Illegal immigration

oscarBravo

AlekSmart wrote: »

...the Irish State's long running lackadaisical attitude to the preservation of it's own integrity...

Can you define "integrity" for me in this context?

AlekSmart

oscarBravo wrote: »

Can you define "integrity" for me in this context?

For me...having the self-confidence to implement it's own laws without feeling that it needed to apologize for their stringency ?

We had,and continue to have,functional immigration and asylum systems which were totally appropriate for our own State's resources.

In order to preserve and protect those systems,we simply had to draw lines in the sand in relation to regulating what became a flood of humanity.

However,instead of reasoned debate and recognition of a problem,our Immigration and Asylum issues descended into, what passes here,as class warfare,with the usual suspects lining up to hurl allegations of Racism across the backgarden walls of Ireland.

Ah well,those were the days,eh...it's all a bit different now ? (Said he,full of doubt)

Death and Taxes

AlekSmart wrote: »

For me...having the self-confidence to implement it's own laws without feeling that it needed to apologize for their stringency ?

We had,and continue to have,functional immigration and asylum systems which were totally appropriate for our own State's resources.
The Minister for justice disagrees which is why he is introducing new legislation in 2013.

In order to preserve and protect those systems,we simply had to draw lines in the sand in relation to regulating what became a flood of humanity.
Flood? what flood are you talking about?

However,instead of reasoned debate and recognition of a problem,our Immigration and Asylum issues descended into, what passes here,as class warfare,with the usual suspects lining up to hurl allegations of Racism across the backgarden walls of Ireland.
Who are these "Usual Suspects"? Expand please.

Ah well,those were the days,eh...it's all a bit different now ? (Said he,full of doubt)

Hopefully you will address the points I raised.

oscarBravo

AlekSmart wrote: »

For me...having the self-confidence to implement it's own laws without feeling that it needed to apologize for their stringency ?

That's a pretty strange definition of the integrity of a state, particularly in the context of needing to defend that integrity.

AlekSmart

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Hopefully you will address the points I raised.

Ministers often disagree with things,even with their own advisors by times and they can and do get it wrong....

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/1m-legal-bill-after-pamela-and-girls-finally-deported-2825871.html

Ms Izevbekhai enjoyed widespread public support -- including that of Justice Minister, Alan Shatter -- up to two years ago when garda investigators travelled to Nigeria and discovered she was using forged documents in her court case.

Alan Shatter is no more or less than another incumbent who seeks to somehow alter his Departments focus to suit his own reasonably well known Liberal predilictions...I wish him well in his endeavours.

There's some interesting observations on this site...

http://www.migrationinformation.org/Profiles/display.cfm?ID=740

I tend to side with Lord Palmerston on the subject of statistics,but if it helps,I would personally categorize these as a "flood".

Ireland experienced dramatic increases in immigration flows (which include returning Irish citizens) from the mid-1990s but most markedly after the 2004 EU enlargement. Flows peaked in 2006-2007 at well over 100,000 immigrants per year before dropping off in 2008

An indication of the "make it up as we go along" nature of our Administrators can be gleaned from this...

The key decision: Ireland, along with the United Kingdom and Sweden, agreed to allow citizens from the 10 countries that joined the European Union in May 2004 to work in the country immediately. This contributed to an acceleration in EU immigration flows, a large proportion of which came from Poland. Many nationals from new EU Member States have filled lower-skilled jobs than appropriate for their level of education.

More recently, Ireland instituted stricter policies that favor highly skilled immigrants from outside the European Union.

All evidence of a "policy" I suppose,but as to it's nature I'll leave it up to yourself to divine.

As for "suspects",well there were so may that it became a virtual beauty pageant of high-minded high-ground dwellers all queuing up to decry our Leglislation,usually via the National Broadcaster.
A cast of thousands methinks,but some names continue to reasonate....
The aforementioned Alan Shatter along with such luminaries as,Phillip Boucher Hayes....Roddy Doyle...Cllr Veronica Cawley,Sen David Norris....and this was relating to one high-profile case alone.

Other than that It's most likely business as usual I reckon ?

ResearchWill

"Quote:
Ireland experienced dramatic increases in immigration flows (which include returning Irish citizens) from the mid-1990s but most markedly after the 2004 EU enlargement. Flows peaked in 2006-2007 at well over 100,000 immigrants per year before dropping off in 2008

An indication of the "make it up as we go along" nature of our Administrators can be gleaned from this..."

Yes we did have large inward migration during most of the decade starting 2000 peaking 2006 to 2007, but the vast majority of the number are made up of UK and EU persons, so just to be clear are you saying that those people should not be allowed to migrate to ireland.

A simple look at the figures shows that Ireland has approx 800k non Irish living here of that figure about 255k are UK about 300k are EU the remains from rest of world headline figures Africa 55k Asia 80k the Americas 50k other EU 25k then the rest of the world.

So to be clear you are saying there was a flood of people entering Ireland the vast majority of whom are UK EU and The Americas, and to be clear you have an issue with that.

AlekSmart

ResearchWill wrote: »

"Quote:
Ireland experienced dramatic increases in immigration flows (which include returning Irish citizens) from the mid-1990s but most markedly after the 2004 EU enlargement. Flows peaked in 2006-2007 at well over 100,000 immigrants per year before dropping off in 2008

An indication of the "make it up as we go along" nature of our Administrators can be gleaned from this..."

Yes we did have large inward migration during most of the decade starting 2000 peaking 2006 to 2007, but the vast majority of the number are made up of UK and EU persons, so just to be clear are you saying that those people should not be allowed to migrate to ireland.

A simple look at the figures shows that Ireland has approx 800k non Irish living here of that figure about 255k are UK about 300k are EU the remains from rest of world headline figures Africa 55k Asia 80k the Americas 50k other EU 25k then the rest of the world.

So to be clear you are saying there was a flood of people entering Ireland the vast majority of whom are UK EU and The Americas, and to be clear you have an issue with that.

Nope...Since Paddy Hillery signed us into Europe I've never had as much as a twitter of issue over "My Fellow Europeans" ...How's that for clarity ?

This influx,massive as it was,came about through our negotiated accession and was,in that sense,managed.

The thread topic,refers to illegal immigration,which I contend managed to piggy-back on the basis of our new found EU openess,until we found it difficult to differentiate the two.

The tendency of threads with titles such as this,is to descend into polar opposites..however I straddle the equator on it,only drawing a line at blatantly obvious scams such as the Izevbekhai lark...which only assumed such import thanks to a misguided,aggressive and destructive campaign by folks,like Minister Shatter and his fellow "usuals",who should have known far better.

ResearchWill

AlekSmart wrote: »

Nope...Since Paddy Hillery signed us into Europe I've never had as much as a twitter of issue over "My Fellow Europeans" ...How's that for clarity ?

This influx,massive as it was,came about through our negotiated accession and was,in that sense,managed.

The thread topic,refers to illegal immigration,which I contend managed to piggy-back on the basis of our new found EU openess,until we found it difficult to differentiate the two.

The tendency of threads with titles such as this,is to descend into polar opposites..however I straddle the equator on it,only drawing a line at blatantly obvious scams such as the Izevbekhai lark...which only assumed such import thanks to a misguided,aggressive and destructive campaign by folks,like Minister Shatter and his fellow "usuals",who should have known far better.

So a women lies, tells tall tails, lots of people believe her, the Irish Authorities did not, they investigated the story, found it to be false and deported the family. So a number of people with serious egg on their faces and the system worked as it was set up to.

In relation to the flood of people we now agree it was all those not with a automatic right to enter so some 250000 over about 10 years. Of which the vast majority are here legally, students (no matter what any person thinks if the system they are legal) and high skilled workers, yes between 1998 and 2008 low skilled workers had a easy time to enter but now that door is closed. We also know that the largest single route of people with out permission to enter is the Asylum process, well that hit a high of 12000 or so a year, and yes even the most liberal person accepts that the vast majority of those are economic migrants not refugees. Now the figure seeking Asylum in 2012 was 950, in fact I think last September had 2 people claim Asylum, so that flood is a now just a leaking tap.

At best estimates numbers of illegals in country are 50000, or about 1% of the population not really a flood.

AlekSmart

ResearchWill wrote: »

So a women lies, tells tall tails, lots of people believe her, the Irish Authorities did not, they investigated the story, found it to be false and deported the family. So a number of people with serious egg on their faces and the system worked as it was set up to.

In relation to the flood of people we now agree it was all those not with a automatic right to enter so some 250000 over about 10 years. Of which the vast majority are here legally, students (no matter what any person thinks if the system they are legal) and high skilled workers, yes between 1998 and 2008 low skilled workers had a easy time to enter but now that door is closed. We also know that the largest single route of people with out permission to enter is the Asylum process, well that hit a high of 12000 or so a year, and yes even the most liberal person accepts that the vast majority of those are economic migrants not refugees. Now the figure seeking Asylum in 2012 was 950, in fact I think last September had 2 people claim Asylum, so that flood is a now just a leaking tap.

At best estimates numbers of illegals in country are 50000, or about 1% of the population not really a flood.

All true,but the issue for me was the vehemence and vigour which a significant sector of Irelands opinion formers and influential personages displayed towards the same Irish Authorities you speak of.

Members of the GNIB,ordinary men and women performing a thankless task as part of their duty were subject to accusations of Nazism and worse simply because they sought to uphold the laws of the State.

Those who doubted the story of Pamela Izevbekhai,and other less well known "applicants" of the era,were accused of all manner of unspeakable attitudes in addition to the de rigeur one of "Racism".

So,I do hope you will forgive my lack of a loud Hurrah at that 50,000 "trickle"

ResearchWill

AlekSmart wrote: »

All true,but the issue for me was the vehemence and vigour which a significant sector of Irelands opinion formers and influential personages displayed towards the same Irish Authorities you speak of.

Members of the GNIB,ordinary men and women performing a thankless task as part of their duty were subject to accusations of Nazism and worse simply because they sought to uphold the laws of the State.

Those who doubted the story of Pamela Izevbekhai,and other less well known "applicants" of the era,were accused of all manner of unspeakable attitudes in addition to the de rigeur one of "Racism".

So,I do hope you will forgive my lack of a loud Hurrah at that 50,000 "trickle"

The same vehemence and vigour, that another section of society in Ireland attack immigration. Ordinary people carrying on their business legally in ireland when certain assume they must be illegal because they are not originally from here.

AlekSmart

ResearchWill wrote: »

The same vehemence and vigour, that another section of society in Ireland attack immigration. Ordinary people carrying on their business legally in ireland when certain assume they must be illegal because they are not originally from here.

If this vehemence is directed towards illegal immigration,then please add my quota also...however as I think I've made clear,immigration,emigration in fact migration itself is a positive human factor since the dawn of humanity.

Quite what the reference to carrying on of business refers to is,i'm afraid,beyond my ken at the moment....sorry

ResearchWill

AlekSmart wrote: »

If this vehemence is directed towards illegal immigration,then please add my quota also...however as I think I've made clear,immigration,emigration in fact migration itself is a positive human factor since the dawn of humanity.

Quite what the reference to carrying on of business refers to is,i'm afraid,beyond my ken at the moment....sorry

My statement was I thought clear, you pointed out that a number of people attack any non supportive comment as being akin to racism etc., I then pointed out that there is a similar vein, when people attack any non Irish living here and seem to think that all non Irish working and living here are illegal. The OP if I remember correctly mentioned both Turkey and The Philippines which from my own experience are for various reasons countries that do not have a large number of illegals.

It was also I thought clear that the vehemence was that which is directed at non Irish without any knowledge as to the persons status.

The mention of business was in relation to legal non Irish working and carrying on business.

Nodin

AlekSmart wrote: »

.............

The tendency of threads with titles such as this,is to descend into polar opposites..however I straddle the equator on it,only drawing a line at blatantly obvious scams such as the Izevbekhai lark...which only assumed such import thanks to a misguided,aggressive and destructive campaign by folks,like Minister Shatter and his fellow "usuals",who should have known far better.

The fourth reference you've made in this thread to a case now over, done and finished with. To be blunt, you've well and truly worn out that record at this stage.

Noel Kinsella

WileyCoyote wrote: »

A person can be illegal, an act is illegal !
How about we use the term the Irish Government use when talking about our immigrants in the USA who have no permission to be there and be working there?
The term used is Undocumented residents/ workers.

Quote "How about we use the term the Irish Government use when talking about our immigrants in the USA who have no permission to be there and be working there?"

Unquote:
What is your problem with Ireland and the Irish ? You are the most anti Ireland person I have ever seen on boards every chance you get you attack the Irish you have a real issue. You are RACIST against the Irish "FACT" all anybody has to do is go through your posts and they can see that you are quite a nasty unpleasant unhappy person IMO.

The Corinthian

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

What is your problem with Ireland and the Irish ? You are the most anti Ireland person I have ever seen on boards every chance you get you attack the Irish you have a real issue. You are RACIST against the Irish "FACT" all anybody has to do is go through your posts and they can see that you are quite a nasty unpleasant unhappy person IMO.

At least from what you've quoted, I certainly would not agree. That the Irish will often have a rather hypocritical attitude towards immigration is not exactly unheard on - on one side arguing for the rights of 'undocumented' Irish immigrants in the US, while simultaneously seeking more hawkish policies on 'illegal' immigrants in Ireland.

Unless you have better evidence of 'racism', hiding behind such an accusation is a bit churlish, TBH.

Noel Kinsella

The Corinthian wrote: »

At least from what you've quoted, I certainly would not agree. That the Irish will often have a rather hypocritical attitude towards immigration is not exactly unheard on - on one side arguing for the rights of 'undocumented' Irish immigrants in the US, while simultaneously seeking more hawkish policies on 'illegal' immigrants in Ireland.

Unless you have better evidence of 'racism', hiding behind such an accusation is a bit churlish, TBH.

If you do like I said and read through all his posts ? you will see he attacks Ireland and the Irish every chance he gets while happily defending refugees whether they are legal or illegal.

The Corinthian

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

If you do like I said and read through all his posts ? you will see he attacks Ireland and the Irish every chance he gets while happily defending refugees whether they are legal or illegal.

No, you can quote what is so 'anti-Irish', because what you've quoted in your last post certainly does not prove your point - and it is your responsibility to do that, not anyone else's.

He may be overly 'bleeding heart' twoards immigrants in Ireland, or (understandably) disdainful of the double standard that we impose on immigration, but other than that I can't see any 'racism', just someone hiding behind the accusation of racism because they dislike criticism.

Noel Kinsella

The Corinthian wrote: »

No, you can quote what is so 'anti-Irish', because what you've quoted in your last post certainly does not prove your point - and it is your responsibility to do that, not anyone else's.

He may be overly 'bleeding heart' twoards immigrants in Ireland, or (understandably) disdainful of the double standard that we impose on immigration, but other than that I can't see any 'racism', just someone hiding behind the accusation of racism because they dislike criticism.

If your not prepared to read through his posts then you really are not that interested in the issue. There are NO double standards when it comes to immigration with the Irish IMO. Any time the Irish went away to work we went away to do just that "WORK" we are famous for "WORKING" I have no problem with immigration I went away to "WORK" myself my problem is with the minority that came here to bleed the state and won and then you have people defending them.

The Corinthian

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

If your not prepared to read through his posts then you really are not that interested in the issue.

No, I'm not prepared to do your job for you. You made the accusation; back it up rather than making some vague demand that we should go off and back it up for you.

There are NO double standards when it comes to immigration with the Irish IMO. Any time the Irish went away to work we went away to do just that "WORK" we are famous for "WORKING" I have no problem with immigration I went away to "WORK" myself my problem is with the minority that came here to bleed the state and won and then you have people defending them.

So you have no problem with illegal immigrants who are working and earning a living in Ireland?

ResearchWill

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

If your not prepared to read through his posts then you really are not that interested in the issue. There are NO double standards when it comes to immigration with the Irish IMO. Any time the Irish went away to work we went away to do just that "WORK" we are famous for "WORKING" I have no problem with immigration I went away to "WORK" myself my problem is with the minority that came here to bleed the state and won and then you have people defending them.

But that is the problem with your argument, if a person is in ireland illegally they can not bleed the state they have no right to anything if illegal. If a person is seeking Asylum (during that process they are here legally) they get €19 a week plus bed and board ( while that did cost the State some money, the State did not allow such people to work).

If a person is here claiming social welfare then they are legal and have a right to claim it. Just like say a Irish guy or English guy in the USA if legal they can claim social insurance per the same rules as an American if illegal then if not working then no money.

Noel Kinsella

The Corinthian wrote: »

No, I'm not prepared to do your job for you. You made the accusation; back it up rather than making some vague demand that we should go off and back it up for you.

So you have no problem with illegal immigrants who are working and earning a living in Ireland?

Quote
"So you have no problem with illegal immigrants who are working and earning a living in Ireland?"
Unquote
Are there any illegal immigrants working in Ireland ? Do you have any stats ?

ResearchWill

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Quote
"So you have no problem with illegal immigrants who are working and earning a living in Ireland?"
Unquote
Are there any illegal immigrants working in Ireland ? Do you have any stats ?

Well if there are none working in Ireland then why are we discussing it. As I said if illegal has to be either rich or working simple, you can not get off a plane from the good old USA walk into social welfare office and say give me money.

Noel Kinsella

ResearchWill wrote: »

But that is the problem with your argument, if a person is in ireland illegally they can not bleed the state they have no right to anything if illegal. If a person is seeking Asylum (during that process they are here legally) they get €19 a week plus bed and board ( while that did cost the State some money, the State did not allow such people to work).

If a person is here claiming social welfare then they are legal and have a right to claim it. Just like say a Irish guy or English guy in the USA if legal they can claim social insurance per the same rules as an American if illegal then if not working then no money.

Ok not illegal but FAKE asylum seekers how many of them are here ? Say like pamela izevbekhai and people like that that have cost the state (ie: US) MILLIONS why are so many still defending these people ?

Noel Kinsella

ResearchWill wrote: »

Well if there are none working in Ireland then why are we discussing it. As I said if illegal has to be either rich or working simple, you can not get off a plane from the good old USA walk into social welfare office and say give me money.

Yes you can if you seeking asylum. Or if you are 8 months pregnant and not (fit) to travel back so your child is born in Ireland. How many of these children were born here before the law changed ? How many will come here when they are adults to live and draw the dole ?

The Corinthian

ResearchWill wrote: »

If a person is seeking Asylum (during that process they are here legally) they get €19 a week plus bed and board ( while that did cost the State some money, the State did not allow such people to work).

In fairness, the cost to the state of that is not simply €19 p.w., but given that it includes B&B - not to mention administration - significantly more. Given that the vast majority of asylum cases are in reality economic migrants (I presume this is accepted) abusing the asylum system, I personally would have little sympathy for that majority and would agree that streamlining and/or otherwise improving the system to weed this out at an earlier stage might be necessary (or at least was back when we got a lot of asylum cases).

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Are there any illegal immigrants working in Ireland ? Do you have any stats ?

I asked you the question on theoretical bases, to see if your objection is to such immigrants not earning a living, as you have just claimed.

So other than that, I presume you can't actually back up your accusation of racism, as has been asked of you.

Death and Taxes

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Yes you can if you seeking asylum. Or if you are 8 months pregnant and not (fit) to travel back so your child is born in Ireland. How many of these children were born here before the law changed ? How many will come here when they are adults to live and draw the dole ?

If they were born here before the Constitutional change then they are Irish Citizens same as any other Irish Citzen,and are entitled to go to school, college, work , marry , or in unfortunate cases draw the dole.

ResearchWill

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Ok not illegal but FAKE asylum seekers how many of them are here ? Say like pamela izevbekhai and people like that that have cost the state (ie: US) MILLIONS why are so many still defending these people ?

As I again point out a Asylum seeker fake or otherwise is given bed and board and €19 a week. While here they are going through the process they have permission to be here. I again point out the figures we used to have 12000 a year claiming asylum last year it was 950 and still dropping.

No body in their right mind defends a person who tries to pull the wool over the eyes of a nation. But I will defend those who came here went through that system and are declared Refugees. The others should have had their claims heard quickly and fairly and been deported at the end of the process. Like Izevbekhai who has been deported.

The Corinthian

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Yes you can if you seeking asylum. Or if you are 8 months pregnant and not (fit) to travel back so your child is born in Ireland. How many of these children were born here before the law changed ? How many will come here when they are adults to live and draw the dole ?

With all due respects, that's quite racist, as you presume that as adults these Irish citizens (not their fault we had a really dumb system of assigning citizenship) are doomed to be parasites.

Numerically, and ironically, I suspect that even if they do all end up sponging they will be far fewer that the home-grown parasites from some of the urban estates around the country.

Noel Kinsella

WileyCoyote wrote: »

If they were born here before the Constitutional change then they are Irish Citizens same as any other Irish Citzen,and are entitled to go to school, college, work , marry , or in unfortunate cases draw the dole.

EXACTLY even though it was a complete scam ! When they arrived here pregnant that was their intention. Ahhhh sure its grand its holy Ireland.

ResearchWill

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Yes you can if you seeking asylum. Or if you are 8 months pregnant and not (fit) to travel back so your child is born in Ireland. How many of these children were born here before the law changed ? How many will come here when they are adults to live and draw the dole ?

If they are an Irish Citizen then they have that right we actually know the number, if I remember there was about 10,000 people granted leave to remain under that scheme. So again as a number of people in the country it's small, a lot of the parents are how getting citizenship, which means they are working.

BTW not many will come here as adults, as they are living here already. Again this area of immigration is no longer available.

Noel Kinsella

The Corinthian wrote: »

With all due respects, that's quite racist, as you presume that as adults these Irish citizens (not their fault we had a really dumb system of assigning citizenship) are doomed to be parasites.

Numerically, and ironically, I suspect that even if they do all end up sponging they will be far fewer that the home-grown parasites from some of the urban estates around the country.

I agree we have enough parasites as it is. It is quite racist of you to single out the people from "urban estates" do you have a problem with "urban" people ? Where are you from yourself ?

ResearchWill

The Corinthian wrote: »

In fairness, the cost to the state of that is not simply €19 p.w., but given that it includes B&B - not to mention administration - significantly more. Given that the vast majority of asylum cases are in reality economic migrants (I presume this is accepted) abusing the asylum system, I personally would have little sympathy for that majority and would agree that streamlining and/or otherwise improving the system to weed this out at an earlier stage might be necessary (or at least was back when we got a lot of asylum cases).

I asked you the question on theoretical bases, to see if your objection is to such immigrants not earning a living, as you have just claimed.

So other than that, I presume you can't actually back up your accusation of racism, as has been asked of you.

Maybe I did not make my self clear, I accept it cost the state some money, yes a good amount of money. I have said over and over again that a large % of Asylum seekers are economic migrants. I have also advocated for a system that deal with most applications for Asylum, Sub Protection and leave to remain in no more than 12 months. There are people still in the system after a decade.

But in any vent the problem is fast disappearing.

ResearchWill

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

EXACTLY even though it was a complete scam ! When they arrived here pregnant that was their intention. Ahhhh sure its grand its holy Ireland.

If holy Ireland thought it was grand it would not have changed the constitution. It would have left the baby door open. In fact from identification of the issue to constitutional change was very quick. So Holy Ireland said BA we don't like this idea, your only Irish if you show a connection to the State.

Noel Kinsella

ResearchWill wrote: »

Maybe I did not make my self clear, I accept it cost the state some money, yes a good amount of money. I have said over and over again that a large % of Asylum seekers are economic migrants. I have also advocated for a system that deal with most applications for Asylum, Sub Protection and leave to remain in no more than 12 months. There are people still in the system after a decade.

But in any vent the problem is fast disappearing.

Yes there are some still in the system after a decade and THATS the problem. I accept there are real asylum seekers here and they have my full support and sympathy but my feeling is there are much more fake that real.

The Corinthian

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

It is quite racist of you to single out the people from "urban estates"

Racist? Are they a different race now?

do you have a problem with "urban" people ?

I have a problem with people who are part of a sub-culture whereby living on benefits and claims is a way of life, from generation to generation. That you'll tend to find them in certain urban estates is simply a demographic correlation.

Where are you from yourself ?

Is where I'm from relevant to what I've argued? Why do you try to attack posters rather than their arguments so often?

Speaking of which, you've failed to either back up your accusation of racism against another poster, or to respond to whether it is solely upon the question of productivity that your objections rest.

Last chance to respond? Otherwise, I'll have to come to my own conclusions.

ResearchWill wrote: »

Maybe I did not make my self clear, I accept it cost the state some money, yes a good amount of money. I have said over and over again that a large % of Asylum seekers are economic migrants. I have also advocated for a system that deal with most applications for Asylum, Sub Protection and leave to remain in no more than 12 months. There are people still in the system after a decade.

Fair enough.

But in any vent the problem is fast disappearing.

Indeed. I've heard many a barrister lament the drying up of that cash cow.

Noel Kinsella

The Corinthian wrote: »

Racist? Are they a different race now?

I have a problem with people who are part of a sub-culture whereby living on benefits and claims is a way of life, from generation to generation. That you'll tend to find them in certain urban estates is simply a demographic correlation.

Is where I'm from relevant to what I've argued? Why do you try to attack posters rather than their arguments so often?

Speaking of which, you've failed to either back up your accusation of racism against another poster, or to respond to whether it is solely upon the question of productivity that your objections rest.

Last chance to respond? Otherwise, I'll have to come to my own conclusions.

Fair enough.

Indeed. I've heard many a barrister lament the drying up of that cash cow.

Quote "Is where I'm from relevant to what I've argued? Why do you try to attack posters rather than their arguments so often?"
Unquote
Define attack ?

The Corinthian

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Define attack ?

A number of points have been made by other posters, and on a number of occasions now you have ignored the point and instead accused posters of 'racism' or turned the discussion on the posters personally, as opposed to anything they said.

That's called an ad hominem, which is where one turns attention to and attacks the character of the speaker, rather than the substance of of what they've said.

I take it you're ignoring the aforementioned points I highlighted in my previous post?

Scofflaw

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Quote "Is where I'm from relevant to what I've argued? Why do you try to attack posters rather than their arguments so often?"
Unquote
Define attack ?

Telling people they're racists rather than responding to their points. It earns infractions, and eventually a ban from the forum. It's also ridiculous when applied as you've applied it in at least one of your posts.

moderately,
Scofflaw

djpbarry

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Any time the Irish went away to work we went away to do just that "WORK"...

So there are no unemployed Irish people in the UK, for example?

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

EXACTLY even though it was a complete scam ! When they arrived here pregnant that was their intention.

Plenty of Irish people travel to the US with exactly the same intention.

AlekSmart

Nodin wrote: »

The fourth reference you've made in this thread to a case now over, done and finished with. To be blunt, you've well and truly worn out that record at this stage.

"Over,Done and Finished With"....

Yes,I suppose it is somewhat easier to tag the Izevbekhai case as just a blip on the screen,a rogue amongst the thousands of (all) genuine asylum seekers whom we needed to embrace warmly and without question ?

Pamela Izevbekhai herself is irrelevant,however her case and the systemic weaknesses it uncovered in our Asylum system remains out there and worthy of continuing inspection and, where necessary,reassessment.

The manner in which a section of Irelands well placed and influential media and political elite intervened and actively sought to frustrate the Asylum process was,to me,indicative of a far deeper attitudional malaise.

Equally,we saw the highest courts in the land,seemingly unable to function when faced with this constant barrage of good-intent at whatever cost.

The Izevbekhai case raised a skip-full of issues,contradictions and asides,which,if I 'm reading correctly,some posters would prefer were left swept under the carpet of egalaterianism above all.

However,irrespective of the number and seriousness of issues raised by these cases,it appears that because Pamela Izevbekhai,Grace Egbanlahor,Kunle Elekanlo and many others happen to be of black African origin there can be no serious questions asked of Ireland s handling of their "cases".

The issue,for me,is not the individuals or their Countries of Origin,but rather the ability of our Asylum System's due process to function without overt interference and frustrational attacks perpetrated upon it and it's officials.

Whilst I fully appreciate a desire to see the Izevbekhai case as "Over,Done and Finished With",I feel the greater issue of Irelands confidence in,and respect for,it's own procedures remains open for debate.

This,for those who keep score,probably amounts to reference number 5 ?

AlekSmart

The Corinthian wrote: »

Indeed. I've heard many a barrister lament the drying up of that cash cow.

Good point,Corinthian,and one quite understandably overlooked in much of this "debate".

The Asylum issues aside,the Izevbekhai case and its multiple representative aspects,particularly towards the end,remain most interesting to an outside (non-legal) observer.

Noel Kinsella

Scofflaw wrote: »

Telling people they're racists rather than responding to their points. It earns infractions, and eventually a ban from the forum. It's also ridiculous when applied as you've applied it in at least one of your posts.

moderately,
Scofflaw

There is quite obviously a "click" around here, posters have called me racist and used bad language towards me "your talking bollocks" and the like and moderators are not interested. I understand that the "mods" are afraid of the "race" issue and are erring on the side of caution but really ? This is not an open forum here and when one poster has to explain every statement and others dont it amounts to bullying why dont you just put a mod note at beginning of this forum some like "if you are not (for) pro immigrant, refugee, black, and going to slag Ireland every chance you get DONT ENTER. Anybody who wants to look through the posts will see I was called racist (mods never pushed the accusers to explain) people got personal with me (nothing done) people used bad language to me (nothing done) and then a mod can not be bothered to read the posts in question but wants to force an issue ???????
ohhhhhhhh well
PS: I am going nowhere.

Noel Kinsella

djpbarry wrote: »

So there are no unemployed Irish people in the UK, for example?
Plenty of Irish people travel to the US with exactly the same intention.

Quote
"Plenty of Irish people travel to the US with exactly the same intention."
Unquote
Plenty ? How many ? Where are you getting your information from ? I dont know any Irish person that would travel to the usa for this reason. The Irish passport is probably the best passport in the world for travelling and the American probably one of the worst. Also green cards aren't that had to get so I find it had to believe to be honest.

Scofflaw

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

There is quite obviously a "click" around here, posters have called me racist and used bad language towards me "your talking bollocks" and the like and moderators are not interested. I understand that the "mods" are afraid of the "race" issue and are erring on the side of caution but really ? This is not an open forum here and when one poster has to explain every statement and others dont it amounts to bullying why dont you just put a mod note at beginning of this forum some like "if you are not (for) pro immigrant, refugee, black, and going to slag Ireland every chance you get DONT ENTER. Anybody who wants to look through the posts will see I was called racist (mods never pushed the accusers to explain) people got personal with me (nothing done) people used bad language to me (nothing done) and then a mod can not be bothered to read the posts in question but wants to force an issue ???????
ohhhhhhhh well
PS: I am going nowhere.

I'm afraid you are - you're going out of the forum for a day, which should give you time to read the Forum Charter.

moderately,
Scofflaw

The Corinthian

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

There is quite obviously a "click" around here, posters have called me racist and used bad language towards me "your talking bollocks" and the like and moderators are not interested.

To begin with the word is clique. Secondly, given you have accused two other posters of racism here, including me, complaining that you have been accused of same (which incidentally is incorrect, all I can see is that something you said was accused of being racist) is a bit rich.

This is not an open forum here and when one poster has to explain every statement and others dont

Others have, you are the only one who has given unsubstantiated opinion here.

Noel Kinsella wrote: »

Plenty ? How many ? Where are you getting your information from ? I dont know any Irish person that would travel to the usa for this reason.

I've known a few, holiday or J1 visa, when younger, then they stay on once the visa expires, although I really do think it an utterly daft thing to do.

Indeed, how does one become 'undocumented' exactly? Had you thought about that?

The Irish passport is probably the best passport in the world for travelling and the American probably one of the worst. Also green cards aren't that had to get so I find it had to believe to be honest.

Your first point makes absolutely no sense, in the context of someone seeking to remain as an illegal resident in the US. Your second ignores the fact that while it is much easier nowadays to get a green card, that doesn't mean you will - there are plenty who are simply barred from doing so (e.g. criminal record).

archer22

Somebody mentioned further back about a Filipino woman who wanted her status here legalised.It reminded me of a TV programme a few years back about foreign workers being brought here and horribly exploited by Irish employers.In one case a Filipino domestic servant found that the accommodation provided for her was a container in the yard another Filipino nanny was expected to work 80 hrs a week for 100 euros,2 Filipino men hired to work on fishing boats were given an old wrecked caravan on a freezing hill as accomodation and so on.These workers were tied to those employers under the terms of their entry visas and hence were virtual slave labourers..if or when they ran away (so to speak) they then became illegals as many could not afford the expensive plane ticket back to the Philippines or wherever else they were from..this probably accounts for some being in the current situation they find themselves..never intending to be illegals in the first place

IrishAm

ResearchWill wrote: »

As I again point out a Asylum seeker fake or otherwise is given bed and board and €19 a week. While here they are going through the process they have permission to be here. I again point out the figures we used to have 12000 a year claiming asylum last year it was 950 and still dropping.

No body in their right mind defends a person who tries to pull the wool over the eyes of a nation.

- bar immigration lawyers, such as yourself.:mad:

IrishAm

archer22 wrote: »

Somebody mentioned further back about a Filipino woman who wanted her status here legalised.It reminded me of a TV programme a few years back about foreign workers being brought here and horribly exploited by Irish employers.In one case a Filipino domestic servant found that the accommodation provided for her was a container in the yard another Filipino nanny was expected to work 80 hrs a week for 100 euros,2 Filipino men hired to work on fishing boats were given an old wrecked caravan on a freezing hill as accomodation and so on.These workers were tied to those employers under the terms of their entry visas and hence were virtual slave labourers..if or when they ran away (so to speak) they then became illegals as many could not afford the expensive plane ticket back to the Philippines or wherever else they were from..this probably accounts for some being in the current situation they find themselves..never intending to be illegals in the first place

That was moi

IrishAm wrote: »

THE MIGRANT RIGHTS Centre Ireland (MRCI) believes the St Patrick’s Day celebrations this weekend offer an opportunity to highlight the plight of an estimated 30,000 undocumented people in Ireland.


http://www.thejournal.ie/undocumente...85862-Mar2012/

Now here is the amusing part.

“I have three children to support and I work really hard to provide an education for them. Yet I am in limbo,” Elisia Fuentes, who is originally from the Philippines and came to Ireland in 2007, said.
Speaking for the Justice for the Undocumented Campaign she called on the government to provide a “fair and pragmatic solution” by introducing a regularisation scheme that would consider the “rights and responsibilities of undocumented people living here.”


A quick google of yer wans name and the GNIB would be able to find out where she lives and what company she works for.

Yet, she remains. Do they even give a f*ck?

Google throws up where she works, lives etc. She lives close by me and I realise that her kin need her wages back home.

For that reason only, id support a once off amnesty in exchange for an immigration system that benefits the Irish people. I think that is a fair compromise, no?

When the FF government changed the work permit legislation a lot of folk fell through the cracks. Give them a once off pass - but never again !

ResearchWill

IrishAm wrote: »

- bar immigration lawyers, such as yourself.:mad:

Are you accusing me of something. Why are you making this personal. If you want to attack what I say please do, if you want to attack my profession please do, if you want to attack me personally that's different, so take it back. But then again looking back ver your posts you have a habit of making it personal.

There is a huge difference representing someone and helping them to pull the wool over someone eyes. It may come as a shock to you and others but a lawyer who knowingly allows a client to lie to a court is in serious trouble, it could result in the end of a persons profession.

If you can't win the argument fairly don't resort to personal attacks, it is beneath both of us, we'll me anyway.

IrishAm

ResearchWill wrote: »

if you want to attack my profession please do, if you want to attack me personally that's different, so take it back.

I dislike immigration lawyers that play the run around and cost my nation millions - im being a gentlemen about it for the moment.

I am sure that you are a nice guy.