Direct Provision

Shelflife

So a family present themselves at our border seeking asylum.

They are taken to a centre and given basic shelter and provisions, all good so far.

Why are they still there 6mths+ later ? how long does it take to make a decision on their asylum status ?

If they are accepted then they should be allowed to become part of our community, get jobs and send their children to school.

If not then they are sent back.

I cant understand the delay.

Calhoun

They can appeal multiple times which we are aware of and can tie it up for years.

Atlantic Dawn

Depends what type of Lord Of The Rings type story they have brought with them that needs to be investigated. Someone arriving here from an area with no direct flights or ships from has some explaining to do as what influenced their decision.

Sonny noggs

They appeal and drag it out for years, hoping to become so entrenched (have more kids etc) that the minister will give a leave to remain eventually.

EmmetSpiceland

The main reason they are detained in Direct Provision for so long is because there is money being made. The process is a blight upon are country.

Sonny noggs

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

The main reason they are detained in Direct Provision for so long is because there is money being made. The process is a blight upon are country.

It would cost the state far more to accommodate them in regular private rental accommodation (the only viable alternative), as well as reducing the supply of rental properties for the rest of us and likely bumping up the prices further.

Shelflife

Sonny noggs wrote: »

It would cost the state far more to accommodate them in regular private rental accommodation (the only viable alternative), as well as reducing the supply of rental properties for the rest of us and likely bumping up the prices further.

But there would be some hope that they could get jobs and instead of being a negative to the economy they could be a positive .

Shelflife

Calhoun wrote: »

They can appeal multiple times which we are aware of and can tie it up for years.

Why dont we allow one appeal and then thats it ?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Sonny noggs wrote: »

It would cost the state far more to accommodate them in regular private rental accommodation (the only viable alternative), as well as reducing the supply of rental properties for the rest of us and likely bumping up the prices further.

Actually another alternative is private homes.

Gatling

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Depends what type of Lord Of The Rings type story they have brought with them that needs to be investigated. Someone arriving here from an area with no direct flights or ships from has some explaining to do as what influenced their decision.

And every time they have a child followed by another and another the process and appeals start over again ,
Add they have to have solicitors , barristers , human rights solicitors , social workers too

Sonny noggs

Shelflife wrote: »

But there would be some hope that they could get jobs and instead of being a negative to the economy they could be a positive .

I think you are overestimating the skill sets of the people in question and not taking account of the family makeup.

The jobs would likely be minimum wage, probably not enough to pay market rent, so we (the taxpayer) would them be paying HAP or equivalent, potentially for 5 or more years while they run down the appeals process... plus lots of one parent families, so who looks after the kids (or pays the crèche) while the parent works?

EmmetSpiceland

Sonny noggs wrote: »

It would cost the state far more to accommodate them in regular private rental accommodation (the only viable alternative), as well as reducing the supply of rental properties for the rest of us and likely bumping up the prices further.

But only a few landlords would be getting the cash that way. There’d be no contracts or tenders put out for cleaning, cooking, security and all the other bits and pieces that go with the setup.

We won’t privatise our prisons but we will with our refugee process, hardly surprising that people are being held so long.

Sonny noggs

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Actually another alternative is private homes.

Do you mean the public volunteering to house asylum seekers (including families) for free? For an indefinite period while their application and appeals progress?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Sonny noggs wrote: »

Do you mean the public volunteering to house asylum seekers (including families) for free? For an indefinite period while their application and appeals progress?

Yeh.

Sonny noggs

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

But only a few landlords would be getting the cash that way. There’d be no contracts or tenders put out for cleaning, cooking, security and all the other bits and pieces that go with the setup.

We won’t privatise our prisons but we will with our refugee process, hardly surprising that people are being held so long.

If they didn’t appeal they wouldn’t be here long, the length of stay is on them, not the system. By a few you mean thousands, potentially EUR 12-15k per year depending on where in the country the person is residing...

Sonny noggs

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Yeh.

You volunteering?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Sonny noggs wrote: »

You volunteering?

No. Big houses first. My two bedroom is full.

This is how internal refugees were housed in WWII so it’s possible. I think some European countries do it.

Sonny noggs

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

No. Big houses first. My two bedroom is full.

This is how internal refugees were housed in WWII so it’s possible. I think some European countries do it.

WWII is no way comparable to mostly economic migrants voluntarily relocating here to claim asylum because we are seen as a soft touch. Nothing stopping you lobbying your politicians with your suggestion though. Could be a great solution that saves the taxpayer a few hundred million a year.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Sonny noggs wrote: »

WWII is no way comparable to mostly economic migrants voluntarily relocating here to claim asylum because we are seen as a soft touch. Nothing stopping you lobbying your politicians with your suggestion though. Could be a great solution that saves the taxpayer a few hundred million a year.

There are differences of course. They were children and internal.

What I’m saying is this - if we are to take significant numbers we need to make sure that the burden isn’t on the poorest here.

Gatling

We should have built a secure facility years ago ,you arrive seek asylum you get put in a secure unit with a school and what not ,
Your application is rejected your taken to Baldonnell airbase and flown home on chartered aircraft.