dictionaries creating new words and so on. I'm going off the point a bit, but I just wanted to illustrate that cultures are transient. Some of those cultures mentioned by Kathleen McDonagh, such as rearing the kids in another language, while it keeps Shelta alive, it alienates the children from the population at large. Also, one of the 'values and traditions' she mentions, 'begging' is only likely to lower their self-esteem and annoy the population that don't like begging.

In my opinion it would be wise for Travellers not necessarily to abandon their culture, but abandon some parts of it that don't serve them well - adapt, if you like. For instance, the very notion of travelling around the country on a whim makes it very difficult for children to have a good education - it can be very unsettling to have to enter a new classroom every few months. As regards the state providing services, it can be hard for it to do so given the nomadic lifestyle of travellers. This does not ignore the fact that many local authorities currently don't provide enough serviced halting sites.

At the moment, Section 6, sub-section 5 of the Housing (Traveller Accomodation) Act 1998 provides that...

A relevant housing authority shall make an estimate of the number of traveller families and households for whom accommodation will be required within the functional area for a period which the Minister may by direction specify.

As I have emphasised, the local authority can only provide an estimate of travellers living in the area.

What I propose is that we bring in a registration system here similary to those present in France, Germany and other countries in continental Europe whereby when you move to a new area you have to register your presence with the local authority so they can no how many people in the area they have to provide services for. I think this is a sensible idea, and would like to see it brought into Ireland.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 8:34pm

I think the "begging" has mostly been done away with. its mostly travellers who are selling coal, turf or cheap furniture who call to peoples doors nowadays. selling stuff door-to-door isnt begging in my opinion.

gaf1983 · 17-11-2005 8:34pm

billy the squid wrote:

First off, link to that claim. as the last time I checked the legal age for marriage was not 13. and there is no church in this country who will marry a 13 year old to anyone. oh wait, another baseless claim.

It was in the wikipedia article you posted the link to earlier, under the section 'Language and customs' and the information comes from an Irish Traveller living in the United States- it's up to yourselves to judge whether it's a valid source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Travellers#Language_and_customs

Language and customs
Irish Travellers are distinguished from the settled communities of the countries in which they live by their own language and customs. Shelta is the traditional language of Travellers but they also speak English with a distinct accent and mannerisms. The historical origins of Travellers as a group has been a subject of dispute. Some argue that the Irish Travellers are descended from another nomadic people called the Tarish. It was once widely believed that Travellers were descended from landowners who were made homeless in Oliver Cromwell's military campaign in Ireland, but evidence shows that they have dwelt in Ireland since at least the Dark Ages. The estimated numbers of Irish Travellers in the countries in which they live are1:

Ireland: 25,000
Great Britain: 15,000
United States: 10,000
Several known groups in the United States include the Northern and Southern Travellers (each of which have their own subcategories) and the Western Travellers. The Traveller language (Shelta) is dying out and only the older Travellers still know the language completely.

Some of the marriage customs, at least in the Southern Travellers (Memphis and "Georgies"), 11 year old girls are engaged to be married to 20+ year old men. Weddings occur as young as 12 or 13, often to a first or second cousin. Because in Traveller culture men are the ones who provide for the wife and family, a girl's main goal is to marry. The bride's parents pay the groom's parents up to 500,000 dollars for this arrangement.

Travellers in the U.S. live in trailer parks, and travel every summer to work. They are close-knit and in general are poorly educated, leading to much racism and bigotry due to ignorance.

Information comes from an interview with an Irish Traveller in the United States.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 8:36pm

yes i read the articles you quoted, I am just telling you that it is not done much anymore.

i dont condone the actions of wedding children for marriage. nonetheless it doesn't happen here

gurramok · 17-11-2005 8:39pm

billy the squid wrote:

Excluding them from society and forcing them to live a life they choose not to live are two different things though. If members of the travelling community want to be left alone then they should not have intergration forced upon them, however intergration with the settled community should be an option open to them.
Well, we have to agree to disagree on the question whether they choose their lifestyle.

Integration with the settled community is an option, intergrated housing has been built in areas and some travellers have taken that option.
I have beef with the ones that choose to live on side of the road yet moan about their disadvanges in life.

billy the squid wrote:

what is normal?

Normal society, not talking about the people. IE..living in a fixed address, earning your keep, being respectable and civil to people etc

billy the squid wrote:

you also pay for the building and upkeep of drug-filled council housing estates too. but there is less objection to a drug filled housing estate because the people living there, well, at least they are not tinkers, right?

No, the people living there are living there legally and constitute a tiny minority of the settled population(a few hundred in an estate for example)
The people in halting sites are much higher % of the traveller population who systematically destroy any land they illegally occupy.

billy the squid wrote:

I never said you personally did, just take a look at the threads here and the one in Afterhours (which I'm sure the moderators are aware of but have done nothing about) and you will find frequent use of the terms "tinker" and "pikey."

It is the one minority in this country where it is ok to rip the piss out of and get away with.

Well, it is a reflection where a sizable % of people imho label that particular group with derogatory(sp?) names, have you asked yourself why does this group attract the name-calling, it can't all be blatant bigotory?

mcgarnicle · 17-11-2005 8:45pm

billy the squid wrote:

First off, link to that claim. as the last time I checked the legal age for marriage was not 13. and there is no church in this country who will marry a 13 year old to anyone. oh wait, another baseless claim.

It's in the wiki link you posted, do you not even read your own links?

billy the squid wrote:

Find me a planning application to build a halting site where the application was accepted so. if you think it is that easy.

Since you made the initial claim, how about you find me a planning application being rejected.

billy the squid wrote:

again 13 year olds getting married is illegal in this country, you have yet to provide evidence of this.

You posted the link.

billy the squid wrote:

yet you still have people calling themselves irish-american italian-american african-american. even though they have never been born in Ireland, italy, or africa. tell me was theadore rosevelt born in holland? the Irish who went to america still had their accents also, they didn't just develop an american one the minute they landed on ellis island.

Like I said if you chose not to be Irish then you can stop, if you chose not to be a traveller you can stop. I backed this up with a quote by someone born in Germany who stopped being German, yet you have ignored this in your quote.

billy the squid wrote:

Is unfair discrimination and abuse more acceptable than racism?

No, but even legitimate actions by gardai are labelled racist. As the entire point of the OP was, when gardai try to deal with travellers they are accused of being racist. Take a look at that anarchist article you posted and count how many times the word racism is mentioned. As the OP suggested using the word racism is a cynical move to get media attention as it is a buzzword packed with negative connotations.

billy the squid wrote:

the land is only as crap as the facilities. if it is near a river or railway line there should be sufficient protections like walls or fenses blocking them off.

What halting site has these? Since you are calling for evidence now I will do the same. Unless you are suggesting that if travellers park up in a dangerous area that the government should make it safe for them.

billy the squid wrote:

If there was open access to a DART line or a railway track going through or past a housing estate you can be sure that the local council would do something about it. a toilet, shower facilities, electricity, and protection from danger, it isnt a lot to be honest.

I'd imagine that the sites that don't have these facilities are the ones that travellers just park up on out of the blue, with no regard for local people.

billy the squid wrote:

not really, Richard branson had opportunities opened to him even though he left school early, you were claiming that people do not have opportunities open to them because they leave school, this is not the case.

Yes ok, because no school-leaving travellers are as rich as Richard Branson they are descriminated against. As one poster pointed out, if a traveller had the same character profile as Branson they would have a decent chance at making it, but there is a huge amount of luck in what he has accomplished. The average person is far more likely to be successful if they have a good education, this is just common sense. And the average traveller is not merely a school leaver, they are illeterate and lack basic skills necessary to work, skills that an education would provide.

billy the squid wrote:

post offices are linked up by computer to the social welfare office to the best of my knowledge, ive never been on it myself either so dont quote me on that.

Again as far as I know you have to go to your local post office. It's pretty clear neither of us know enough about this to say for sure. But I will stick with my point that travellers having to collect their dole on the same day is a result of bureaucratic necessity rather than institutionalised descrimination.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 8:48pm

Well, it is a reflection where a sizable % of people imho label that particular group with derogatory(sp?) names, have you asked yourself why does this group attract the name-calling, it can't all be blatant bigotory?

nope, it just means that the moderators are more tollerant of bigotry against travellers than they are of other cultures. do you think a thread full of stormfronters would have gone on this long?

o, the people living there are living there legally and constitute a tiny minority of the settled population(a few hundred in an estate for example)
The people in halting sites are much higher % of the traveller population who systematically destroy any land they illegally occupy.

as are those travellers living in halting sites provided by the councils. they are also living there legally.

Any traveller who occupies land illegally without first seeking out a legal halting site is breaking the law the minute they occupy that land. those who are legally in halting sites tend to look after them.

Normal society, not talking about the people. IE..living in a fixed address, earning your keep, being respectable and civil to people etc

the last two criteria i can accept as being normal, but to a traveller, living in a fixed address would not be normal.

I have beef with the ones that choose to live on side of the road yet moan about their disadvanges in life.

so do other travellers.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 9:09pm

mcgarnicle wrote:

It's in the wiki link you posted, do you not even read your own links?

I read it, it refers to american travellers. I am not familiar with the laws of concent in Memphis or Georgia,

Since you made the initial claim, how about you find me a planning application being rejected.

actualy it was you that suggested that they should go for planning permission, i just want you to demonstrate how easy it is and how successful it would be for someone to do such a thing.

Like I said if you chose not to be Irish then you can stop, if you chose not to be a traveller you can stop. I backed this up with a quote by someone born in Germany who stopped being German, yet you have ignored this in your quote.

I could easily find a reference to someone who went to america and chose not to abandon their heritage, it prooved to be a prudent move on the part of Teddy rosevelt considering that he was about to go to war with Germany.

Someone should not be forsed to stop identifying them selves as a traveller just so they can get on in life.

No, but even legitimate actions by gardai are labelled racist. As the entire point of the OP was, when gardai try to deal with travellers they are accused of being racist. Take a look at that anarchist article you posted and count how many times the word racism is mentioned. As the OP suggested using the word racism is a cynical move to get media attention as it is a buzzword packed with negative connotations.

provisionaly racist pending clarification from the UN is a bit of a moutful alright. So the travellers in the original posters reference consider them selves to be a separate race from settled people. so their claim that it was a race issue is legitimate. it is a grey area which needs to be resolved.

you have not however answered my question, is an ethnic related grievience a lesser evil than a race related grievience.

[quoteWhat halting site has these?[/quote]

not enough of them to be honest, but alot do.

Since you are calling for evidence now I will do the same. Unless you are suggesting that if travellers park up in a dangerous area that the government should make it safe for them.

I think you are referring to illegally parked travellers here, I am saying that halting sites provided by the state should be safe from dangers such as rivers and railway lines.

I'd imagine that the sites that don't have these facilities are the ones that travellers just park up on out of the blue, with no regard for local people.

there are no sites with no facilities like the ones mentioned. my whole point is that there are not enough halting sites whatsoever. again I am not referring to illegally parted travellers.

Yes ok, because no school-leaving travellers are as rich as Richard Branson they are descriminated against. As one poster pointed out, if a traveller had the same character profile as Branson they would have a decent chance at making it, but there is a huge amount of luck in what he has accomplished. The average person is far more likely to be successful if they have a good education, this is just common sense. And the average traveller is not merely a school leaver, they are illeterate and lack basic skills necessary to work, skills that an education would provide.

but is that a good enough reason to discriminate against the ones that do have an education.

Again as far as I know you have to go to your local post office. It's pretty clear neither of us know enough about this to say for sure. But I will stick with my point that travellers having to collect their dole on the same day is a result of bureaucratic necessity rather than institutionalised descrimination.

fair enough.

mcgarnicle · 17-11-2005 9:39pm

billy the squid wrote:

I read it, it refers to american travellers. I am not familiar with the laws of concent in Memphis or Georgia,

It was your link and the link refers to Irish travellers in America, or are you saying that they stop being travellers when they reach America?

billy the squid wrote:

actualy it was you that suggested that they should go for planning permission, i just want you to demonstrate how easy it is and how successful it would be for someone to do such a thing.

Actually I said he can buy his own site, you introduced the issue of planning so the burden is on you to prove how hard it would be to get permission.

billy the squid wrote:

I could easily find a reference to someone who went to america and chose not to abandon their heritage, it proved to be a prudent move on the part of Teddy rosevelt considering that he was about to go to war with Germany.

You asked if Irish people can stop being Irish, I have proven they can with that quote, of course some chose not to stop being Irish but that is irrelevent to your original question. Just to clarify Theodore Roosevelt never went to war with Germany, he was President from 1902-1909, that book was published in 1897.

billy the squid wrote:

provisionaly racist pending clarification from the UN is a bit of a moutful alright. So the travellers in the original posters reference consider them selves to be a separate race from settled people. so their claim that it was a race issue is legitimate. it is a grey area which needs to be resolved.

So now it is racist, make up your mind. They can consider themselves whatever they like, they are not a seperate race and I have proven why and you even agreed they were not earlier.

billy the squid wrote:

In all the 57-page traveller bashing threads on boards.ie I have never claimed that travellers were a separate race

billy the squid wrote:

you have not however answered my question, is an ethnic related grievience a lesser evil than a race related grievience.

Yes I have, look at the first word of my response.

billy the squid wrote:

not enough of them to be honest, but alot do.

I asked that wrong, what I should have said was what halting sites, built by the government, do not have walls etc blocking off railway lines?

billy the squid wrote:

I think you are referring to illegally parked travellers here, I am saying that halting sites provided by the state should be safe from dangers such as rivers and railway lines.

Who says they aren't? As for rivers, how do you make a river safe? I have never seen a walled off river.

billy the squid wrote:

there are no sites with no facilities like the ones mentioned. my whole point is that there are not enough halting sites whatsoever. again I am not referring to illegally parted travellers.

I think there are, but this is getting away from the question. Why should the government pay for halting sites for them. You claim that most work, so why should they be given free land and housing?

billy the squid wrote:

but is that a good enough reason to discriminate against the ones that do have an education.

Show me evidence that travellers with a decent education are discriminated against. I don't mean going to school till 13, I mean a decent education. The type that only a very small minority have to begin with.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 9:55pm

mcgarnicle wrote:

It was your link and the link refers to Irish travellers in America, or are you saying that they stop being travellers when they reach America?

No there are indeed irish travellers in america. but thay ARE in america not ireland, where the laws on concent are different. what you posted gave the impression that there were travellers in ireland marrying at 13. There has been decendants of Irish travellers in the US for several centuries who still identify themselves as both irish and travellers. whats your point?

Actually I said he can buy his own site, you introduced the issue of planning so the burden is on you to prove how hard it would be to get permission.

You have to have planning permission to build anything on a site, without it the site is useless. and buying it would be pointless.

You asked if Irish people can stop being Irish, I have proven they can with that quote, of course some chose not to stop being Irish but that is irrelevent to your original question. Just to clarify Theodore Roosevelt never went to war with Germany, he was President from 1902-1909, that book was published in 1897.

I dont think it is irrelevent, like i said a traveller should not have to stop being a traveller simply because he wants to work, you are claiming that they should.

So now it is racist,

In their opinion it is racist. but you still havent answered my question, which type of discrimination is more acceptable to you?

They can consider themselves whatever they like, they are not a seperate race and I have proven why and you even agreed they were not earlier.

has nothing to do with the question I asked.

Who says they aren't? As for rivers, how do you make a river safe? I have never seen a walled off river.

take a walk down the quays you will find there are walls and barriers going along the liffey.

I think there are, but this is getting away from the question. Why should the government pay for halting sites for them. You claim that most work, so why should they be given free land and housing?

For the same reason they pay for roads, council housing, water services, etc. There are travellers who pay tax too you know.

as for discrimination in employment, can you give me evidence to the contrary?

mcgarnicle · 17-11-2005 10:21pm

billy the squid wrote:

No there are indeed irish travellers in america. but thay ARE in america not ireland, where the laws on concent are different. what you posted gave the impression that there were travellers in ireland marrying at 13. There has been decendants of Irish travellers in the US for several centuries who still identify themselves as both irish and travellers. whats your point?

This is getting ridiculous. I ask you to show me evidence of traveller culture and you post a link to the above info. If you don't like it why post to it? Are you saying that travellers want to marry 13 yr olds and only get the chance when they go to America, I doubt marrying 13 yr olds is legal in the US. My point is obvious there are two pieces of so called traveller culture in the link you gave and the links on the site, they tell stories and marry 13 yr olds. If you didn't agree with it why did you post it?

billy the squid wrote:

You have to have planning permission to build anything on a site, without it the site is useless. and buying it would be pointless.

So let them apply for permission then. After some do and are refused permission then show me the example, unless you have some now.

billy the squid wrote:

I dont think it is irrelevent, like i said a traveller should not have to stop being a traveller simply because he wants to work, you are claiming that they should.

The ability to stop being a traveller proves they are not an ethnic group or a race, that is why it is relevent.

billy the squid wrote:

In their opinion it is racist. but you still havent answered my question, which type of discrimination is more acceptable to you?

Their opinion is wrong. It is never racial discrimination since they are not a sepperate race. Don't ask dumb questions.

billy the squid wrote:

has nothing to do with the question I asked.

You said that they consider themselves a race so it is a race issue. That is ridiculous if I go for a job and don't get it, can I just decide I am a new race and complain about racism? You have agreed that they are not a race so my point valid.

billy the squid wrote:

take a walk down the quays you will find there are walls and barriers going along the liffey.

You are comparing Dublin city centre with a traveller halting site? Find a more relevant example.

billy the squid wrote:

For the same reason they pay for roads, council housing, water services, etc. There are travellers who pay tax too you know.

There are not many that pay tax. Council housing- so a few homeless people get homes, therefore all travellers should get free housing, even though they actually have money? The reasonsn they pay for roads and water are irrelevent to your point.

billy the squid wrote:

as for discrimination in employment, can you give me evidence to the contrary?

You are claiming they are discrminated against so you prove they are.

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 10:36pm

you are still avoiding my question. which is worse, racial dicrimination, or discrimination against an ethnic minority.

So let them apply for permission then. After some do and are refused permission then show me the example, unless you have some now.

I'm still waiting for you to prove that such an application has been successful.

The ability to stop being a traveller proves they are not an ethnic group or a race, that is why it is relevent.

why should they "stop being a traveller" as you put it. they should have equal opportunities whether they are a traveller or not. you believe that they should stop being travellers, why?

Their opinion is wrong.

says who? you?

It is never racial discrimination since they are not a sepperate race. Don't ask dumb questions.

...or questions you won't or can't answer

You are comparing Dublin city centre with a traveller halting site? Find a more relevant example.

Nope I am comparing one part of the country where people happen to live, with another part of the country where people happen to live. the example should be relevant enough.

You said that they consider themselves a race so it is a race issue. That is ridiculous if I go for a job and don't get it, can I just decide I am a new race and complain about racism? You have agreed that they are not a race so my point valid.

the issue of whether or not the irish travelling community is a separate race or not has not been decided or declared by those that declare such things. my views are my views, not theirs, there are those that do believe that travellers are a separate race. so until the matter is fully decided then their claim is legitimate.

There are not many that pay tax. Council housing- so a few homeless people get homes, therefore all travellers should get free housing, even though they actually have money. They pay for roads and water are irrelevent to your point.

you pay rent on a halting site bay, so it isnt free.

pete · 17-11-2005 11:00pm

mcgarnicle wrote:

But I will stick with my point that travellers having to collect their dole on the same day is a result of bureaucratic necessity rather than institutionalised descrimination.

Wrong.

It was everything to do with discrimination, and it was very much institutionalised.

At the time, the procedure for claiming Social Welfare was you signed on & collected your payment once a week in your local social welfare office. For members of the settled community, your signing on day was decided by two criteria - your sex, & where your surname fell alphabetically. For members of the travelling community, however, it was decreed that all of them were to sign on at the same time: 11.30am on Thursdays.

The reasoning behind this was to rule out the possibility of double signing, since it would not be possible to be in two places at the same time. I suppose this made perfect bureaucratic sense... apart from the fact that it made a completely outrageously discriminatory assumption of guilt on the part of all travellers.

This led to some crowd scenes you wouldn't believe almost every week. A crush of scores of people[1] would all try to sign on at exactly the same time, since they would be left waiting until exactly 11:30 (not a minute before!) and they all knew they ran the risk of being docked a day's dole if they signed on too late too many times[2].... absolute insanity.

The whole situation was grossly unfair, completely untenable and just blatantly wrong, and was eventually rectified sometime around 1994/95 I think. Good to see we've moved on so much since then, eh?

[1] Before anyone asks "why couldn't they just queue up like everyone else?", can I just point out that after lunch on every other signing day there would be a crowd of people waiting outside for the office to open up again. Every day when the Services Officer opened the gate, he'd have to jump up onto it as it swung crashing back due to the charge of people (accompanied by much pushing and shoving and some suitably charge-esque roaring) running in to try to get to the front of the queue.

[2] In itself this policy was applied in a discriminatory fashion. For customers from the "settled community", money was only ever docked after repeatedly missed their signing on day, not their signing on time.

mcgarnicle · 17-11-2005 11:00pm

billy the squid wrote:

you are still avoiding my question. which is worse, racial dicrimination, or discrimination against an ethnic minority.

As I have said I am not answering such a dumb question. It is a cynical attempt to get the moral high ground. It is also irrelevent since travellers are neither a race or an ethnic group.

billy the squid wrote:

I'm still waiting for you to prove that such an application has been successful.

I doubt such an application has even been made, they are happy enough to moan and complain until they get it for free.

billy the squid wrote:

why should they "stop being a traveller" as you put it. they should have equal opportunities whether they are a traveller or not. you believe that they should stop being travellers, why?

Yawn, you are getting boring I have explained what I meant twice now, but just for you I will try again. I did not say they should stop being travellers, I said that they can if they want, proving they are not a race.

billy the squid wrote:

says who? you?

Yes, me and plenty of others. You are saying that I can't claim they are not a race since the people that decide these things (whoever they are) have not reached a conclussion regarding travellers, if I can't assume they are not a race, why can they assume they are a race?

billy the squid wrote:

...or questions you won't or can't answer

Well I said I won't, I have explained why above.

billy the squid wrote:

Nope I am comparing one part of the country where people happen to live, with another part of the country where people happen to live. the example should be relevant enough.

Right, well you aren't going to convice anyone with that argument. A city with a million people has walls around its largest river so some traveller site should also have them, good work. Look at any place with a population comparible to a traveller site and see if the nearby river is walled off. I am guessing that it isn't.

billy the squid wrote:

the issue of whether or not the irish travelling community is a separate race or not has not been decided or declared by those that declare such things. my views are my views, not theirs, there are those that do believe that travellers are a separate race. so until the matter is fully decided then their claim is legitimate.

They are not a race imo and that won't change. Who is trying decide if travellers are a race? Can you prove that such a deliberation is taking place?

billy the squid wrote:

you pay rent on a halting site bay, so it isnt free.

It is free, they get the site for free. Whatever paltry rent they may pay (can you prove they pay rent?) on it is not the point

billy the squid · 17-11-2005 11:06pm

its an easy question to answer, either you condem ethnic related discrimination or racially realated discrimination, or both, whats so hard about answering a question like that, or do you make an exception for travellers and just dont want it to be highlighted?

looking more and more like a troll account.

mcgarnicle · 17-11-2005 11:15pm

pete wrote:

At the time, the procedure for claiming Social Welfare was you signed on & collected your payment once a week in your local social welfare office. For members of the settled community, your signing on day was decided by two criteria - your sex, & where your surname fell alphabetically. For members of the travelling community, however, it was decreed that all of them were to sign on at the same time: 11.30am on Thursdays.

Just like I said, I doubt you made the policy Pete and I doubt whoever did would admit the reason was to catch out travellers who were cheating the system.
If they were then fair enough, it is wrong. But apart from the issue of time, I can't think of better way available (at the time) to administer travellers getting their dole.
And like I have said, if they had got an education and gotten jobs then there wouldn't be so many of them on the dole in the first place.

Before anybody points out that settled people are on the dole too. It is pretty clear that there is a rather large comparative proportion of travellers on the dole.

mcgarnicle · 17-11-2005 11:18pm

billy the squid wrote:

its an easy question to answer, either you condem ethnic related discrimination or racially realated discrimination, or both, whats so hard about answering a question like that, or do you make an exception for travellers and just dont want it to be highlighted?

looking more and more like a troll account.

Ok, just for the troll accusation. Both are obviously wrong, the question is irrelevent since travellers are neither a race nor an ethnic minority, that is why I didn't want to dignify it with an answer. The problem is the abuse of the term racism by travellers who want to cry everytime the law is brought to bear against them. As the OP pointed out.
The issue, as far as I and apparantly the OP are concerned is that travellers are using peoples' perceptions of discrimination to make themselves look like victims.

pete · 17-11-2005 11:19pm

mcgarnicle wrote:

Just like I said, I doubt you made the policy Pete and I doubt whoever did would admit the reason was to catch out travellers who were cheating the system.

Did you read my post? "to catch out travellers who were cheating the system" was the whole point of the exercise. It wasn't a secret.

If they were then fair enough, it is wrong. But apart from the issue of time, I can't think of better way available (at the time) to administer travellers getting their dole.

How about "the same as everyone else"?

And like I have said, if they had got an education and gotten jobs then there wouldn't be so many of them on the dole in the first place.

Before anybody points out that settled people are on the dole too. It is pretty clear that there is a rather large comparative proportion of travellers on the dole.

Based on?

pete · 17-11-2005 11:23pm

mcgarnicle wrote:

Ok, just for the troll accusation. Both are obviously wrong, the question is irrelevent since travellers are neither a race nor an ethnic minority.

That's not your decision to make.

I didn't want to dignify it with an answer, but the fact that is wrong has nothing to do with abuse of the term racism by travellers who want to cry everytime the law is brought to bear against them. As the OP pointed out.

Any evidence of this actually happening?

The issue, as far as I and apparantly the OP are concerned is that travellers are using peoples' perceptions of discrimination to make themselves look like victims.

Any evidence of this actually happening?

mcgarnicle · 17-11-2005 11:31pm

pete wrote:

That's not your decision to make.

Going by the definitions that have been posted it is a reasonable conclusion. Who makes the decision?

pete wrote:

Any evidence of this actually happening?

Any evidence of this actually happening?

Yes, read the newspaper and watch the news, you will see it. Check out the OP. Oh and don't forget squid's anarchist article. The traveller's information website on the wiki link posted by squid is also a good example.

The Issue of Travellers.

Comments