oughterard people - see OP for Mod warning 29/09/19

alastair

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

"Custom built centre" - So why are they not building more in Dublin? There is plenty of public land lying around. They could use some of the religious land from church restitution.

They could use the Thorntan Hall site, owned by the state and lying dormant. Much of the infrastructure is there already.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/officials-dont-know-what-to-do-with-empty-prison-site-after-50m-outlay-30988433.html

Dublin should be doing more and in proportion to its population instead of the problem being shunted somewhere else. Its not like this is a short term problem.

Nope, there is a very strong whiff of NIMBYism coming from the reluctance to build more centres in Dublin.

Once again - it’s a policy decision - cheaper and more dissuasion of casual claims by dispersing the asylum seekers around the country.

alastair

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

And what did that achieve? Police investigation? Conviction?

Or just Theroux making some snide remarks but overall giving Saville a free pass?

The latter clearly.

We know that people complained for decades to the BBC, most of his producers and colleagues knew what he was like and they did nothing.

In any case its a separate issue. In summary the BBC are as flawed as anyone and far from perfect.

Policing isn’t generally done by broadcasters. It certainly delved into the darker aspects of Saville’s persona, and was very clear that he had specific suspicions around him.

ToBeFrank123

alastair wrote: »

Once again - it’s a policy decision - cheaper and more dissuasion of casual claims by dispersing the asylum seekers around the country.

You don't want them basically. Thanks for clearing it up.

Thorntan Hall is hardly Dublin city centre by the way, it should be dispersed enough for your liking. And the state already owns the land.

alastair

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

You don't want them basically. Thanks for clearing it up.

Hilarious. You understand perfectly what the policy is based on. And once again - there are many asylum seekers in Dublin.

ToBeFrank123

alastair wrote: »

Hilarious. You understand perfectly what the policy is based on. And once again - there are many asylum seekers in Dublin.

About 10% are in Dublin.

I do understand perfectly - you want to disperse the problem to the rest of the country and keep it well away from Dublin. It couldn't be clearer.

You are coming across as the biggest NIMBY here to be honest. Completely unwilling to entertain any new DPCs in Dublin or surrounds.

alastair

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

About 10% are in Dublin.

I do understand perfectly - you want to disperse the problem to the rest of the country and keep it well away from Dublin. It couldn't be clearer.

You are coming across as the biggest NIMBY here to be honest. Completely unwilling to entertain any new DPCs in Dublin or surrounds.

There are more than 10% of asylum seekers in Dublin. By my ready reckoner, there are about a sixth of the current numbers in Dublin. Dubliners, or their political representatives, don’t decide HSE or Department of Justice & Reform policy. The NIMBY is you, pretending that there’s an infrastructural impact on Oughterard which mysteriously didn’t arise when a development of 157 houses was in play, and which is within the scope of planned residential expansion of the area. Pretending that there’s an impact on school resources when you don’t know how many, if any, of the asylum seekers will be primary or secondary age pupils, trying to shift your argument to one of inhumanity when the rhetoric of the meeting was clearly unconcerned with those issues.

ToBeFrank123

alastair wrote: »

There are more than 10% of asylum seekers in Dublin. By my ready reckoner, there are about a sixth of the current numbers in Dublin. The NIMBY is you, pretending that there’s an infrastructural impact on Oughterard which mysteriously didn’t arise when a development of 157 houses was in play, and which is within the scope of planned residential expansion of the area. Pretending that there’s an impact on school resources when you don’t know how many, if any, of the asylum seekers will be primary or secondary age pupils, trying to shift your argument to one of inhumanity when the rhetoric of the meeting was clearly unconcerned with those issues.

Dublin's population is about 25% of the whole country. So well down on representation, still not pulling their weight.

No-one knows how many will be school age you are right. No-one knows anything about them. They could be upstanding members of society. They could be fleeing justice for serious crimes. They could be aged 25 pretending to be 15 and with no documents to back it up.

You are just forcing 250 people on Oughterard without any significant help to them. They rightly told people like you where to go.

I can't be a nimby in this case as I'm not from Oughterard. But you are from Dublin and have made it clear you don't want any more DPCs. A DPC in Oughterard is an idiotic idea. You don't have to be from there to see that.

Its just the latest in a long line of idiotic ideas from this government led by a Taoiseach who tells everyone for example we need more high density developments yet opposed a 4 story apartment block in his own constituency!

vriesmays

Dublin won't take them because it has no empty hotels.

alastair

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Dublin's population is about 25% of the whole country. So well down on representation, still not pulling their weight.

No-one knows how many will be school age you are right. No-one knows anything about them. They could be upstanding members of society. They could be fleeing justice for serious crimes. They could be aged 25 pretending to be 15 and with no documents to back it up.

You are just forcing 250 people on Oughterard without any significant help to them. They rightly told people like you where to go.

I can't be a nimby in this case as I'm not from Oughterard. But you are from Dublin and have made it clear you don't want any more DPCs. A DPC in Oughterard is an idiotic idea. You don't have to be from there to see that.

Its just the latest in a long line of idiotic ideas from this government led by a Taoiseach who tells everyone for example we need more high density developments yet opposed a 4 story apartment block in his own constituency!

Well it’s not about proportionality, is it? I’ve no problem with more asylum seekers being housed in Dublin. But that’s a decision made by a national government, and departments that have precious little to do with Dublin. The rationale for dispersement has already been explained to you - multiple times.

No-one else was consulted. There isn’t any requirement to consult on these decisions. Nobody asked me about a singular asylum seeker in my locale - ever. And they could all be satanists, determined to sacrifice my soul on the next full moon - it’s terrible, isn’t it?!

vriesmays

If they were software engineers or actuaries they would get housed in Dublin.

ToBeFrank123

vriesmays wrote: »

Dublin won't take them because it has no empty hotels.

I'm sure there has been one or two in recent years. Its not like its a short term problem though. We should be building DPCs. Lovely free site out in Thorntan Hall, lying dormant. Its odd that it has never been developed, at the very least for housing.

In the long run, the state building its own DPCs would solve a lot of issues, not least the cost of renting from a private owner.

Odyssey 2005

Flanagan was on with Mary wilson a little while ago to address the situation in Ouchterard. Not since Shatter was a minister have I heard so many words that said nothing

vriesmays

Import the 3rd world, no more 1st world.

Topgear on Dave

vriesmays wrote: »

If they were software engineers or actuaries they would get housed in Dublin.

Maybe, maybe not.

Local politicians in Dublin (or in most towns) are pretty quick out of the traps to oppose new development.

Watch on twitter for councillors giving out about hotels ("the area has too many already") or apartments ("its a working class area, this is gentrification").

Oughterard is not unique for objections, its just getting attention for it being asylum seekers.

The_Kew_Tour

Seathrun66 wrote: »

17 & 18 are pretty young to me. School-going age. Hence the reason they were likely in Eyre Sq at 1.30pm where schoolkids gather at lunchtime.

Other two were 19 and 23, not kids, though the former may have been attending school.

In terms of facts you have one lad of Nigerian descent, another (going by name) of Senegalese descent. Two others we know nothing about.
As before when there's any sort of group the Gardai will refer to them as a gang.

The poster here talked about an organised African gang terrorising the locals. and you show me one convicted guy of Nigerian descent. That ain't an African gang and they ain't terrorising the locals or you'd be seeing reports on it in the right-wing element of the press.

Anecdotal information not accepted.

So come on, do some proper forensic work and give me details on an African gang.

He has said he has dealt with them before.

So what do you want him to do. Go there by himself at 3am in morning and do some research, get beat up I suppose. Just so you can then come along and say it’s only 1 or 2 anyway.

If they represent 1% of the population like the good folk at CSO would have you believe stories like this should be hard to come by, but they ain’t.

Wibbling wonder

Alastair - can you validate that no one in the Oughterard area objected when the proposal for the 150 or so houses was announced?

The proposal is only that, it hasn't even begun the formal planning process and unlike the DP centre people have the opportunity to submit objections and have those considered. Today it is a field and nothing more, if people wish to exercise their democratic right to object they can do so within the process.

More recently a plan to develop 13 houses in Oughterard by the council was rejected primarily due to concerns that it would adversely affect the SPA but I believe lack of access to infrastructure/services was also a consideration.

http://www.pleanala.ie/documents/directions/304/S304339.pdf

So 13 houses approximately closer or at worst the same to the village centre than the Gateway is rejected but it's okay to develop a hotel to cater for approx 250 people?

Seathrun66

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Dublin's population is about 25% of the whole country. So well down on representation, still not pulling their weight.

No-one knows how many will be school age you are right. No-one knows anything about them. They could be upstanding members of society. They could be fleeing justice for serious crimes. They could be aged 25 pretending to be 15 and with no documents to back it up.

You are just forcing 250 people on Oughterard without any significant help to them. They rightly told people like you where to go.

I can't be a nimby in this case as I'm not from Oughterard. But you are from Dublin and have made it clear you don't want any more DPCs. A DPC in Oughterard is an idiotic idea. You don't have to be from there to see that.

Its just the latest in a long line of idiotic ideas from this government led by a Taoiseach who tells everyone for example we need more high density developments yet opposed a 4 story apartment block in his own constituency!

Where did he say that? You're just making stuff up again.

Seathrun66

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

He has said he has dealt with them before.

So what do you want him to do. Go there by himself at 3am in morning and do some research, get beat up I suppose. Just so you can then come along and say it’s only 1 or 2 anyway.

If they represent 1% of the population like the good folk at CSO would have you believe stories like this should be hard to come by, but they ain’t.

Given the lads fighting were there at 1.30pm and 3/4 are of school age then you'll probably not come across them at closing time in Galway. And you're highly unlikely to get beat up either, not that vibe. Though instead of online hate you may feel entitled to go and spread some in person which could get you the provoked reaction you desire.

The_Kew_Tour

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Given the lads fighting were there at 1.30pm and 3/4 are of school age then you'll probably not come across them at closing time in Galway. And you're highly unlikely to get beat up either, not that vibe. Though instead of online hate you may feel entitled to go and spread some in person which could get you the provoked reaction you desire.

Loving the moving of the Goals Posts again.

No hate, why would I. Life is too short. But people are entitled to ask question on the DP center and also this attack. Nobody safety should be put on hold to help nut jobs like them

enricoh

Wibbs wrote: »

Hmmm..









So still on the same tack proving my last point for all to see? And that's only the last hour.

I'm making stuff up eh Alastair? All that comes from you seems to be airyfairy vagueness about cultural vibrancy, if you respond directly at all. Earlier I pointed out the *trigger warning!* facts that in multicultural societies ethnic minorities are much higher in the poverty and crime and social issues stats than the native ethnicity(in the west Whites). No? I'm making stuff, sorry "****e" up again?


From the above link from Poverty UK: Around two-fifths of people from ethnic minorities live in low-income households, twice the rate for White people.
Within this, there are big variations by ethnic group. More specifically, the proportion of people who live in low-income households is:

20% for White people.
30% for Indians and Black Caribbeans.
50% for Black Africans.
60% for Pakistanis.
70% for Bangladeshis.

Do you want me to dig up the stats that show while Afro-Caribbeans make up 3% of the UK population they make up 14 % of the UK prison population? And yep there are all sorts of reasons for this, not least racism within the justice system and society in general, but after many decades of trying to solve that knotty problem it's still there and in the case of some crimes getting worse. Not many whities on stabbing sprees, or acid attacks. The Pakistani minorities are way overrepresented in rape and sexual assault cases. When authorities have been bothered to investigate, when not afraid of being seen as "racist". Oh and those stats will be similarly reflected in every single "multicultural" nation in Europe.

Again these are *trigger warning!* facts, not conjecture. And those facts lead me to firmly believe this multicultural pipe dream is just that, a pipe dream, not least for the minority folks. It's no wonder some of them seek to set themselves apart in such nations. If I were a third generation Pakistani Muslim guy in England I would, because I would know I was born into a half truth.

Again, why are some of us so hellbent in wanting to import that nonsense here? Yes we have our own social problems and no mistake, so why the hell import more of them???

Seeing as ye are all back posting boggles, Alistair and sethrun would ya kindly tackle this post from wibbs, ye must have missed it first time round. n let us know how ireland will have a different outcome, thanks in advance folks

Boggles

enricoh wrote: »

Seeing as ye are all back posting boggles,

I didn't go anywhere.

enricoh wrote: »

ye must have missed it first time round

No, I skipped over it. When Wibbs goes full Gemma it's not pretty, TBF to him he starts reasonable but then the ranting and raving starts. He has made the same "points" more than once and he has challenged more than once on them.


Anyway Afro Caribbean stats in the UK have absolutely fúck all to do with a village in the West of Ireland and a proposed DP center.

Now have you any original thought you would like to add yourself or do you normally go around bizarrely semi plagiarizing other users "work"?

enricoh

Boggles wrote: »

I didn't go anywhere.



No, I skipped over it. When Wibbs goes full Gemma it's not pretty, TBF to him he starts reasonable but then the ranting and raving starts. He has made the same "points" more than once and he has challenged more than once on them.


Anyway Afro Caribbean stats in the UK have absolutely fúck all to do with a village in the West of Ireland and a proposed DP center.

Now have you any original thought you would like to add yourself or do you normally go around bizarrely semi plagiarizing other users "work"?

Of course you skipped over it, you couldn't disprove one point!
And the black African and pakistani stats have sod all to do asylum seekers in ireland i suppose?!

Wibbs

Boggles wrote: »

No, I skipped over it. When Wibbs goes full Gemma it's not pretty, TBF to him he starts reasonable but then the ranting and raving starts. He has made the same "points" more than once and he has challenged more than once on them.

Nope, you skipped over it because you can't answer it. Not with a straight face anyway. It is a demonstrable fact and one that you can glean from whatever "acceptable" site or source you like that ethnic minorities, with the general exceptions of East Asians, within their new countries even after many generations are more likely to be suffering poverty and social exclusion compared to the background White population. In some minorities far more likely. A trend that is repeated throughout the EU and even beyond. The UK is a little different as it's usually those of African origin that suffer more at the bottom.

And no, the occasional success stories from such origins is neither an explanation nor a recommendation for multiculturalism, because, and this is the point, they do so in spite of their background and skin colour. As I pointed out previously just because a Black man Barack Obama became president of the US, hardly proves African Americans are on the pigs back. They most certainly are not. Seathrun66's earlier contention that this is a sign of multiculturalism working is beyond daft, naive, deflective, or all of the above.

Anyway Afro Caribbean stats in the UK have absolutely fúck all to do with a village in the West of Ireland and a proposed DP center.

Clearly you didn't read it as Afro Caribbean folks are but one of the demographic groups this applies to. But you keep avoiding the facts. I'd be shocked at this stage if you didn't.


[Cue Seathrun's patented Spellchecker 2000 in 3...2...1...]



PS: Who or what is gemma? No doubt it's some attempt at a some sort of a slight, which seems to be a large part of your debating "skills".

alastair

Wibbling wonder wrote: »

Alastair - can you validate that no one in the Oughterard area objected when the proposal for the 150 or so houses was announced?

The proposal is only that, it hasn't even begun the formal planning process and unlike the DP centre people have the opportunity to submit objections and have those considered. Today it is a field and nothing more, if people wish to exercise their democratic right to object they can do so within the process.

More recently a plan to develop 13 houses in Oughterard by the council was rejected primarily due to concerns that it would adversely affect the SPA but I believe lack of access to infrastructure/services was also a consideration.

http://www.pleanala.ie/documents/directions/304/S304339.pdf

So 13 houses approximately closer or at worst the same to the village centre than the Gateway is rejected but it's okay to develop a hotel to cater for approx 250 people?

The hotel successfully got planning permission years ago. It’s already been developed.

alastair

enricoh wrote: »

Seeing as ye are all back posting boggles, Alistair and sethrun would ya kindly tackle this post from wibbs, ye must have missed it first time round. n let us know how ireland will have a different outcome, thanks in advance folks

There’s not anything to refute there tbh. If the notion is that there’s less crime proportionally from those who are greater stakeholders in society then that’s always going to be true, regardless of any ethnicity considerations. It’s not as if crime disappears with ethnic minorities.

The canard of pretending that multicultural free societies are more crime infested than monocultural free societies is about as persuasive as the notion that Saudi society is preferential to that of Northern Ireland. It’s all nonsense that aims to make excuses for simple xenophobia.

Wibbling wonder

alastair wrote: »

The hotel successfully got planning permission years ago. It’s already been developed.

Oh seriously...... change my post to - but it's okay to take a hotel that has been closed for years, change the use with the potential to cater for approx 250 people relying on the save services or lack thereof?

alastair

Wibbling wonder wrote: »

Oh seriously...... change my post to - but it's okay to take a hotel that has been closed for years, change the use with the potential to cater for approx 250 people relying on the save services or lack thereof?

It’s not a change of use. It doesn’t require planning permission.

Wibbling wonder

More twaddle, just because Alan Kelly signed an SI meaning planning permission isn't required you can hardly say a Direct Provision centre is the same thing as a hotel.

Wibbs

alastair wrote: »

There’s not anything to refute there tbh.

Translation: You can't.

If the notion is that there’s less crime proportionally from those who are greater stakeholders in society then that’s always going to be true, regardless of any ethnicity considerations.

Indeed. "Greater stakeholders" and "that’s always going to be true", eh? By your own "argument" you've just gone and proven my point about the innate problem with your multiculturalism ideal. It isn't one, beyond an admittedly admirable hope that somehow this time it'll be different. If it is, we'll be one of the biggest outliers in human history, ancient and modern.

It’s not as if crime disappears with ethnic minorities.

No, but multicultural specific crimes go up. Hell, we wouldn't even have this very thread and debate if it didn't bring extra issues to a society. That's before we look at the many decades of extra social issues multiculturalism brings. Again, yes we have social issues and crime here already, so why import more and different ones?

The canard of pretending that multicultural free societies are more crime infested than monocultural free societies is about as persuasive as the notion that Saudi society is preferential to that of Northern Ireland.

Jaysus you're still beating that Lambeg Halal drum of SA and NI? Simple question: Does multiculturalism bring extra social issues for both the locals and the newcomers? Yes or No? In multicultural societies who are more likely to be socially excluded, the locals or the newcomers? How good is Ireland's record on ethnic minorities of the same "race" and skin colour?

It’s all nonsense that aims to make excuses for simple xenophobia.

Oh it's all nonsense when you struggle to field a cogent rebuttal and it would be all so easy to go to xenophobia or its bedfellow in your arsenal racism, but again my questions stand.

Wibbling wonder wrote: »

More twaddle, just because Alan Kelly signed an SI meaning planning permission isn't required you can hardly say a Direct Provision centre is the same thing as a hotel.

Apparently he can.

alastair

Wibbling wonder wrote: »

More twaddle, just because Alan Kelly signed an SI meaning planning permission isn't required you can hardly say a Direct Provision centre is the same thing as a hotel.

Plenty of permanent residents in hotels before 2015. It’s not really a change of use. It’s still catering for the same number of residents.