Ireland's asylum hotel monthly bill tops €3.54m

Topgear on Dave

HAHA LOL, I was thinking they would head away. :pac:

They probably have work lined up in London or where ever, Paddy was at this kind of stuff for years in the US.

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Will they stay here though? They're hardly going to hang around if they're sent to Achill for the winter.

DP isnt a prison, they'll probably have a good meal and a bed and be on their way to London or Dublin or where ever they were headed when they were caught.

ThunbergsAreGo

alastair wrote: »

Their claim is assessed on it’s merits. What isn’t debatable is that they have committed a crime by making their claim here. They haven’t.

Is illegally breaking and entering a vehicle and causing multiple hundred thousands worth of lost revenue not a crime?

And I am far from someone who thinks all asylum seekers are Isis jihadists, but there must be serious security concerns about this.......

AlekSmart

alastair wrote: »

Unlike you, I’m not so wedded to abandoning due process to actually evaluate asylum claims. I’m not the one embarrassing myself with inane posturing.

?
Oddly enough,those concerned with "due process" in this scenario are from t'udder side.

Ireland already has a functioning Immigration,Refugee and Asylum process,which has functioned to a very high degree throughout the history of this Republic.

I went to school with children of German refugees who came here under it,I work with people who came from Indo-China and Eastern Europe and availed of the system,and it WORKED.

They availed of a system which was tailored to realistically provide what the Irish State could actually afford to provide,rather than some rose tinted vision of what some would wish it to provide.

If any due process was abandoned it this case,it was flung aside in Rosslare,last week.

Beechwoodspark

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Is illegally breaking and entering a vehicle and causing multiple hundred thousands worth of lost revenue not a crime?

I would say it certainly is. I also say they should be pursued through the courts for the loss incurred.

Let them either pay back the amount of goods they destroyed in the container or let them do a good stretch in prison.

Wibbs

10000maniacs wrote: »

His justification is that before the famine we had a similar population to England's.

The muppets that come out with this nonsense seem to forget that the pre famine population were, outside of urban well off areas, dirt poor peasants one failed harvest away from calamity. Oh wait... But yep this increase population stuff is very odd, bordering on creepy. More crowding please! Especially as the same muppets will almost certainly also push the sky is falling in environmental rhetoric and on that they're on firmer ground, yet having one less person around is one of the biggest positive impacts on our environment. Never mind that the Irish population has had sustained growth for many decades and doesn't have the birthrate issues of some other EU countries. And yet they use the same script when it doesn't apply here. Funny that.

What's scary is how so many of these talking heads have sod all knowledge of basic history or demographic impacts and just parrot off the third hand script they've been given as gospel and if any dissenting voice does come along they have no answer beyond screeching racism!! or whatever ism you're having yourself. Though as has been pointed out we hear fewer and fewer dissenting voices of any stripe and that's very worrying.

alastair

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

You're not? Your entire position is tied to "the process" even though its clear as day that "the process" has being flagrantly abused by these lads and many more like them.

Personal insults (which are wasted on me by the way - it only shows you can't make a point without it) and deflection of every post put to you don't change that reality.

I’m not - correct. Just because someone might choose to abuse a process doesn’t make that process in any way inappropriate. I note that you don’t actually have anything better to offer, and merely carp from the sidelines. As I said - inane posturing.

alastair

AlekSmart wrote: »

?
Oddly enough,those concerned with "due process" in this scenario are from t'udder side.

Ireland already has a functioning Immigration,Refugee and Asylum process,which has functioned to a very high degree throughout the history of this Republic.

I went to school with children of German refugees who came here under it,I work with people who came from Indo-China and Eastern Europe and availed of the system,and it WORKED.

They availed of a system which was tailored to realistically provide what the Irish State could actually afford to provide,rather than some rose tinted vision of what some would wish it to provide.

If any due process was abandoned it this case,it was flung aside in Rosslare,last week.

Rubbish. The same laws, the same process, applies.

Wibbs

ShamNNspace wrote: »

Unbelievable.. Just listening to him there.. What sort of a parallel universe are these people living in??

The universe of vested interests - those millions per month have to go somewhere, the universe of naive useful idiots for same and a complete lack of questioning of their narrative in mainstream media. Which leads to too many nutters itching to design their own uniforms in non mainstream media as some sort of alternative and it isn't one.

Look at those folks here on the "side" of multiculturalism. They have near zero argument or answers to some basic questions and the usual MO is non answers out of frustration from not having any real answers.

Just telling people there's nothing to see here and ignoring valid questions is a sure way to shore up trouble down the line. And yet again we have seen this in every single European nation that has bought into this multicultural nonsense. This time it'll be different... :rolleyes:

AlekSmart

alastair wrote: »

I’m not - correct. Just because someone might choose to abuse a process doesn’t make that process in any way inappropriate. I note that you don’t actually have anything better to offer, and merely carp from the sidelines. As I said - inane posturing.

Hmmmm.....standing back and reading it,I'm seeing quite a bit of sideline carping and inane posturing alright....it's merely a matter of conjecture as to which posters are supplying it ?

Personally,I'm offering something better.....a more sustainable and fair Asylum/Refugee system IF we operate it in a reasonable and balanced manner...what we are currently attempting to do is in the realms of craziness.

Ireland,as it currently exists cannot afford to be the destination of choice for Albanian,Georgian,Zimbabwean,Libyan,Syrian solo travellers etc etc.

No Carp,No Inanity....WE cannot afford it

alastair

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Is illegally breaking and entering a vehicle and causing multiple hundred thousands worth of lost revenue not a crime?

And I am far from someone who thinks all asylum seekers are Isis jihadists, but there must be serious security concerns about this.......

I’m failing to see where you drummed up hundreds of thousands of lost revenue, but on the back of sneaking into a container for the purposes of seeking asylum - no, it’s not a crime - and they were not charged with a crime.

Wibbs

alastair wrote: »

I’m not - correct.

We agree for once...

Just because someone might choose to abuse a process doesn’t make that process in any way inappropriate.

When a process is abused it does mean the implementation of that process is in question. Though I would say these are isolated incidences and the process is significantly tighter than it was during the Celtic Tiger when our borders were about as watertight as a teabag and the first bunch of non EU economic migrants fetched up here. At least today the chancers from sub Saharan Africa, Georgia et al are refused in the vast majority of cases. Where the process is failing today is that we're not throwing these failed chancers out quickly enough.

alastair

AlekSmart wrote: »

Hmmmm.....standing back and reading it,I'm seeing quite a bit of sideline carping and inane posturing alright....it's merely a matter of conjecture as to which posters are supplying it ?

Personally,I'm offering something better.....a more sustainable and fair Asylum/Refugee system IF we operate it in a reasonable and balanced manner...what we are currently attempting to do is in the realms of craziness.

Ireland,as it currently exists cannot afford to be the destination of choice for Albanian,Georgian,Zimbabwean,Libyan,Syrian solo travellers etc etc.

No Carp,No Inanity....WE cannot afford it

So- you’re suggesting what exactly? All I’m seeing is apple pie and mom generalities. Are you opposed to reviewing all asylum claims on their merits, and allowing the claimant appeal an initial rejection? Because that’s the (fair) current process.

alastair

Wibbs wrote: »

We agree for once...
When a process is abused it does mean the implementation of that process is in question. Though I would say these are isolated incidences and the process is significantly tighter than it was during the Celtic Tiger when our borders were about as watertight as a teabag and the first bunch of non EU economic migrants fetched up here. At least today the chancers from sub Saharan Africa, Georgia et al are refused in the vast majority of cases. Where the process is failing today is that we're not throwing these failed chancers out quickly enough.

More nonsense. Which law or process can you point to that is not abused - anywhere? What evidence do you have to support your claim that deportation orders are not adhered to in short order?

Wibbs

alastair wrote: »

I’m failing to see where you drummed up hundreds of thousands of lost revenue, but on the back of sneaking into a container for the purposes of seeking asylum - no, it’s not a crime - and they were not charged with a crime.

I'm not seeing the hundreds of thousands part, but there are a number of crimes associated with breaking into a goods container crossing borders. Trespass, customs issues, damage to property. Try it for yourself and see if you just get let go.

alastair

Wibbs wrote: »

I'm not seeing the hundreds of thousands part, but there are a number of crimes associated with breaking into a goods container crossing borders. Trespass, customs issues, damage to property. Try it for yourself and see if you just get let go.

The clue is in the lack of prosecution. Do you imagine that’s out of sympathy for the people involved, or on the back of legal rights?

ThunbergsAreGo

Wibbs wrote: »

I'm not seeing the hundreds of thousands part, but there are a number of crimes associated with breaking into a goods container crossing borders. Trespass, customs issues, damage to property. Try it for yourself and see if you just get let go.

It was mentioned on here yesterday the goods were contaminated. I am not too sure of it myself to be honest.

I would say they weren't charged with anything due to optics more than anything. I feel for the driver involved, imagine something had happened to them in transit!

I don't see how people don't think this is a security concern. Enter Ireland, get free medical supplies, accomodation and.....vanish

Wibbs

alastair wrote: »

The clue is in the lack of prosecution. Do you imagine that’s out of sympathy for the people involved, or on the back of legal rights?

So you're actually claiming that breaking into a shipping container crossing borders is a legal act? OK.

Jackman25

10000maniacs wrote: »

Theres a liberal wet from the refugee council on the Marian Finucune show now suggesting we should increase our population by 3 million. His justification is that before the famine we had a similar population to England's.
And of course Marian cheering him on with this insanity.

You can bet your life the same fool would also be bleating on about doing our bit for climate change and thinks it would be a good idea to cram another 3 million people in here

alastair

Wibbs wrote: »

So you're actually claiming that breaking into a shipping container crossing borders is a legal act? OK.

It’s decriminalised for the purposes of seeking asylum, under article 31 of the status of refugees act - correct.

jackofalltrades

alastair wrote: »

Extra-legal entry for the purposes of seeking asylum is, by international law, not a criminal act.

Only when certain criteria are met, which I've highlighted below.
From here:

Convention and protocol relating to the status of refugees wrote:

Article 31
Refugees unlawfully in the country of refugee
1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their
illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory
where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or
are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present
themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their
illegal entry or presence.

Wibbs

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Only when certain criteria are met, which I've highlighted below.

So yep they're criminals who broke the law, then absconded into the wind and into another state. Cue more excuses...

_Kaiser_

Wibbs wrote: »

So yep they're criminals who broke the law, then absconded into the wind and into another state. Cue more excuses...

Always amusing though when someone quoting half of something to try and make their argument is exposed.

alastair

alastair wrote: »

Extra-legal entry for the purposes of seeking asylum is, by international law, not a criminal act. Regardless of whether that claim is successful or not. So while they might be undocumented, they haven’t done anything illegal. And there’s no obligation on any asylum seeker to make a claim in a first safe country. Pretty much every successful asylum seeker in Ireland has passed through other safe countries. So no ‘enormous question mark’ there.

no ‘enormous question mark’ there? Why not?

Being undocumented is illegal until their application is approved. Claiming asylum simply puts the crime 'on hold'. If their claim is denied, they're back to having broken the law.

Let's think this through for a moment. These are people under investigation for an asylum application. Their backgrounds haven't been verified. That's pretty much a given or the application claim would have gone through already. they've entered the country illegally, and have since fled the place they were allocated. So.. they could be terrorists aiming an attack on European soil.

Sure, it's a paranoid idea (although anything seems possible these days) but it seems like the asylum process is the easiest way to enter Europe these days, and considering Ireland, (choose a country with a terrible processing time) you could get in, and then just head off without being stopped... We have no real idea who these lads are.

171170

Blueshoe wrote: »

Great comment. Fantastic insight coupled with rational thought.

In fairness, he's a Soc Dem/Gary Gannon supporter - virtue signalling plus the IQ of a turnip.

The_Kew_Tour

IF it is true about these lads running away I wonder why its not a headline on RTE?

Just wondering if we do bring in a extra 3 million people now....

Where can they get houses? How will their Social Welfare Work? Who going pay for extra Schools, Hospitals and all the other infrastructure that will be needed to meet the supply?

I’m not totally against the idea cause maybe I have missed something but basically how hell can this all be paid for?enligthen me cause maybe I’m the stupid one here.

171170

Wibbs wrote: »

I'm not seeing the hundreds of thousands part, but there are a number of crimes associated with breaking into a goods container crossing borders.

The container in which the illegal migrants cheerfully p1ssed and defecated during their excursion from La Belle France contained pharmaceuticals with an estimated value of some €1,000,000.

link: https://extra.ie/2019/11/22/news/irish-news/sixteen-migrants-bound-for-ireland-found-when-ship-worker-heard-noises

171170

alastair wrote: »

It’s decriminalised for the purposes of seeking asylum, under article 31 of the status of refugees act - correct?

Incorrect.

wellwhynot

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

IF it is true about these lads running away I wonder why its not a headline on RTE?

Just wondering if we do bring in a extra 3 million people now....

Where can they get houses? How will their Social Welfare Work? Who going pay for extra Schools, Hospitals and all the other infrastructure that will be needed to meet the supply?

I’m not totally against the idea cause maybe I have missed something but basically how hell can this all be paid for?enligthen me cause maybe I’m the stupid one here.

The tax payer of course. When the eventual welfare system collapses, Leo and the rest will be long gone with secure pensions while the rest of us work until we die.

The_Kew_Tour

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Just wondering if we do bring in a extra 3 million people now....
.

I'm wondering whether integration has even been discussed.

I figure it's the government thinking that they've lost the trust of the public, so they've decided to stack the odds. A bit like in America when they gave rights to black people to boost votes. Maybe the migrants will be grateful and continue voting them in. It would be their style of short term thinking.

seenitall

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm wondering whether integration has even been discussed.

I figure it's the government thinking that they've lost the trust of the public, so they've decided to stack the odds. A bit like in America when they gave rights to black people to boost votes. Maybe the migrants will be grateful and continue voting them in. It would be their style of short term thinking.

Blair's way.