Asylum seekers waiting 10 years for decision

Femme_Fatale

delthedriver wrote: »

To express concerns about it taking ten years to process assylum seekers is indeed all very noble.

However our concerns may be better focussed on solving the problems of homeless people first. The assylum seekers at least have bed and board, so by comparison have little to complain about.:)

You're a big fan of using the in a passive-aggressive manner. It's pretty easy to see through.

Red Nissan

Galway is not seen in a good light these days for stories, the quoted advertiser is a privately owned free sheet.

Is it registered as a newspaper and does it employ NUJ journalists and pay the appropriate rate?

delthedriver

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

You're a big fan of using the in a passive-aggressive manner. It's pretty easy to see through.

Attacking a poster ?:)

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, however there was nothing passive nor aggressive in my post

Perhaps a little realism is needed:)

delthedriver

Stereomaniac wrote: »

That is a whole different kettle of fish entirely. There are homeless people who actually decide to be homeless sometimes, and are quite resistant to help, I believe. It is not just Dublin, I saw a homeless man in Galway yesterday. In other news, a Nigerian friend of mine has been granted citizenship after being here for many years. However, she was not an asyl-ee?

Congratulations to your friend on being granted citizenship. I hope life in Ireland treats her well. I am all in favour of a multicultural Ireland embracing people from all minority groups and sincerely hope they will be represented at the highest levels in our society:)

the flananator

Living in Australia for the last couple of years, and the attitude towards asyluim seekers here, or "Boat People" as they are known, is toe curling stuff. Both major parties here have been using the issue as a political football, each trying to out do the other in their promises to "Stop the Boats". The way these people are treated is inhumane and immoral. The attitude of the general Australian population is appalling, in my opinion.

I thought Irish people would have had a more nuanced understanding of the asylum seeker issue, and would generally be more compassionate as a people. But then I stumbled onto this thread, and am genuinely shocked at some of the opinion held within. We signed the Geneva convention, we have to take them in. 10 years is a disgrace.

delthedriver

the flananator wrote: »

Living in Australia for the last couple of years, and the attitude towards asyluim seekers here, or "Boat People" as they are known, is toe curling stuff. Both major parties here have been using the issue as a political football, each trying to out do the other in their promises to "Stop the Boats". The way these people are treated is inhumane and immoral. The attitude of the general Australian population is appalling, in my opinion.

I thought Irish people would have had a more nuanced understanding of the asylum seeker issue, and would generally be more compassionate as a people. But then I stumbled onto this thread, and am genuinely shocked at some of the opinion held within. We signed the Geneva convention, we have to take them in. 10 years is a disgrace.

Fair comment. But why does it take 10 years to process an asylum seeker in Ireland? Should Ireland open the doors to everyone? Have Australia taken in too many people already?:)

stoneill

Does anyone have the statistics?
How many people are waiting for asylum in Ireland? Is it hundreds, thousands, ten of thousands?
How many are approved, how many rejected?

Eight Ball

jugger0 wrote: »

Reject all of them and look after our own people first, plenty of people living rough in our own country.

Bingo. Look after our own.

the flananator

Eight Ball wrote: »

Bingo. Look after our own.

You're vile.

homerjay2005

the flananator wrote: »

We signed the Geneva convention, we have to take them in. 10 years is a disgrace.

do we? im sure every country is taking them in as you say, yet other countries are throwing them out quickly.

the flananator wrote: »

The way these people are treated is inhumane and immoral. The attitude of the general Australian population is appalling, in my opinion.
.

these people dont have to stay here, they can go elsewhere if they are not happy. nobody in ireland told them to come.

the flananator

homerjay2005 wrote: »

do we? im sure every country is taking them in as you say, yet other countries are throwing them out quickly.



these people dont have to stay here, they can go elsewhere if they are not happy. nobody in ireland told them to come.

I can see we've got a future Nobel Laureate on our hands here.

Pro Hoc Vice

stoneill wrote: »

Does anyone have the statistics?
How many people are waiting for asylum in Ireland? Is it hundreds, thousands, ten of thousands?
How many are approved, how many rejected?

Acceptance figures is about 10%, figures applying for Asylum reached a peak of about 12,000 in 2006 if I remember. Current new applications are 920 for last year about the same maybe less this year. I think there is only a few thousand in Direct Provision, as a lot of the centres are closed down.

Dyr

Still, ten years worth of appeals is a whole lotta wonga for our legal profession, always a silver lining.

Thomasmartin

We can't afford them..get them out and give us mosney back!!

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Eight Ball wrote: »

Bingo. Look after our own.

Presume then that you would be demanding that all of our immigrants be returned to us as well, in the intrests of fairness like.:P

Nodin

Bambi wrote: »

Still, ten years worth of appeals is a whole lotta wonga for our legal profession, always a silver lining.

...a lot of it is done pro bono. It came out how much Pamela I's lawyers got, which was SFA, for instance.

Nodin

Thomasmartin wrote: »

We can't afford them..get them out and give us mosney back!!

....jaysus....there's a deal if ever there was one.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Nodin wrote: »

...a lot of it is done pro bono. It came out how much Pamela I's lawyers got, which was SFA, for instance.

I doubt if the States bill was pro bono, and in her case(since you brought it up) it was a fraudulent claim by her that cost the taxpayer a lot of money.

Mike 1972

conorhal wrote: »

#

I realize tht 42 million people that all wanted into Europe. A rethink is needed, no?

A few posts back you said this 42 million was a worldwide figure.

Which is it ?

Nodin

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

I doubt if the States bill was pro bono, and in her case(since you brought it up) it was a fraudulent claim by her that cost the taxpayer a lot of money.

....well the usual line is that the defence lawyers present cases they know to be fraudulent in order to make money. However if you want to say the state lawyers are in it to make a few bob too, in a grand lawyer conspiracy, feel free.

Pro Hoc Vice

Mike 1972 wrote: »

A few posts back you said this 42 million was a worldwide figure.

Which is it ?

Its a world wide figure, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/19/world-refugee-numbers-1999-unhcr the country with the higest number of Refugees is Pakistan with 1.6 million.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Nodin wrote: »

....well the usual line is that the defence lawyers present cases they know to be fraudulent in order to make money. However if you want to say the state lawyers are in it to make a few bob too, in a grand lawyer conspiracy, feel free.

Sad reply, you were the one inferring that her case was pro bono, as though once her lawyers didnt charge then there was no cost involved. You were also the one who brought her case up, I would happily avoid it because though she was a fraud I wouldn't use a single fraud case as being representative of all asylum/refugee claims.

Nodin

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

Sad reply, you were the one inferring that her case was pro bono, as though once her lawyers didnt charge then there was no cost involved. You were also the one who brought her case up, I would happily avoid it because though she was a fraud I wouldn't use a single fraud case as being representative of all asylum/refugee claims.

Wha?

Potatoeman

I know someone that worked for the ORAC and you wouldnt believe the nonsense that they have to deal with. Even if they can point out lies in the persons story the judicial review can just ignore it.
Many of their colleagues were planning on retiring abroad because of some of the shady characters granted asylum.

That said there were other clear cases were people had been tortured and these people would stay anywhere reguardless of the standard of tje accomadation rather than go back to what they fled.

ash23

We need better border control. Anyone entering the country from outside the EU, without a visa needs to be detained and interviewed at length (and fairly) about their reason for being in the country. If they are a genuine asylum seeker then they should be allowed into the country.
If not, back on the first return flight they go.

If the numbers of asylum seekers needing support were reduced, the conditions should be improved.

Ireland are far too soft in my opinion. We're seen as an easy touch and it's time to toughen up.

Pro Hoc Vice

Potatoeman wrote: »

I know someone that worked for the ORAC and you wouldnt believe the nonsense that they have to deal with. Even if they can point out lies in the persons story the judicial review can just ignore it.
Many of their colleagues were planning on retiring abroad because of some of the shady characters granted asylum.

That said there were other clear cases were people had been tortured and these people would stay anywhere reguardless of the standard of tje accomadation rather than go back to what they fled.

The High Court is not an Appeal, it can only look at how the decision was made not the substance of the decision.

Nodin

ash23 wrote: »

We need better border control. Anyone entering the country from outside the EU, without a visa needs to be detained and interviewed at length (and fairly) about their reason for being in the country. If they are a genuine asylum seeker then they should be allowed into the country.
If not, back on the first return flight they go.

If the numbers of asylum seekers needing support were reduced, the conditions should be improved.

Ireland are far too soft in my opinion. We're seen as an easy touch and it's time to toughen up.

"IRELAND’S IMMIGRATION SERVICES are more likely to reject applications from asylum seekers than all but a handful of the authorities in other EU countries.
New figures published by the EU this morning shows that of the 1,625 asylum cases ruled on by Irish authorities last year, only 140 applications were granted some kind of positive protection – an approval rate of only 8.6 per cent."
http://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-asylum-seekers-eu-955725-Jun2013/

ash23

Nodin wrote: »

"IRELAND’S IMMIGRATION SERVICES are more likely to reject applications from asylum seekers than all but a handful of the authorities in other EU countries.
New figures published by the EU this morning shows that of the 1,625 asylum cases ruled on by Irish authorities last year, only 140 applications were granted some kind of positive protection – an approval rate of only 8.6 per cent."
http://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-asylum-seekers-eu-955725-Jun2013/

After ten years of putting them up though and allowing countless appeals and children being born with Irish citizenship.

Turnaround should be immediate. Decision made within a day or two. Not dragging out the process for years and years costing the government a fortune, tying up the courts and legal system and causing families to live in conditions as described. Having kids being reared here and then sent away.

The process needs to be much quicker and stricter.

Nodin

ash23 wrote: »

After ten years of putting them up though and allowing countless appeals and children being born with Irish citizenship. .

...that loophole was closed years ago.

ash23 wrote: »

Turnaround should be immediate. Decision made within a day or two. Not dragging out the process for years and years costing the government a fortune, tying up the courts and legal system and causing families to live in conditions as described. Having kids being reared here and then sent away.

The process needs to be much quicker and stricter.

....so goal post shift from 'we're too soft' to 'we're too slow'.

CruelCoin

Systemic Risk wrote: »

Should they just be happy we took them in at all and are providing for them?

This.

The alternative being imprisonment or death in their home countries...

Beggars can't be choosers.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

ash23 wrote: »

Turnaround should be immediate. Decision made within a day or two.

The process needs to be much quicker and stricter.

It would be impossible to make a decision that quickly in most cases, and probably illegal too as each application must be assesed and investigated.
That said once a decision is made there should be one single appeal and thats it.
there is no way that dragging it out ten years can be justified.

Potatoeman

infosys wrote: »

The High Court is not an Appeal, it can only look at how the decision was made not the substance of the decision.

Im no expert Im just repeating what my friend told me so I may have my terms wrong.

ash23

Nodin wrote: »

...that loophole was closed years ago.


....so goal post shift from 'we're too soft' to 'we're too slow'.

If the parents have spent 3 out of 4 years prior to the birth, the child can claim Irish citizenship. When appeal upon appeals are being allowed it's easy for people to delay and then their children have a "link" to Ireland and can get Irish citizenship. I'm not saying they're wrong to do it. I'd probably do the same. But it's not fair on these kids who have to live in these conditions. But nor is it fair to burden our state with the costs associated either.

We're too soft and too slow. Too soft as in we put up numerous people for numerous years, allowing indefinite appeals.

You were taking it in terms of granted asylum. I was discussing the process as per the OP. And the length of the process. No "goal posts" as you put it. The end result is not the problem nor is it the discussion.

If you were seeking asylum falsely, where would you go? The country that will detain you indefinitely while they look into your claim and put you on the first plane out if denied? Or the country which will give you food, a roof over your head and a weekly allowance for a decade?


It might not be all it cracks up to be when they've been living the reality for a couple of years but as an incentive, it sounds pretty good on paper and I think that's part of the problem.

galah

ash23 wrote: »

If the parents have spent 3 out of 4 years prior to the birth, the child can claim Irish citizenship. When appeal upon appeals are being allowed it's easy for people to delay and then their children have a "link" to Ireland and can get Irish citizenship. I'm not saying they're wrong to do it. I'd probably do the same. But it's not fair on these kids who have to live in these conditions. But nor is it fair to burden our state with the costs associated either.

only up to 2005: (citizensinformation.ie)

Born in the island of Ireland on or before 31 December 2004

Entitled to Irish citizenship or you are an Irish citizen

Born on the island of Ireland on or after 1 January 2005

Entitled to Irish citizenship if your parents are Irish. Entitled to Irish citizenship, if your parents are foreign nationals legally resident in the island of Ireland for 3 out of 4 years immediately prior to your birth.

What I don't get is why we can't let asylum seekers work to improve their lifestyle? It could be fairly easily controlled (special permits for example), government would get extra taxes instead of just spending money, and it would help potential asylum candidates to integrate much easier into Irish society as well.

ash23

Well according to citizens info

Other foreign national parents of children born in the island of Ireland on or after 1 January 2005 must prove that they have a genuine link to Ireland. This will be evidenced by their having 3 out of the previous 4 years reckonable residence in the island of Ireland immediately before the birth of the child. On proof of a genuine link to Ireland their child will be entitled to Irish citizenship and can apply for a certificate of nationality - see 'How to apply' below.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

Citizenship is not automatic and must be applied for but if your parents have been living in Ireland for 3/4 years before the child is born or can prove a "link" to Ireland the child is eligible to apply for citizenship. I'd imagine being schooled in Ireland and living in Ireland for 10 years would be enough of a link if the parents hadn't been living in Ireland for 3 years prior to the birth.

Pro Hoc Vice

ash23 wrote: »

If the parents have spent 3 out of 4 years prior to the birth, the child can claim Irish citizenship. When appeal upon appeals are being allowed it's easy for people to delay and then their children have a "link" to Ireland and can get Irish citizenship. I'm not saying they're wrong to do it. I'd probably do the same. But it's not fair on these kids who have to live in these conditions. But nor is it fair to burden our state with the costs associated either.

We're too soft and too slow. Too soft as in we put up numerous people for numerous years, allowing indefinite appeals.

You were taking it in terms of granted asylum. I was discussing the process as per the OP. And the length of the process. No "goal posts" as you put it. The end result is not the problem nor is it the discussion.

If you were seeking asylum falsely, where would you go? The country that will detain you indefinitely while they look into your claim and put you on the first plane out if denied? Or the country which will give you food, a roof over your head and a weekly allowance for a decade?


It might not be all it cracks up to be when they've been living the reality for a couple of years but as an incentive, it sounds pretty good on paper and I think that's part of the problem.

The 3 out of 4 years, must be legal applying for asylum is not reckonable for citizenship of either the parent or their children. Students on stamp 2 have the same issue.

Grayson

infosys wrote: »

Its a world wide figure, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/19/world-refugee-numbers-1999-unhcr the country with the higest number of Refugees is Pakistan with 1.6 million.

That's going to change. was reading this morning about Syria. Millions and millions displaced internally and millions more outside. many outside don't register because they fear that the government will conviscate their homes if they are declared refugees.
Apparently it's the largest refugee crises since Rwanda.

Nodin

ash23 wrote: »

Well according to citizens info



http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

Citizenship is not automatic and must be applied for but if your parents have been living in Ireland for 3/4 years before the child is born or can prove a "link" to Ireland the child is eligible to apply for citizenship. I'd imagine being schooled in Ireland and living in Ireland for 10 years would be enough of a link if the parents hadn't been living in Ireland for 3 years prior to the birth.

It's not automatic and has to be applied for. You claimed it was automatic.

Pro Hoc Vice

Nodin wrote: »

It's not automatic and has to be applied for. You claimed it was automatic.

If a person satisfies the rules they are a citizen simple. They like every other Citizen must apply for a passport but they are a citizen.

Any child of a citizen born in ireland is a citizen. Any child of a citizen born abroad must register on the foregin births register and that person is a citizen on registration.

Any person born of a non citizen in ireland is a citizen if one of their parents is legally resident in ireland for 3 out of tje previous 4 years. Certain types of residents are excluded, students on stamp 2 and Asylum seekers to name two.

ash23

Nodin wrote: »

It's not automatic and has to be applied for. You claimed it was automatic.

No I didn't.

What I said was

After ten years of putting them up though and allowing countless appeals and children being born with Irish citizenship.

If that inferred automatic then my bad but that wasn't what I meant.

Nodin

ash23 wrote: »

No I didn't.

What I said was

If that inferred automatic then my bad but that wasn't what I meant.

"children being born with Irish citizenship" doesn't infer, it baldly states. We'll file it away beside your "Ireland is soft" notion.

ash23

Nodin wrote: »

"children being born with Irish citizenship" doesn't infer, it baldly states. We'll file it away beside your "Ireland is soft" notion.

So are you actually looking to discuss the topic or just twist what anyone says, make up your own version of it even if they clarify what they mean and then be a patronising git about it?


If it's the latter then you're doing a stand up job.

SpaceTime

It should take 6 months or 12 months tops.

If it's taking 10 years is either a completely incompetent system or there's just one person processing 10,000+ applications?

Anahita

I am familiar with situations where children are living in direct provision for 8+ years. There is a definite 'syndrome' or set of characteristics that develop when children are raised long term in this type of setting. We see it in school. I can't go into too much detail but if these long-term residents of direct provision centres do 'get their papers' the results of the lifetime institutionalisation of these children will be our problem to deal with long term. These needs will also cost money.

I understand that the application and appeal process will in some ways be conducted in tandem to expedite cases as much as possible. In my own experience also, when some asylum seekers get a denial of their leave to remain they abscond within the Republic. They simply change their identities, go underground and register their children in different schools, etc... they do not participate in the economy by paying taxes, have no access to social welfare and work in the black market. The children suffer the most, in my experience often don't get to say goodbye to their friends or have any continuity in their education.

Does this anger you? Shock you? Disgust you? Do you want these 'illegals' out of Ireland? How dare they live and work here illegally taking 'Irish' jobs and not contribute to the society in which they live!! Outrageous!


Well....read this: http://www.thejournal.ie/immigration-reform-us-gilmore-irish-illegals-874103-Apr2013/
Only they are not called 'illegals' in America, they're call 'undocumented.' Samesies, I think?

Nodin

ash23 wrote: »

So are you actually looking to discuss the topic or just twist what anyone says, make up your own version of it even if they clarify what they mean and then be a patronising git about it?


If it's the latter then you're doing a stand up job.

I didn't twist anything you said. Firstly you stated

Ireland are far too soft in my opinion. We're seen as an easy touch and it's time to toughen up.

This is factually incorrect, and I and others pointed that out.

Secondly you stated

After ten years of putting them up though and allowing countless appeals and children being born with Irish citizenship

This is factually incorrect, and I and others pointed this out. Had you just acknowledged the fact in either case and moved on, it wouldn't have been raised again.

Nodin

SpaceTime wrote: »

It should take 6 months or 12 months tops.

If it's taking 10 years is either a completely incompetent system or there's just one person processing 10,000+ applications?

...the former, from what I can gather. There are cases sub judice at the moment re what appear to be "mass" refusals in batches of applications, afaik.

RealistSpy

The economy is bad so let us blame the Asylum Seekers.
Let us all point the fingers and not take any responsibilities.
Let us detach Ireland from the rest of the world and only care about "WE".

I seriously wonder how the country would be if we deport all immigrants and other countries do like wise.
I imagined a world where Africa nor Eire was not invaded.
I wonder what the world would be like if it was the other way around.

What would you do to survive and have a better life?

Poem by RealistSpy {Is é an domhan mo thír agus Is é mo reiligiún a bheith go maith}, still learning Irish.

ash23

Nodin wrote: »

I didn't twist anything you said. Firstly you stated


This is factually incorrect, and I and others pointed that out.

Secondly you stated



This is factually incorrect, and I and others pointed this out. Had you just acknowledged the fact in either case and moved on, it wouldn't have been raised again.

To clarify (again) I think Ireland are too soft. In many ways. In regard to the op, the length of the processing is caused in part because of the unwillingness to just give a no and stick to it. Allowing endless appeals and allowing the process to drag on and on, while supporting asylum seekers is soft.
It's akin to saying no and then saying "well maybe". And doing it over and over. Not standing over a decision or following through is soft. I fail to see what is so hard to grasp about that point.

As for the children and citizenship remark, I apologised for the lack of clarity and again explained in more detail. There were things I didn't know, for example that while waiting for asylum it wasn't counted as being resident in relation to the 3 out of 4 years so im glad I was informed about that. It's a pity it was in such a patronising and arrogant way though.

Nodin

ash23 wrote: »

To clarify (again) I think Ireland are too soft. In many ways. .

No, not at all.

ash23 wrote: »

In regard to the op, the length of the processing is caused in part because of the unwillingness to just give a no and stick to it. Allowing endless appeals and allowing the process to drag on and on, while supporting asylum seekers is soft..

You evidently think life here as an asylum seeker is soft, which is part of the problem.

Femme_Fatale

delthedriver wrote: »

Attacking a poster ?:)

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, however there was nothing passive nor aggressive in my post

Perhaps a little realism is needed:)

'Course you were being passive-aggressive. And you've done it again in the above post. Every dig you make about people having an open mind regarding asylum-seekers, you follow with a . It's plain as day. Just try to consider some of them are coming from desperate circumstances and wouldn't be living in cramped conditions on €20 per week if that weren't so. Surely you have some compassion for your fellow human beings?