David McWilliams article in indo

thehighground

marco_polo wrote: »

None of that backs up your allegation that the Dutch government (one of the most progressive in the world) was condoning or aware of the mistreatment of the Irish Gama workers in any shape or form.

But the Dutch Gov. has to take responsibility for letting one of their banks exploit European workers.

Just like the Irish Gov. had to take a bit of stick for what happened to the Gama workers in Ireland. After all, the Irish Gov./Irish people were not exploiting the Gama workers directly, but yet has to take the blame for what happened to them.

marco_polo

thehighground wrote: »

But the Dutch Gov. has to take responsibility for letting one of their banks exploit European workers.

Just like the Irish Gov. had to take a bit of stick for what happened to the Gama workers in Ireland. After all, the Irish Gov./Irish people were not exploiting the Gama workers directly, but yet has to take the blame for what happened to them.

I don't know the in and outs of European banking laws and the specifics of the case in question, but it very possible that they were perfectly legitimate company bank accounts being used for less than legitimate puroposes. I would imagine that the onus is on the justice / law authorities to detect this rather than financial institutions. As for example I could lodge dodgy money to my perfectly legitimate bank account if I so wished (I wouldn't do such a thing of course ) .

I completely agree that the blame lies squarely at our weaknesses in the area of labour law enforcement in this instance.

conceited

Who exactly is they? Our fellow member EU states are rightly continuing with their own independant national ratification processes on this treaty.

It's my understanding that all EU members must ratify the treaty for it to become law, right?

is_that_so

It is true but how the EU work out how to get to that now is not clear. As I've posted elsewhere, the opt-outs and processes that they used for Denmark at the time of Maastricht is a possible way forward. As all EU countries have signed up to Lisbon, they are obliged to continue with the process, irrespective of what we are doing. Considering that seven years have gone into getting to this point they are more likely to do so anyway.
TBH this is a serious misconception that has been reflected in the assumptions of some people on the No side. Just because we did not ratify the treaty does not automatically mean that it will stop. All they see at present is our non-ratification. The EU has been here before on a number of occasions, Maastricht, Nice, this treaty and will endeavour to find a way out, either politically or legally. For all the reasons to vote No there are too many institution reform elements that are urgently need

DishonestPikey

MrParanoid wrote: »

"Let's do a little calculation. We have close to 300,000 immigrants working from the new accession states here. Let's say they are on a wage between the minimum wage of €17,000 and the average wage of close to €35,000 a year. So let's say €25,000. That's a total wage bill of €7.5bn per year."

Come on, you really think that all the work could/would have been done by the irish themselfs for the same salary, fact is that this saved ireland a lot of money, and that ireland would have spent this amount on own labour anyway. This in no way at all justifies the 33 billion! euros that Ireland recieved from the EU.

Thing is, the EU helped Ireland out of its 3rd world country status, and made sure that Ireland could be up to par to other EU countries. That Ireland misbehaves and has ridicoulous prices on housing, letting, food, clothing compared to other EU countries, and people coming here for 17k a year and hardly being able to survive, is plain rude, irish did not get this country up out of the gutter, so stop being proud for the wrong reasons! Irish culture / mentality = great, be proud of that. Irish new found wealth and the people having it hands that can not treat it well and because of this have tens of thousands of euro's in debt, while having 2 houses and 2 cars, is just plain idiotic.

Please use the EU money to make a stable, welfaring economic enviroment of Irland, and then complain about stuff.

Eastern europeans coming to Ireland only has given the country cheap, hardworking and precise labourers. All the work done would have cost way more if it was done by Irish. This is not 'What Ireland did for the EU' this is what other EU members did for Ireland!

p.s. Im not an eastern european.

Before the influx young irish people/students worked part time (mainly in services sector). Nowadays most of them live off Daddy's money which he borrows from the bank.

Migrant workers were needed in the construction industry, but as pointed out all that has done is contribute to the bubble. Quite simply, we didn't need that many houses, i.e we didn't need all those construction workers.

Immigration workers (not just EU migrants) suppress wages. This is evident in the I.T sector where Indian workers and Eastern Europeans are willing to work for peanuts. Fortunately the recent shortage of workers in the industry is getting wages back up to where they should be - for what are highly skilled jobs.

These are the facts of the matter, but one more fact is that none of these reasons should be a reason against immigration. If anything they point out Irelands inability to ensure equal rights for all workers. something I feel the EU should take control of...amongst a lot of other issues our governments throughout time have failed to address.

nacho libre

Look what we have done for ordinary Europeans
By DAVID MCWILLIAMS
Wednesday June 18 2008

What makes a good European country? According to many of our European neighbours -- specifically the French and Germans -- Ireland post-Lisbon, can't be regarded as a good member of the EU club because we are ungrateful and unpredictable.

More egregiously, the spin is that the Irish people are in someway intent on blocking enlargement. The storyline continues that, given how much we gained from the EU, how could such a nation of malcontent ingrates deprive our eastern neighbours of their opportunity?

Certainly some of the crestfallen 'Yes' campaigners are using similar arguments, toeing the French line that "eaten bread is soon forgotten". How could we possibly trouser the cash and then give them the two fingers?

It is easy to see the world this way, particularly if you regard politics as one giant inter-country game of treaties and committees. In this world view -- one usually formulated by over-educated, risk-averse courtesans -- people do not matter. The only thing that counts for the Eurocratic worldview is summits, leaders and the elite.

But Europe is about more than countries; it is about people. It is about 400 million individual people whose ambitions, aspirations and lives can be improved by the opportunities that economic integration affords.

If you take this people- centred view of things, it is interesting to contrast Doubting Ireland and Enthusiastic France. French politicians have conveniently forgotten that while they might hob-nob with their Polish counterparts, France does not allow Polish immigrants to work freely in France. So France talks the language of solidarity but freezes out the people that this very solidarity is supposed to help. What breathless hypocrisy!

While France threw up barriers, Ireland on the other hand opened its doors to hundreds of thousands of ordinary Poles, Lithuanians and Latvians whose lives have been greatly enhanced by the opportunities we have given them.

Ireland is a proper European partner to the Joe Soaps from Warsaw, Riga and Vilnius, while the French and Germans have closed their doors to them.

This distinction between a Europe of the peoples -- the Irish view -- and a Europe of the elites -- the old Europe view -- goes to the heart of our differing approaches.

So, for example, the French foreign minister claimed indignantly that over the 35 years of EU membership the Irish people have received €33bn in aid from the EU. This is true.

But because Ireland, unlike Germany or France, allowed the people from the accession states to come and live and work freely here, we have given back to the East in wages and opportunities.

Let's do a little calculation. We have close to 300,000 immigrants working from the new accession states here. Let's say they are on a wage between the minimum wage of €17,000 and the average wage of close to €35,000 a year. So let's say €25,000. That's a total wage bill of €7.5bn per year.

As we are now going into our fifth year of open borders, it is likely that Ireland has put back more cash in the pockets of poor European immigrants in five years that the EU has given us in 35 years.

We have also provided an open platform for people to come and go without recourse to registering with the local authorities or without the need to be monitored by identity cards. Furthermore, the Irish Ryanair, not the EU Commission, has been the single greatest force behind actual integration, flying the poor people of the East cheaply all around the Union. We've yet to see a low-fares French carrier demean itself to carry ordinary citizens to work.

So, not only have we given hundreds of thousands of eastern Europeans a chance to fulfil the promise of the EU and have their children educated here, but given that the propensity to save is higher among immigrants than the rest of us, billions of euros earned in Ireland are likely to have been sent home to Eastern Europe to build opportunity there.

Only Ireland, Britain and Sweden -- the three countries most regarded as sceptical on Europe -- have shown real, material solidarity with the poor of Eastern Europe.

While the French, Germans and Italians might lecture others on being good Europeans, they don't stick to the spirit of the treaties they sign.

The question then arises again: which is the better European country; the one that blocks the freedom of mobility but accords to the fine rhetoric of the 'grand projet', or the one that allows free movement of people but might be more quizzical about the rhetoric?

Go down to your local Spar or Centra and ask the Polish or Lithuanian working there (who would not be freely allowed to work in France or Germany) who has done more for them -- France or Ireland?

Also ask them, who made xenophobia part of the last referendum? It was in France not Ireland that the anti-EU vote made a big deal of the threat of the 'Polish Plumber'. The ever-so-European French played the race card last time they voted with the 'Yes' side, ensuring the 'No' side that a 'Yes' vote would keep the Poles off French building sites.

The problem for the elite is that Ireland has given back money to the EU, but just not to them. We have given the poor an opportunity to work which is precisely what an economic union is all about.

Tomorrow morning, when Brian Cowen is facing the music and feels he is dealing with a meagre hand, he should remind his tormentors, such as former communist Mr Kouchner, that Ireland has given back to European workers in wages far more than we have taken in direct subsidies. Ireland is accepting in eight times more EU immigrants per head than France.

There are many ways of looking at Europe. Some of our neighbours are 'top down' Europeans, pushing through treaties in parliament, not consulting their electorates. This makes them look powerful at summits.

There are others who are happy to enhance ordinary peoples' lives but have to face the electoral music at every turn.
We are the 'bottom-up' Europeans -- the more honest and less hypocritical EU members.
If you want to see what European integration is for ordinary people, don't watch the pomp and ceremony of the leaders' summit tomorrow, go to the arrivals hall at Dublin airport.

There, amid the stonewashed denims, shaved heads and East European biker jackets, you will see the true hope that Europe brings. It is a chance of a better life for the immigrants and their children. It is the chance to bring money home, to plan and to invest in the future. This is what Europe is all about.

In my opinion he is right. This is what the EU should stick to being about.
A common market and economic union where the poor can travel across borders of the member states to seek a better life. I wholeheartedly agree with him about the blatant hypocrisy of French leaders castigating us as being anti-eu because of our no vote when you consider some of the decisions the French politicians took post Nice

Drexl Spivey

conceited wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/look-what-we-have-done-for-ordinary-europeans-1413378.html




Great article

From this article: Irish are generous and the French + Germans are hypocrits ...

btw, politicians are not generous. The fact is that politcians have to compromise and be diplomat especially if the country they work for is a driving economical power that has a say on the international scene (USA, UK, FR, GERMANY, RU, ..) So I guess the more a country is on the international scene the more hypocrisy you'll see, but smaller countries can be hypocrit as well in some occasions: Irish neutrality / allowing US military planes to land in Shanon, crooked politicians, ...

Anyway, this article makes it sound like Ireland was full of generosity with eastern europeans when in fact it looks to me that it was more of a lack of planning/regulation in immigration influx. Bertie even went to Poland to discuss the polish immigration issue.

Furthermore, Ireland benefited from it since the eastern europeans are cheap labour and they pay their taxes here. (I have examples of a Latvian worker being paid less than an Irish worker for the same job in the same company. and we wont go to the call centres case where qualified foreigners are paid a misery when their Irish managers make a decent leaving)

Also, mentioning the race issue, how many times (a lot) have I heard "there are too many polish" or, to a lesser extend : "there are too many foreigners". A man who was jumping the queue at a taxi rank recently said to me: "go back to poland!" (I am not polish btw ..)

According to the Irish Independent (17th June), foreigners coming into the country took a part in the NO vote.

Giving lessons to France when it comes to immigration is a tad presumptious. Sarkozy himself has hungarian roots...
8% of the population are foreign born immigrants.
Most of the population from immigrant stock is of European descent (from Italy, Spain, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Russia, Ukraine, and the former Yugoslavia)

Finally I would like to add that there are way too many simplistic associations. It is true that the French politicians are not impressed with the NO vote, however, the vast majority of French ppl not only respect the irish vote but they apparently back it up from what i can read in the surveys/forums (lefigaro.fr 's forums)

Moriarty

Threads merged.

K-9

France has had immigration for decades with ex colonies etc.

Ireland has had it for 6/7 years. Slight difference.

I find a country that has specialised in emigration for decades lecturing France on immigration confusing!

In another article McWilliams said Europe should be thankful for Ryanair!

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

France has had immigration for decades with ex colonies etc.

Ireland has had it for 6/7 years. Slight difference.

I find a country that has specialised in emigration for decades lecturing France on immigration confusing!

In another article McWilliams said Europe should be thankful for Ryanair!

Different relationship Seanie. France would have 'exploited' their former colonies and actually own them something. Ireland has never had colonies and so doesn't owe anyone anything.

Considering the number of migrants to Ireland in the last few years (from 3% to 16% of population), we are probably not doing too bad!

I think the Poles working here are very pleased that Ryanair exists - they can hop home a couple of times a year without breaking the bank. Think thats the point McWilliams was making - cheap and easy air travel!

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

Different relationship Seanie. France would have 'exploited' their former colonies and actually own them something. Ireland has never had colonies and so doesn't owe anyone anything.

Considering the number of migrants to Ireland in the last few years (from 3% to 16% of population), we are probably not doing too bad!

I think the Poles working here are very pleased that Ryanair exists - they can hop home a couple of times a year without breaking the bank. Think thats the point McWilliams was making - cheap and easy air travel!

You could take the point that France owes the colonies and argue that Ireland owes the countries we emigrated to.

The irony with Ryanair is it owes its success to EU competition policy so the Polish owe the EU, not Ryanair!

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

You could take the point that France owes the colonies and argue that Ireland owes the countries we emigrated to.

Gwan then, what would you say Ireland owes England?

The irony with Ryanair is it owes its success to EU competition policy so the Polish owe the EU, not Ryanair!

So everyone is happy then, now that we all know who owes what! When you say the EU, do you mean the bureaucrats in Brussels or the countries signed up like France, Britain IRELAND, Czech. Republic etc.?

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

Gwan then, what would you say Ireland owes England?

Immigration wise as this is what the thread is about, we should be thankful to them for the 100s of thousands of immigrant it took from Ireland, Scotland too. There are many areas we owe them zilch, but not immigration.

thehighground wrote:

So everyone is happy then, now that we all know who owes what! When you say the EU, do you mean the bureaucrats in Brussels or the countries signed up like France, Britain IRELAND, Czech. Republic etc.?

Does it really matter? Competition policy benefited Ryanair and consumers.

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

Immigration wise as this is what the thread is about, we should be thankful to them for the 100s of thousands of immigrant it took from Ireland, Scotland too. There are many areas we owe them zilch, but not immigration.

Well as an Irish person, I'm extremely grateful to the Poles, Latvians, Filipinos, etc. who came over here and have made such a huge contribution to the prosperity and health of this country

Does it really matter? Competition policy benefited Ryanair and consumers.

Tony Ryan/Michael O'Leary put it to Aer Lingus / BA, the state airlines that were ripping us all off. They took monumental risks (not the State owned airlines mind) to provide cheap travel. I salute them both.

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

Well as an Irish person, I'm extremely grateful to the Poles, Latvians, Filipinos, etc. who came over here and have made such a huge contribution to the prosperity and health of this country

Nice sidestep there!

thehighground wrote:

Tony Ryan/Michael O'Leary put it to Aer Lingus / BA, the state airlines that were ripping us all off. They took monumental risks (not the State owned airlines mind) to provide cheap travel. I salute them both.

Indeed, massively helped by EU rules on competition, state aid etc.

Will you give the EU credit for anything?

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

Nice sidestep there!

Indeed, massively helped by EU rules on competition, state aid etc.

Will you give the EU credit for anything?

Glad you liked the sidestep.

I note you are located in Donegal, which to my mind has been sadly neglected by the Irish Gov. over the years (i.e., you lost your fishing industry, the Troubles etc. didn't help) etc. As a BMW area you are probably the only part of the country that is still in receipt of grant aid from the EU.

Ireland also contributes to the EU - and always has. Recently we started giving more than we are receiving.

The Sarkozy / Merkel tried to insinutate that we (Ireland) only received. We have contributed (and will continue to contribute) - thats if the EU doesn't cut off its nose to spite its face.

Anyway, what with a world food shortage, if we got our fishing rights back, Donegal (and Ireland as a net exporter of food) could probably do very well outside of the EU

K-9

I take it you now recognise the EU influence in Ryanairs success?

thehighground wrote: »

Glad you liked the sidestep.

I note you are located in Donegal, which to my mind has been sadly neglected by the Irish Gov. over the years (i.e., you lost your fishing industry, the Troubles etc. didn't help) etc. As a BMW area you are probably the only part of the country that is still in receipt of grant aid from the EU.

Ireland also contributes to the EU - and always has. Recently we started giving more than we are receiving.

The Sarkozy / Merkel tried to insinutate that we (Ireland) only received. We have contributed (and will continue to contribute) - thats if the EU doesn't cut off its nose to spite its face.

Anyway, what with a world food shortage, if we got our fishing rights back, Donegal (and Ireland as a net exporter of food) could probably do very well outside of the EU

Examples of how Norway and Iceland have benefitted?

extragon

I think the sentiments behind McWilliam's article are spot on.
But he should be aware that France will open its labour market to eight East European countries on 1st July, ( a year earlier than planned ). Also, it was Sarkozy as interior minister who abolished the need for EU citizens to have identity cards, about five years ago.

Which reminds me of the article's reference to Ireland's "bottom up" approach to Europe. The chief thing missing here is media interest in European news, or any attempt to create such a thing as, for example, a daily European roundup on RTE, or requiring cable networks to show European channels. If the Irish were as well informed about Europe as about the US I think the Lisbon treaty would have gone differently.

redspider

David points out that the French didnt allow in the eastern europeans when we did, etc, and that therefore they arent on this score as European as us - however, its not a major point to make and is misleading due to the following:

All of the EU (EU-15 as it was then) voted on such a mechanism with Nice (I and II), where countries COULD allow or not allow people from the new accession states to move in and work. (This created a 'two-tier' or 'two-speed' EU from that point onwards and was one of the reasons that some voted No to Nice-I and Nice-II.). Thus it was within France’s remit, as well as other countries, where countries could choose to allow the movements in or not based on their own self-interest. However, it is clear that Ireland did allow the movements for its own self-interests and NOT in the interests of Poland or Lithuania and the other countries. We were not acting like a charity or being altruistic, far from it.

Secondly, its just a matter of time before the Poles, Latvians, and peoples from the other accession states can move freely into and work in France, as it will be for all ‘desintation’ old europe countries, Germany, etc. This is an opt-out that we have agreed to but it is a time limited one if I remember correctly. So, its not as if the French wont ever let the accession people in. All of this was agreed with Nice, which we as a people signed up to, wisely or not. We cant blame the French now after the fact.

As Ireland's economy slows, the cheaper immigrant labour force will 'nip' away at jobs from the 'indigenous', and this may cause tensions but certaibly problems. Its much easier for the population at large to demonstate "the land of 1000 welcomes" when its in the good times. And businesses are most welcoming to accept people that will work for less. We cant blame businesses that use cheap labour sometimes to the deficiency of their product/service and sometimes not, as they are 'playing' within the rules.

However, it will be a much sterner test for Ireland in the bad times ahead. In the bad times of the past we had guaranteed-Irish products. Will there be "Guaranteed-Irish" services where they are only provided by Irish people, even if more costly, and will Irish people opt for them? Or is that classified as racist? This is uncharted waters, as immigration intra-EU wont be going away.

I wonder what a referendum/poll would determine if the Irish voters were asked this question:

Do you want the EU to expand further beyond the EU-27 in the next 5 years?

Would that be a No I wonder.

Redspider

craichoe

Seanies32 wrote: »

I take it you now recognise the EU influence in Ryanairs success?



Examples of how Norway and Iceland have benefitted?

Ahh come on now, thats Norways choice and they have a wagon load of Oil and Gas (which their sticking the profits for into a piggy bank).