Social housing for non-EU nationals queried

Borboletinha

http://www.meramirpur.com/racism-in-britain.html



I know huh? Racism sure is an ugly thing... Specially when Its against ourselves...:mad:

mikemac1

Fair play to you for coming back with a reply

But how old is that can I ask?

Just you put "not a long time ago" so I assumed you meant recently

Is that American sign from a few hundred years ago?

Doc Ruby

Borboletinha wrote: »

I know huh? Racism sure is an ugly thing... Specially when Its against ourselves...:mad:

When you start seeing "No Brazilians need apply" signs you might have a point. Until such time you can't point the finger at every query on public spending related to immigrants and claim its racism. Maybe this guy is racist, I don't know, but simply saying that Irish citizens need to be prioritised IF priorities exist, doesn't seem racist to me. The real question here is whether or not priorities exist in the allocation of the means of assistance.

Borboletinha

mikemac1 I was being ironic with the "not a long time ago". Of course it was before the celtic tiger but now the celtic tiger is nothing but a kitty so who garantees you that that kind of horrible prejudice against irish people wont come back??? Specially now that you're immigrating again by the thousands!! A person has to be very ignorant and stupid to turn against immigrants because if an irish person knows their own history of immigration and diaspora they wont have the cheek to be racist!!!


The Irish diaspora (Irish: Diaspóra na nGael) consists of Irish emigrants and their descendants in countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, Argentina, New Zealand, Mexico, South Africa, BRAZIL and states of the Caribbean and continental Europe. The diaspora, maximally interpreted, contains more than 80 million people, which is more than thirteen times the population of the island of Ireland itself!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_diaspora

Borboletinha

"DOC RUBY:When you start seeing "No Brazilians need apply" signs you might have a point. Until such time you can't point the finger at every query on public spending related to immigrants and claim its racism"

I never pointed any fingers at any queries my reply was to the guy that said letting non eu nationals in ireland was the worst mistake to the country which is not only untrue but unfair if you look at irish past and present of immigration.

Just for the record I love ireland and im thankful for the opportunities the country gave me. Also like i said before brazilian people are not allowed to claim anything from the government be it the dole or social housing unless you're the parent of an irish/european child so one of the parents has to be irish/european. Other than that we get nothing, but still we are happy,content and thankful for our minnimum wage jobs. If we have a job, if not we go back home by the loads like its happening right now. We dont stay here sponging the state, WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO. SO PLEASE DONT BLAME US FOR THAT.

whatsamsn

Why do accusations of racism have to pop its ugly head again?
The point of the article was that non-eu nationalites were given houses & thus obviously chosen OVER eu citizens applying... Irish people applying too. Why do people have to accuse racism at hand with this topic?


But this whole thing is nothing new I guess. Its well known a single mother gets moved to the top of the list over a single man ... and its also known a non-national single mother gets moved higher than the aforementioned combined. Thats why people work the system. Want to apply for social housing? your girlfriend is pregnant or yous already have child? get her to apply as a single mother. You live there too. Cheap rent. Win Win.

Will always happen.

Clareboy

#15 wrote: »

What about refugees?

Do you think they should be turned away?

The vast majority of asylum seekers and refugees who have come to Ireland have got in here on the basis of ' cock and bull stories ' and that's a well known and recognised fact.

Lawrence1895

Clareboy wrote: »

The vast majority of asylum seekers and refugees who have come to Ireland have got in here on the basis of ' cock and bull stories ' and that's a well known and recognised fact.

Any links? Any statistics? Or is it just one of these 'Everybody knows it' stories?

Doc Ruby

Borboletinha wrote: »

I never pointed any fingers at any queries my reply was to the guy that said letting non eu nationals in ireland was the worst mistake to the country which is not only untrue but unfair if you look at irish past and present of immigration.

Oh yeah, that's your common or garden troll there, likes to make inflammatory comments to get people all upset and arguing. Its generally best just to ignore them.

By the way, pointing at the Irish history of emigration has no bearing on immigrants coming to Ireland - while the entire population of Ireland could fit neatly into a medium sized city, the opposite does not hold true for most countries and Ireland. There are very real limits on resources here.

lividduck

Clareboy wrote: »

The vast majority of asylum seekers and refugees who have come to Ireland have got in here on the basis of ' cock and bull stories ' and that's a well known and recognised fact.

Prove it! less than 2% of asylum seekers have their claims granted, another "Everybody Knows" claptrap post!

Nodin

Clareboy wrote: »

The vast majority of asylum seekers and refugees who have come to Ireland have got in here on the basis of ' cock and bull stories ' and that's a well known and recognised fact.

If you know that persons here have been granted any sort of status based on lies, why have you not informed the authorities?

ResearchWill

dj jarvis wrote: »

funny how the claims for asylum have declined at par with our economic fortune - has the world suddenly gotten safer and has less refugees ?

not on your life - less are coming becasue of our poor economic outlook , so you would have to make the assumption the most were chancers going to a richer county looking for a hand out - lets face it if you were a refugee in sudan and you had a chance to get out and go to a European nation , you would not care what nation it was , becasue ANY is better than sudan
but yet less are coming

this fact alone speaks volumes to me about our asylum process and the asylum process world wide

90% fail rate - how long were the 90% fed and housed before being asked to leave ? if they could be found - total waste of resources

and leaves a shadow over the reaming 10%

debating immigration policey does not make you rascist
being a rascist makes you a rascist - big big difference

Did I say debating immigration policy makes you rascist, I clearly said ordinary asylum is an issue that is clearly different to a person from Sudan who is a programe refugee.

I am very open to having an open valid discussion on immigration, just because a person want tighter controls does not make them a racist nor does a person who wants more open and transparent system make them a loony leftie

HavingCrack

Borboletinha wrote: »

IRISH PEOPLE SURE ARE FUNNY!! I wonder what you'd say if Australia or America decided its worst mistake was to let IRISH PEOPLE IN!!! Sure you wouldnt be happy would you, if the prejudice against irish people were to come back full force now that you're a BROKE COUNTRY!!! Not a long time ago pubs in america had signs that said: NO DOGS NO IRISH.
GET A GRIP IRISH PEOPLE ARE IMMIGRANTS JUST AS BRAZILIAN PEOPLE ARE!!!!
But i dont begrudge. If you ever need a visa to work in brazil i hope you get one. :pac:

It's unlikely anti-Irish sentiment will ever return to the United States. Have you ever been there? For the most part they love Irish people, it's not an exaggeration. Millions of them have Irish ancestery. There's no doubt that Nativist sentiment was a huge issue in the 1800's but that's long gone.

Xenophobia and racism in the US is very much against Mexicans and other Central Americans these days.

Phill Ewinn

Should we not recoup the money from their country of origin. People need houses, fair enough. But since 70% of citizens voted in a pro austerity government they obviously realise what the consequences are.

Send the bill to Brazil! We can't afford our own stuff.

whatsamsn

Nodin wrote: »

If you know that persons here have been granted any sort of status based on lies, why have you not informed the authorities?

Jesus, I hate that attitude.
That a person, i guess I in this example, is meant to be a goody little too shoes and report someone to the shining authorities.

And why ... because "I" disagree with the choice they made to lie and say they were somalian to enter Ireland as a refugee (for an example) Because Ireland is better than Tanzania or Ethiopia and they want a better life? ... But more so "I" am meant to report them because immigration control is a joke over here?

So i'll report them to the GNIB. And you know what happens? ... nothing.
I once spoke to a bloke who worked in the GNIB. Always remember what he said "its very tricky to prove where a person is from. Most arent that stupid to leave their actual real passport laying around for the Gardai to find after a report is made against them."

Nodin

....where did the idea they're Brazillian hop into things....?

Borboletinha

"It's unlikely anti-Irish sentiment will ever return to the United States. Have you ever been there?"

Yes, I have been there. In fact, I lived there a while. Oh, dont worry. Never claimed benefits or housing if thats what you wanna know.:p
And i hope the anti-irish sentiment never comes back! I dont condone any type of racism! The point is ireland has a huge history of immigration and thats not past its actually more than ever PRESENT with irish people going to australia AND AMERICA by the thousands every day. So for irish people to have a "**** the immigrants" attitude is just plain ignorant and stupid. You were never an empire you had it bad in your past just like most poor countries, you might not suffer from prejudice nowadays but im sure your greatgrandparents who emmigrated for better opportunities did. You shouldnt forget that.

Nodin

whatsamsn wrote: »

Jesus, I hate that attitude.
That a person, i guess I in this example, is meant to be a goody little too shoes and report someone to the shining authorities. .

... as opposed to bitch and moan on the net, spreading xenophobia and shite, rather than do anything.

I'd also be interested to know how so many "ordinary" people have knowledge that the various services involved never came across.

dj jarvis

Lars1916 wrote: »

Any links? Any statistics? Or is it just one of these 'Everybody knows it' stories?

a 90 % fail rate for asylum is a truck load of chancers in my book

if you read the OP then you will see this figure , and in fairness everyone does know it , it's not a detriment to your argument by knowing things , in fact i find its a distinct advantage

Lawrence1895

dj jarvis wrote: »

a 90 % fail rate for asylum is a truck load of chancers in my book

if you read the OP then you will see this figure , and in fairness everyone does know it , it's not a detriment to your argument by knowing things , in fact i find its a distinct advantage

Sorry, but in the OP I can only find figures about Social Housing and the (in my opinion) personal opinion of that FG politician.

I was actually looking for some links or statistics, how many of those, entering Ireland, can clearly be identified as fraudsters, and how many are genuine asylum seekers. Thanks.

Nodin

dj jarvis wrote: »

a 90 % fail rate for asylum is a truck load of chancers in my book

if you read the OP then you will see this figure , and in fairness everyone does know it , it's not a detriment to your argument by knowing things , in fact i find its a distinct advantage

The US at one stage did not accept sexual orientation as grounds for seeking asylum. It now does. If somebody claimed before this change, does that make them a 'chancer'?

#15

Clareboy wrote: »

The vast majority of asylum seekers and refugees who have come to Ireland have got in here on the basis of ' cock and bull stories ' and that's a well known and recognised fact.

Well, it's not a fact but we'll leave that bollocks aside for a minute.

I'm more interested in your answer to the question I asked.

Do you think we should turn refugees and asylum seekers away?

It's a yes or no.

bijapos

Eleganza wrote: »

Used to live in Fingal until last year in a private estate on the edge of a hell hole social housing estate..............

I gave up on Ireland as a country because of this and the banker bailouts and move to Germany. I sold up and I took my job with me. They can pursue what ever misguided social housing policy they like but I for one will not pay for it.

Germany has a very similar system so your tax Euros there are funding much the same thing.

Best of luck there though, I really enjoyed my time in it, I agree it is a better run place in general for all its faults.

dj jarvis

Nodin wrote: »

The US at one stage did not accept sexual orientation as grounds for seeking asylum. It now does. If somebody claimed before this change, does that make them a 'chancer'?

no it does not, but it made them not able to qualify for asylum in that country becasue that was the law for the country they were trying to enter

if they applied for the us and they knew they did not qualify then is that not taking a chance ?

don't agree with that law at all - but the law of that land is the law, and if you don't like it then don't ask for asylum in that country

fairly straight forward in my opinion

my comment about chancers can be taken that if 90% of asylum seekers are turned away because of false claims then in my OP they are chancers , the qualification for asylum is freely available before they enter the state , if they were checked in their home nation they would not get on the plane

them turning up here makes most of them chancers

whatsamsn

Nodin wrote: »

I'd also be interested to know how so many "ordinary" people have knowledge that the various services involved never came across.

Lots of 'ordinary people' know people that the GNIB etc services would be interested to know about.. Of course, alot are also oblivious though. Alot just assume someone has a visa or temp status.

Sure many a Nigerian person has entered Ireland 'on vacation' Then goto their local garda station, sign a form, then they never leave and fall off the system for 7 years. Legally they can apply for temp status within Ireland as they have been living in Ireland for the required 7 years proved by the fact of what they signed in the Gardai station years previous :pac:

.. man there's so many loopholes.

Nodin

dj jarvis wrote: »

no it does not, but it made them not able to qualify for asylum in that country becasue that was the law for the country they were trying to enter

if they applied for the us and they knew they did not qualify then is that not taking a chance ?

don't agree with that law at all - but the law of that land is the law, and if you don't like it then don't ask for asylum in that country

fairly straight forward in my opinion

...yet its only because of people applying and a change in social attitudes that they changed the law. You realise that there isn't exactly a list of reasons that and are not valid for asylum?

dj jarvis wrote: »

my comment about chancers can be taken that if 90% of asylum seekers are turned away because of false claims then in my OP they are chancers , ....

....there's no statistics kept that differentiate as to those turned down because they didn't meet requirements and those who were chancing their arm.

Nodin

whatsamsn wrote: »

Lots of 'ordinary people' know people that the GNIB etc services would be interested to know about.. Of course, alot are also oblivious though. Alot just assume someone has a visa or temp status.

Sure many a Nigerian person has entered Ireland 'on vacation' Then goto their local garda station, sign a form, then they never leave and fall off the system for 7 years. Legally they can apply for temp status within Ireland as they have been living in Ireland for the required 7 years proved by the fact of what they signed in the Gardai station years previous :pac:

.. man there's so many loopholes.

O - more anecdotes. That's deadly.

whatsamsn

Nodin wrote: »

O - more anecdotes. That's deadly.

You're a very rude man Nodin
A man who doesnt know anything about what people do to get over here. But yet, you want to add your 'input' - even tho you aint going nothing to add

twinQuins

Yes and your wonderfully glib anecdotes just do so much to banish the perception that the people most up in arms about immigration are really just closet xenophobes using the economic depression as a cheap justification for their views.

One would imagine someone like you, who "knows" so much, would be in the employ of the government. Or could it be you're just another bellyaching malcontent who's posting to take cheap shots at immigrants.

flanders1979

The majority of asylum claims were dropped once the applicant or applicants partner gives birth to an irish born child. They would have been given temporary leave to remain until the residency was granted with full access to social services the same as EU nationals with additional supports to aid integration. I would estimate that less than 2 percent of the people who applied for asylum in Ireland are genuine refugees who have been awarded refugee status. Our social services have been totally overwhelmed. Bad management on the governments behalf. We underwent more immigration for our size than the UK ever did.

ResearchWill

whatsamsn wrote: »

Lots of 'ordinary people' know people that the GNIB etc services would be interested to know about.. Of course, alot are also oblivious though. Alot just assume someone has a visa or temp status.

Sure many a Nigerian person has entered Ireland 'on vacation' Then goto their local garda station, sign a form, then they never leave and fall off the system for 7 years. Legally they can apply for temp status within Ireland as they have been living in Ireland for the required 7 years proved by the fact of what they signed in the Gardai station years previous :pac:

.. man there's so many loopholes.

If a person enters Ireland legally on say a student or visit visa and then for want of a better word goes underground, the only thing that will happen 7 years later when they surface is they will get a section 3 intention to deport letter. They now have 3 options 1 apply for asylum 2 leave the country 3 make application for humanatarian leave and subsidiary protection. If refused 3 which is kinda like asylum but not as restricted then a deportation order will issue.

lividduck

flanders1979 wrote: »

The majority of asylum claims were dropped once the applicant or applicants partner gives birth to an irish born child. They would have been given temporary leave to remain until the residency was granted with full access to social services the same as EU nationals with additional supports to aid integration. I would estimate that less than 2 percent of the people who applied for asylum in Ireland are genuine refugees who have been awarded refugee status. Our social services have been totally overwhelmed. Bad management on the governments behalf. We underwent more immigration for our size than the UK ever did.

The above post is a joke..yeah?

ResearchWill

flanders1979 wrote: »

The majority of asylum claims were dropped once the applicant or applicants partner gives birth to an irish born child. They would have been given temporary leave to remain until the residency was granted with full access to social services the same as EU nationals with additional supports to aid integration. I would estimate that less than 2 percent of the people who applied for asylum in Ireland are genuine refugees who have been awarded refugee status. Our social services have been totally overwhelmed. Bad management on the governments behalf. We underwent more immigration for our size than the UK ever did.

A few facts to back up your statements would be good. Your 2% claim is more correctly 10%. There are then the % who get subsidiary protection which is not as strict as Asylum.

If you then look at the CSO you will get the figures of non nationals in the Country which if memory serves is about 600000, I'm not looking for the figures again as I have posted them loads of times. Of that 600000 about 250000 are UK then the EU is about 100000 America Canada NZ and Aus make up about 50000 giving a final figure of about 150000 from ever where else.

The exact figures from 2006 are as follows http://cso.ie/en/statistics/population/personsusuallyresidentandpresentinthestateoncensusnightclassifiedbyplaceofbirthandagegroup/

flanders1979

I probably know more on the subject than you ducky. I didnt intend to amuse you.

Chinasea

woodoo wrote: »

Thats a bit extreme. But i think we should only allow a limited number of people in from any non EU country. Let small numbers in so they can integrate well. We don't want to end up like some English midland city like Bradford. With entire sections of the city like a foreign country.

or liverpool with millions of Irish, or London with millions of Irish, or Boston with millions of Irish, or New York with millions of Irish........

flanders1979

Most asylum seekers left the system before the process is carried out to its end, through marriages to EU citizens or usually having babies.
Most genuine asylum seekers never reach Europe, nevermind Ireland.
I dont believe anyone could dispute these facts.

dj jarvis

Nodin wrote: »

...yet its only because of people applying and a change in social attitudes that they changed the law. You realise that there isn't exactly a list of reasons that and are not valid for asylum?



....there's no statistics kept that differentiate as to those turned down because they didn't meet requirements and those who were chancing their arm.

sorry but i think there is a list of qualifications , if not then anyone from a troubled nation could just arrive and set up camp

Pamela isawheyho ( wrong spelling im sure ) is a good case to make my point

she was refused leave to stay becasue she DID NOT qualify the list of reasons some one can stay - and being a pathological lair did not help her case either

as far as i am aware you do have to pass qualification to be even considered , turning up with a sad story does not work ( anymore )

many many reasons would prevent your application from being accepted , i would imagine they have a HUGE list of no no's

i stand open to correction to this

Chinasea

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Last time I checked Ireland had a pretty high and pretty sudden arrival of immigrants over the last ten years, and the most remarkable thing has been the almost complete lack of a racist backlash, unlike every single one of our European neighbours.

Last time I checked there were thousands of Irish off yet again...

0h but the difference is "we're Ire'ish".

Nodin

whatsamsn wrote: »

You're a very rude man Nodin
A man who doesnt know anything about what people do to get over here. But yet, you want to add your 'input' - even tho you aint going nothing to add

...emm....

Nodin

dj jarvis wrote: »

sorry but i think there is a list of qualifications , if not then anyone from a troubled nation could just arrive and set up camp

...........

A refugee in Irish law is someone who "owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his or her nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country......" (section 2 of the Refugee Act, mirroring Article 1 of the 1951 Geneva Convention). The Refugee Act explicitly states that 'social group' can include membership of a trade union or a group of people whose defining characteristic is their belonging to the female or male sex or having a particular sexual orientation.

http://www.orac.ie/Pages/TheProcess.htm#Criteria

ResearchWill

flanders1979 wrote: »

Most asylum seekers left the system before the process is carried out to its end, through marriages to EU citizens or usually having babies.
Most genuine asylum seekers never reach Europe, nevermind Ireland.
I dont believe anyone could dispute these facts.

Well since 2005 any child born in Ireland only of one of the parents has legal ties to the state, that is be an Irish citizen or resident legally in Ireland for 3 of the previous 4 years if I'm correct or it may be resident for 4 years. In any case just having a baby is no longer an automatic right to stay unless said baby is a Irish citizen. BTW the Irish government was deporting parents of Irish citizen children up untill early last year when the ECJ ruling in the zambrano said a non citizen parent was entitled to remain.

flanders1979

Research Will, I suggest you start look at figures from 1998 to 2008. The asylum process used to take a few years on average. A very small percentage of people stayed in the asylum system. Most left it on the basis of an Irish Born Child or other reasons. Many are unaccounted for. Of those who stayed in the system a small percentage were granted, take the initial entry figures into consideration when deciding the percentage granted full refugee status.

Nodin

flanders1979 wrote: »

Research Will, I suggest you start look at figures from 1998 to 2008. The asylum process used to take a few years on average. A very small percentage of people stayed in the asylum system. Most left it on the basis of an Irish Born Child or other reasons. Many are unaccounted for. Of those who stayed in the system a small percentage were granted, take the initial entry figures into consideration when deciding the percentage granted full refugee status.

"used to take"?

flanders1979

Theres the appeals process too.

ResearchWill

dj jarvis wrote: »

sorry but i think there is a list of qualifications , if not then anyone from a troubled nation could just arrive and set up camp

Pamela isawheyho ( wrong spelling im sure ) is a good case to make my point

she was refused leave to stay becasue she DID NOT qualify the list of reasons some one can stay - and being a pathological lair did not help her case either

as far as i am aware you do have to pass qualification to be even considered , turning up with a sad story does not work ( anymore )

many many reasons would prevent your application from being accepted , i would imagine they have a HUGE list of no no's

i stand open to correction to this

The system is that usually at port of entry the person presents to immigration as an asylum seeker. A form is completed and photo taken I also think now finger prints ( to check EU wide if another application has been made) then the person is housed in a hostel and referred to Refugee legal aid. The applicant will complete a application form and be called for interview by ORAC. A decision will ten be made if unsuccessful then an appeal is prepared by the applicants lawyer and an oral hearing takes place. If again unsuccessful the applicant will get a section 3 intention to deport letter the applicant can at this time apply for humanatarian leave to remain and subsidiary protection. Unlike the rest of Europe we don't have all the applications heard together. The main difference between asylum and subsidiary protection is that Asylum is best described as a personal fear while the other can be a general fear. Example say you are from Syira you may not have any issue with the government so do not qualify for Asylum but on the other hand you do have a general fear of death if you had to return so may qualify for SP.

The biggest problem with the Irish system is that it takes years to make a decision to deport.

dj jarvis

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.orac.ie/Pages/TheProcess.htm#Criteria

ok , so does that mean i was correct ? because reading what you posted looks like a list of qualifications for asylum to me

there HAS to be a list of reasons that prevents asylum, becasue there is one the qualifys your application

again i stand open to correction ........... but really not logical to have one for yes but none for no

ResearchWill

flanders1979 wrote: »

Research Will, I suggest you start look at figures from 1998 to 2008. The asylum process used to take a few years on average. A very small percentage of people stayed in the asylum system. Most left it on the basis of an Irish Born Child or other reasons. Many are unaccounted for. Of those who stayed in the system a small percentage were granted, take the initial entry figures into consideration when deciding the percentage granted full refugee status.

Us in 2005 a number left the system under the IBEC05 scheme if I remember correctly the figure was 10000. But the only figures we can look at is final numbers decided. If you want to claim 2% that's fine just provide some links to that, I'm not saying your wrong I'm just saying the only figures I am aware of are total positive decisions. If the figure is 10% final decisions then to come up with your figure of 2% then there needs to be a huge number not completing the process many times greater than those that actually do. Please post links to back it up.

Just one link to back up my 10% claim http://www.nccri.ie/cdsu-refugees.html

Nodin

dj jarvis wrote: »

ok , so does that mean i was correct ? because reading what you posted looks like a list of qualifications for asylum to me

there HAS to be a list of reasons that prevents asylum, becasue there is one the qualifys your application

again i stand open to correction ........... but really not logical to have one for yes but none for no

...it's a legal interpretation of the individuals case as it compares to the law as stated, rather than a bullet list, afaik. You obviously can't claim if there isn't a "well founded fear...". This would normally rule out somebody fleeing from the US because he fears being sodomised by zombie canadians, from France because he says they're going to kill protestants en masse when they gave that hobby up a few years back and so on.

ResearchWill

dj jarvis wrote: »

ok , so does that mean i was correct ? because reading what you posted looks like a list of qualifications for asylum to me

there HAS to be a list of reasons that prevents asylum, becasue there is one the qualifys your application

again i stand open to correction ........... but really not logical to have one for yes but none for no

Any who claim do so telling a story that on the face of it would qualify them as a Refugee. Many decisions from ORAC and the RAT start by saying this is the claim if this claim was true then the person would qualify. But then the decision makers goes through the claim how the person gave evidence etc to decide if the person is telling the truth or not. What proof do they have that they come from a certain area or happened to have certain political beliefs.

Also a person can be refused Asylum because they took part in or had an involvement in crimes against humanity.

flanders1979

2%. I'm being generous. That not saying the percentage would have been higher if the applicants finished out their claims