Advocates of limited immigration accused of being racist.

guyjohn

Nodin wrote: »

What about them?



What "immigration bill"?

For not the first time - You Cannot Arrive And Claim.

The Bill is not law but only in the draft stage at present. There is concern about the common travel area with the UK .
I did not say arrive and claim but if you have a UK passport its possible.

reply to an earlier post.
The loophole may have been closed years ago but family reunification still continues form this.
There are many other loopholes bogus asylum ,fake passports ,fake documents for family re unification ,sham marriages , illegal entry from the Uk or EU.
You can claim asylum then leave the system live with relatives or friends make an application for 'leave to remain' .This is difficult to get but it can take many years for a decision but it allows you to stay here.

The asylum process is easier than trying to come here legally. To sponsor a non EU to come here requires a mountain of documents.

The Swedish model claimed and praised by immigration advocates appears to be running aground .
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2014/April/Soviet-Sweden-Model-Nation-Sliding-to-Third-World/

guyjohn

Nodin wrote: »

So?



There is no open door. That loophole was closed years ago.

The loophole may have been closed years ago but family reunification still continues form this.
There are many other loopholes bogus asylum ,fake passports ,fake documents for family re unification ,sham marriages , illegal entry from the Uk or EU.
You can claim asylum then leave the system live with relatives or friends make an application for 'leave to remain' .This is difficult to get but it can take many years for a decision but it allows you to stay here.

The asylum process is easier than trying to come here legally. To sponsor a non EU to come here requires a mountain of documents.

The Swedish model claimed and praised by immigration advocates appears to be running aground .
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2014/April/Soviet-Sweden-Model-Nation-Sliding-to-Third-World/

guyjohn

Nodin wrote: »

So?



There is no open door. That loophole was closed years ago.

There are many other loophles .bogus asylum seekers, fake passports ,false documents for family re unification,sham marriages, illegal entry from the EU and UK.
You can claim asylum then leave the system to live with relatives or friends .Then make a claim for 'leave to remain ; difficult to get but the process takes years for a decision.

guyjohn

alastair wrote: »

You 'suspect' that do you? Well, that's a bit strange, because the PPS breakdown isn't based on country of application, but on nationality. I supposed there might be some UK nationals applying for PPS numbers who were not born in the UK, but they're certainly UK nationals when they applied for a PPS number (not Romanians, Spaniards, Brazilians, or whatever nationalities you're getting agitated about in a completely non-racist fashion).

You appear to be twisting my post . I did not suggest that the other nationalities mentioned were coming from the UK.

guyjohn

Nodin wrote: »

What about them?



What "immigration bill"?

For not the first time - You Cannot Arrive And Claim.

You do not need Habitual Residence if you come from the common travel area to claim. The rules are more relaxed details unfortunately of how such decisions are made are not available.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

You appear to be twisting my post . I did not suggest that the other nationalities mentioned were coming from the UK.

No? Just that non-UK nationals were 'many' of the UK applicant tally. Hardly see how I'm twisting your point at all - it's hard to establish which mystery nationalities you are most concerned about.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

You do not need Habitual Residence if you come from the common travel area to claim.

Nonsense.

Nodin

guyjohn wrote: »

There are many other loophles .bogus asylum seekers, fake passports ,false documents for family re unification,sham marriages, illegal entry from the EU and UK.
You can claim asylum then leave the system to live with relatives or friends .Then make a claim for 'leave to remain ; difficult to get but the process takes years for a decision.

So again you're conflating asylum with immigration. You also used to back your argument the numbers of people actually registering PPS numbers, now have switched back to illegal unregistered persons when challenged.

Asylum seekers cannot claim benefits.

Guyjohn wrote:

You do not need Habitual Residence if you come from the common travel area to
claim.

Why are you repeating this when its already been shown to you that it is not true?
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/unemployed_people/jobseekers_allowance.html

johnnyskeleton

guyjohn wrote: »

The welfare is better here. There is a proposal in the latest Immigration bill to address this .

What immigration bill? Are you talking about the one that was proposed by the last government and never passed, or is it. The uk you are talking about?

Also, how does an immigration bill reduce our welfare rates?

srsly78

guyjohn wrote: »

There are many other loophles .bogus asylum seekers, fake passports ,false documents for family re unification,sham marriages, illegal entry from the EU and UK.
You can claim asylum then leave the system to live with relatives or friends .Then make a claim for 'leave to remain ; difficult to get but the process takes years for a decision.

Your various gripes are out of date by about 10 years. Read this for starters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation

Also, complaining about fraudulent documents is silly. Do you want some law that makes it illegal to break the law? Should we spend billions erecting some kind of "iron curtain" around our borders to satisfy you?

guyjohn

srsly78 wrote: »

Your various gripes are out of date by about 10 years. Read this for starters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation

Also, complaining about fraudulent documents is silly. Do you want some law that makes it illegal to break the law? Should we spend billions erecting some kind of "iron curtain" around our borders to satisfy you?

' Do you want some law that makes it illegal to break the law? ' Your statement is confusing ???

You appear to have no problem with false documents to apply for asylum or residence here. I am not suggesting an Iron curtain just update checks in line with other countries.

The Dublin Regulation is not properly implemented multiple applications are still a problem because of lack of co operation with EU countries.
The UK only introduced co operation with Ireland 2 years ago. They discovered that 2 out of every 3 asylum seekers were from the UK, most came there on tourist visas and when they expired sought asylum here.


'

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

The UK only introduced co operation with Ireland 2 years ago. They discovered that 2 out of every 3 asylum seekers were from the UK, most came there on tourist visas and when they expired sought asylum here.

Tut tut, that's not true now is it? Just like your previous claims were't true either.

Two thirds of failed asylum applicants were shown to have come into Ireland via using UK visas - which suggests that the system might well be working.

guyjohn

alastair wrote: »

Tut tut, that's not true now is it? Just like your previous claims were't true either.

Two thirds of failed asylum applicants were shown to have come into Ireland via using UK visas - which suggests that the system might well be working.

Tut tut, I suggest you read the links below . This problem has only been properly addressed recently .How many have come here claimed asylum , got refugee status since the asylum was introduced !!

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/twothirds-of-failed-asylum-seekers-had-used-false-identities-26855916.html

http://www.coistine.ie/archive/news-/239-immigration-residence-and-protection-bill-to-fall-yet-again This bill is still waiting to updated is all was working well as you suggest then why the need to review.??
Think before you type.

srsly78

So you acknowledge the problem has been addressed... What are you complaining about so?

Nodin

guyjohn wrote: »

Tut tut, I suggest you read the links below ........

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/twothirds-of-failed-asylum-seekers-had-used-false-identities-26855916.html
.

That just repeats what he said.

guyjohn wrote: »

http://www.coistine.ie/archive/news-/239-immigration-residence-and-protection-bill-to-fall-yet-again This bill is still waiting to updated is all was working well as you suggest then why the need to review.??
Think before you type.

The length of time needed to process an application for starters.

Why are you conflating asylum with immigration?

guyjohn

srsly78 wrote: »

So you acknowledge the problem has been addressed... What are you complaining about so?

There is no evidence or feedback as to how this working for the UK .The problem still remains with those who come from mainland Europe . There is unfortunately no feedback for Rosslare port for example. They have only a random mobile unit to check trucks and cars for illegals and no check for fake passports.
I can see a situation where refugees will have more rights than Irish citizens for family reunification. The are plans to disregard income for sponsors if they are on welfare even for a tourist visa .

guyjohn

Nodin wrote: »

That just repeats what he said.


The length of time needed to process an application for starters.

Why are you conflating asylum with immigration?

He said my claim was false . I will en devour to make the distinction between asylum and immigration if you are not sure ask.

oscarBravo

guyjohn wrote: »

He said my claim was false . I will en devour to make the distinction between asylum and immigration if you are not sure ask.

You could start by not talking about asylum on this thread, which is about immigration.

guyjohn

The OP did refer to economic migrants . The blunt fact is that people are still entering the country from outside the EU for whatever reason.

guyjohn

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

What immigration bill? Are you talking about the one that was proposed by the last government and never passed, or is it. The uk you are talking about?

Also, how does an immigration bill reduce our welfare rates?

The Immigration Bill that has yet to be passed.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

Tut tut, I suggest you read the links below

Read them, cheers - they confirm the falsehood of your claim above. Once could be considered unfortunate, but a multiple of erroneous posts only points to a devious intent.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

He said my claim was false . I will en devour to make the distinction between asylum and immigration if you are not sure ask.

Your claim was, and remains false.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

The Immigration Bill that has yet to be passed.

You're talking about proposed legislation from a previous government? Best of luck with that.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

The OP did refer to economic migrants . The blunt fact is that people are still entering the country from outside the EU for whatever reason.

The Gathering?

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

There is no evidence or feedback as to how this working for the UK .The problem still remains with those who come from mainland Europe . There is unfortunately no feedback for Rosslare port for example. They have only a random mobile unit to check trucks and cars for illegals and no check for fake passports.
I can see a situation where refugees will have more rights than Irish citizens for family reunification. The are plans to disregard income for sponsors if they are on welfare even for a tourist visa .

More 'imaginings'?

Nodin

guyjohn wrote: »

The OP did refer to economic migrants . The blunt fact is that people are still entering the country from outside the EU for whatever reason.

...what are you on about? Theres controls on those entering from outside the EU.

djpbarry

guyjohn wrote: »

The blunt fact is that people are still entering the country from outside the EU for whatever reason.

You do realise it is possible for non-EU citizens to legally live and work in Ireland, yes?

guyjohn

djpbarry wrote: »

You do realise it is possible for non-EU citizens to legally live and work in Ireland, yes?

Of course.

guyjohn

Nodin wrote: »

...what are you on about? Theres controls on those entering from outside the EU.

The controls do not prevent the illegals and those finding loopholes in the law to come here . The reason there is a reformed Immigration Bill being drafted albeit slowly .
The big issue is these faults in the system continue for many years before being addressed.

guyjohn

alastair wrote: »

More 'imaginings'?

I suggest you read the draft immigration bill if you can . Your posts are just quick comments without any substance.

djpbarry

guyjohn wrote: »

Of course.

So what's the problem?

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

The controls do not prevent the illegals and those finding loopholes in the law to come here . The reason there is a reformed Immigration Bill being drafted albeit slowly .
The big issue is these faults in the system continue for many years before being addressed.

The proposed bill was dissolved with the ending of the last Dail. There is no new bill being drafted.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

I suggest you read the draft immigration bill if you can . Your posts are just quick comments without any substance.

There is no draft immigration bill. It was dissolved at the end of the last Dail.
The substance of my quick comments is the truth, not fabrications.

guyjohn

alastair wrote: »

There is no draft immigration bill. It was dissolved at the end of the last Dail.
The substance of my quick comments is the truth, not fabrications.

The Bill has been put back because of the economic problems . See the link unless you have evidence to the contrary . Do please post and use links to support them.

http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/Pages/Immigration%20in%20Ireland%20%E2%80%93%202013%20in%20Review

Nodin

guyjohn wrote: »

The controls do not prevent the illegals and those finding loopholes in the law to come here . ......................

There will always be illegals regardless of the law. The clue to why is in the name.

None of that has anything to do with limited immigration.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

The Bill has been put back because of the economic problems . See the link unless you have evidence to the contrary . Do please post and use links to support them.

http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/Pages/Immigration%20in%20Ireland%20%E2%80%93%202013%20in%20Review

That's a completely different proposed bill. You've been referencing the 2010 bill, which was killed off with the last Dail. No-one has read this new bill, so it's certainly not going to be enacted in 2014, and you've no idea of it's contents - just like everyone else.

guyjohn

Nodin wrote: »

There will always be illegals regardless of the law. The clue to why is in the name.

None of that has anything to do with limited immigration.

Your opinion .

guyjohn

alastair wrote: »

That's a completely different proposed bill. You've been referencing the 2010 bill, which was killed off with the last Dail. No-one has read this new bill, so it's certainly not going to be enacted in 2014, and you've no idea of it's contents - just like everyone else.

The Irish government did not learn from the mistakes of other countries with a longer history of immigration . The law has changed far too slow to keep pace with past abuse of the system and it seems will continue to do so.

Nodin

guyjohn wrote: »

Your opinion .

No, its not my opinion, its a fact. Unless the country is hermetically sealed, there will be illegals. Its largely irrelevant in a discussion entitled "Advocates of limited immigration accused of being racist".

guyjohn wrote:

The Irish government did not learn from the mistakes of other countries with a
longer history of immigration

With regard to what? How? Be specific please.

guyjohn

To limit immigration of the new EU countries in 2006 for a start which others did.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

The Irish government did not learn from the mistakes of other countries with a longer history of immigration . The law has changed far too slow to keep pace with past abuse of the system and it seems will continue to do so.

You've not demonstrated any real abuse of the system though, and failed to point out any 'mistake' in committing to full freedom of movement within the EU. Just because you don't care for the level of immigration at play doesn't mean it's a problem for others.

Nodin

guyjohn wrote: »

To limit immigration of the new EU countries in 2006 for a start which others did.

What was the problem with that?

djpbarry

guyjohn wrote: »

To limit immigration of the new EU countries in 2006 for a start which others did.

I think you mean 2004?

Facts are not your strong point, are they?

guyjohn

djpbarry wrote: »

I think you mean 2004?

Facts are not your strong point, are they?

Does 1 year make such a difference .

guyjohn

Nodin wrote: »

What was the problem with that?

Many came here and then lost jobs in the crash.

guyjohn

alastair wrote: »

You've not demonstrated any real abuse of the system though, and failed to point out any 'mistake' in committing to full freedom of movement within the EU. Just because you don't care for the level of immigration at play doesn't mean it's a problem for others.

Immigration also applies to those coming from outside the EU who do not have the same entitlement.
I showed links in earlier posts to abuse of the system.

You have failed to even mention or show any positive side to immigration. I take it none exist . Time for you to demonstrate something beyond short comments.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

Immigration also applies to those coming from outside the EU who do not have the same entitlement.
I showed links in earlier posts to abuse of the system.

No you didn't. You posted about anecdotal instances of people breaking rules - which you'll find in any area/law/issue. That's not an argument against current immigration (or asylum for that matter) policy.

guyjohn wrote: »

You have failed to even mention or show any positive side to immigration. I take it none exist . Time for you to demonstrate something beyond short comments.

This is a country built on immigration. The positives are well known to every family in this island - every emigrant is an immigrant. What does inward immigration do for us, other than provide a boost to the economy, promote a broader cultural engagement with the world, extend the gene pool, deter homogeny and xenophobia, and provide much better culinary options, etc? As I say - just because you've got some kneejerk reaction to the small number of foreigners amongst us, doesn't mean others share your concerns.

alastair

guyjohn wrote: »

Many came here and then lost jobs in the crash.

How is that a problem?

djpbarry

guyjohn wrote: »

Does 1 year make such a difference .

I think you mean 2 years?

Arithmetic is obviously not a strong point either.

guyjohn wrote: »

Many came here and then lost jobs in the crash.

And many have since left.

guyjohn wrote: »

Immigration also applies to those coming from outside the EU who do not have the same entitlement.

Entitlement to what?

Nodin

guyjohn wrote: »

Many came here and then lost jobs in the crash.

Yep. Again - What was the problem?

guyjohn wrote:

Immigration also applies to those coming from outside the EU who do not have the
same entitlement.

Immigration from outside the EU is limited. Whats your point?