Asylum Seekers Getting Apartments in Ballinamore - mod warning in OP (18/10)

alastair

Gatling wrote: »

Yes .

See the onus is solely on you to back up your own claims with evidence and facts which you have repeatedly refused to do over several threads ,

Your telling lies there is no other explanation

Still waiting for that supposed government statement you keep referring to, or indeed any evidence of your supposed hidden thousands of post-deportation order asylum seekers.

alastair

Gatling wrote: »

Hopefully the people of achill make a stand and say no

https://twitter.com/3imear/status/1187749507548749827?s=21

Graces7

bubblypop wrote: »

What's your view Grace?
You don't think they should take these people?

I do not k now Achill very well; ;only been there once when I was househunting, but I know many of the people indirectly and I studied the island when I was seeking to move. Many kind folk who have lived and worked there for all their lives and their families before them .

This is very ill advised; the medical services are scant and the sheer distance to any hospital.. Nearest is Castlebar. Low key Garda presence; a laid back small community

Achill has very limited facilities. And had it been families it might have worked better. These are single men. In a remote and isolated place .

It seems to have been rushed through? As if they have dumped on a very vulnerable place. Total population 2.500 and in the village under 100 many of whom will be elderly. I would say a vulnerable place

Not a question of whether the locals will take them either. They have been given no choice and who will believe that word "temporary"

Achill depends heavily on tourism.

Unfair. And without proper thought. There should have been the consultation the community asked for

I do wonder re the hotel owner and the bus driver, but jobs are scarce.

Oh a friend opines that we have in Ireland many empty convents; excellent buildings whoch would be perfect for Direct Provision

Graces7

alastair wrote: »

https://twitter.com/3imear/status/1187749507548749827?s=21

Interesting and yes I see the point but how will this work with young males only? Families would have been far far better and yes would have helped the island greatly.

Was this written before it was known that this was single males only?

also as others have opined re other centres, they are in areas where GPs do no t want to come. Nearby. two towns, Glenamoy and Bangor Erris now are served by a single GP as one resigned. This is the pattern

All the islands are depopulating as few choose island life; being compulsorily placed?

Gatling

Graces7 wrote: »

They tried that and were disregarded. Is it illegal to suggest blocking the bridge... easy enough.

A couple of tractor trailers would be ideal if they decide to take that route

1641

A report in the IT today that the Gov has established a group to examine the the asylum system and direct support. It might be a great opportunity for the many posters, who have suggestions and ideas, to make a submission on how the system can be improved:

"The Government has established a new independent group to examine whether the existing system of supports given to asylum seekers, including direct provision, is fit for purpose.

The group, chaired by former European Commission secretary general Catherine Day, will examine the Irish international protection system.

It met for the first time this week. It will look at a range of issues – such as accommodation, education, employment and social welfare rights – and is expected to report back to the Government in about a year’s time.

The Irish Times understands it will also examine engagement between the State and local communities."

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/asylum-seeker-support-focus-of-government-group-1.4063070

Gatling

alastair wrote: »

And ???

Graces7

.

Gatling wrote: »

A couple of tractor trailers would be ideal if they decide to take that route

Indeed! but they are folk who respect authority. I would hate to see that happen.

One of the islands I almost went to is Inishturk and they are fighting depopulation year after year. The school is crucial. The last video on the website there were three there.

There is no knowing; there really is not. But that there has been not even the smallest consideration for the people is a bad start. If these are war torn folk they will need far more help and support than Achill has. In winter a very quiet place. If that is what they need?

It shows a total lack of any valuing of local folk. In the other places, folk were able to act, to protest. Achill was not given that grace.

Interesting post Grace, I don't see anything that would stop 40 people moving onto achill.
Why do you think there would need to be a greater Garda presence?
And perhaps the asylum seekers may get involved in the tourism business? They may be a great addition to the village.
Was the community where you lived asked if you should be allowed to live there before you did?

Gatling

Graces7 wrote: »

.

There is no knowing; there really is not. But that there has been not even the smallest consideration for the people is a bad start. If these are war torn folk

Most will be young male economic migrants seeking the easiest route to life long benefits and social housing,

All they will add to rural communities is ghetto's

Ronin247

alastair wrote: »

The Dublin regulations are an arrangement between EU countries - they’re not an obligation on asylum seekers. Asylum seekers can, and do, register their claims in EU countries having passed through other EU countries every day. Something you’ve clearly not noticed. Only people entitled to make their claim here are allowed make their claim here - unsurprisingly.

Now you are really trying to muddy the water

When an asylum seeker submits a claim to Ireland that claim has to be assessed as to which country it should be registered in, i.e. the first country they entered the European union in. In order to avoid this happening the bogus asylum seekers refuse to say where they entered the European union , they "lose" the passports they travelled on and avoid registering or getting fingerprinted in the first country of the European union they land in. We have no border with Nigeria,Tanzania,Eritrea or any of the other countries they arrive from, therefore there is unequivocally no way they are entitled to asylum here.
We take in refugees from Syria (rightly so in my opinion) and other places by agreement with our European partners, but the bogus asylum seekers are what I am talking about.

Graces7

bubblypop wrote: »

Interesting post Grace, I don't see anything that would stop 40 people moving onto achill.
Why do you think there would need to be a greater Garda presence?
And perhaps the asylum seekers may get involved in the tourism business? They may be a great addition to the village.
Was the community where you lived asked if you should be allowed to live there before you did?

I think you know your answers to most of your points. OK? OK

Graces7

Gatling wrote: »

Most will be young male economic migrants seeking the easiest route to life long benefits and social housing,

All they will add to rural communities is ghetto's

Sad if that is so. Really sad. It is such a different placing than most of the others. But that age group,, The three month plan is interesting, in off season.

alastair

Ronin247 wrote: »

Now you are really trying to muddy the water

When an asylum seeker submits a claim to Ireland that claim has to be assessed as to which country it should be registered in, i.e. the first country they entered the European union in. In order to avoid this happening the bogus asylum seekers refuse to say where they entered the European union , they "lose" the passports they travelled on and avoid registering or getting fingerprinted in the first country of the European union they land in. We have no border with Nigeria,Tanzania,Eritrea or any of the other countries they arrive from, therefore there is unequivocally no way they are entitled to asylum here.
We take in refugees from Syria (rightly so in my opinion) and other places by agreement with our European partners, but the bogus asylum seekers are what I am talking about.

Nope. The Dublin regulations require that an asylum seeker make their claim in the first EU country they are registered in. There’s no obligation on the asylum seeker to register in any EU country on their way to Ireland. It doesn’t matter that we have no border with any country - every successful refugee in this county comes from somewhere we don’t have a border with. They were entitled to seek asylum, and were granted asylum. Do you honestly believe that you’ve discovered some remarkable oversight in the system that nobody else has noticed? Really? ��

ThunbergsAreGo

1641 wrote: »

A report in the IT today that the Gov has established a group to examine the the asylum system and direct support. It might be a great opportunity for the many posters, who have suggestions and ideas, to make a submission on how the system can be improved:

"The Government has established a new independent group to examine whether the existing system of supports given to asylum seekers, including direct provision, is fit for purpose.

The group, chaired by former European Commission secretary general Catherine Day, will examine the Irish international protection system.

It met for the first time this week. It will look at a range of issues – such as accommodation, education, employment and social welfare rights – and is expected to report back to the Government in about a year’s time.

The Irish Times understands it will also examine engagement between the State and local communities."

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/asylum-seeker-support-focus-of-government-group-1.4063070

They would be better looking at the time it takes to assess people and send those back who don't qualify.

Another job for the boys above on which nothing will happen but it spins nicely for Leo

Graces7

Graces7 wrote: »

I think you know your answers to most of your points. OK? OK

I'm asking you those questions

Beechwoodspark

I’m beginning to have suspicions that some onthis thread are facilitators of illegal migration or something.

Baffling some are deflecting and telling everyone that ppl obey deportation orders without the need for the state to actually ya know...deport them. Just ...odd.

Beechwoodspark

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Ah ok. So you want ghettoes with no healthcare or education with security locking people in.

Nah thats actually a disgustingly inhumane system that breaches all sorts of human rights and is certainly not ever a winning situatiin.

To be perfectly clear.

I don’t want “ghettoes”. I don’t want “no health care or education”

I actually want ENHANCED health care and education and integration classes but in a central facility.

So not in far flung rural locations but a central location where they are housed until their application is decided.

Win win for the asy seekers and the state.

alastair

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I’m beginning to have suspicions that some onthis thread are facilitators of illegal migration or something.

Baffling some are deflecting and telling everyone that ppl obey deportation orders without the need for the state to actually ya know...deport them. Just ...odd.

No deflection. It’s not odd at all. Why would you believe that people wouldn’t, in the main, obey the law?

alastair

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

To be perfectly clear.

I don’t want “ghettoes”. I don’t want “no health care or education”

I actually want ENHANCED health care and education and integration classes but in a central facility.

So not in far flung rural locations but a central location where they are housed until their application is decided.

Win win for the asy seekers and the state.

What are these enhanced education and healthcare facilities if not schools and doctors/hospitals - which currently serve the asylum seekers?

Beechwoodspark

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

So you want ghettos and that Irish people and asylum seekers never meet each other. Great idea.

Sorry now that’s not what I want at all. Didn’t see this post but no I don’t want ghettos.

RocketRaccoon

Why are people saying this is a good thing? It's a joke.

Beechwoodspark

alastair wrote: »

What are these enhanced education and healthcare facilities if not schools and doctors/hospitals - which currently serve the asylum seekers?

No, more like a one stop shop type of location where on campus there is a school and health care and integration classes. And fast track solution for ppl who the state wants deported

None of this- ah sure they obey the deportation orders themselves...yeah right... if the state makes a serious decision that someone should have a deportation order then the state should enforce it and make sure it is enforced

This half assed attitude of “oh they will leave themselves” if left to their own devices is deeply odd thinking.

1641

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

They would be better looking at the time it takes to assess people and send those back who don't qualify.

Another job for the boys above on which nothing will happen but it spins nicely for Leo

There may be some people with ideas and suggestions that they want to get across. I take you have some on how the assessment process can be improved and quickened. I think everyone would want to see this achieved, so go for it.


I do understand that there will be some who will forever be much more content cynically carping from the sidelines.

Beechwoodspark

Can I ask ppl to be honest and say if they think deportations should actually be enforced??

alastair

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

No, more like a one stop shop type of location where on campus there is a school and health care and integration classes. And fast track solution for ppl who the state wants deported

None of this- ah sure they obey the deportation orders themselves...yeah right... if the state makes a serious decision that someone should have a deportation order then the state should enforce it and make sure it is enforced

This half assed attitude of “oh they will leave themselves” if left to their own devices is deeply odd thinking.

What’s odd is your inability to grasp the realities of what you claim, and what the existing processes are.

‘One stop shop’ schools and hospitals are still New schools and hospitals - so you’re advocating building new schools and hospitals for segregated communities of asylum seekers. That’s a tax burden, not a saving. Asylum seekers already have access to schools, hospitals and GPs.

Deportation orders are pretty straightforward - those served with them either make arrangements with INIS to leave the country - not voluntarily, as it’s an order after all, make a submission for the minister to revoke the order, seek a judicial review, or refuse to leave - in which case the order is enforced - a process which costs much more than non-enforced deportation. At no point is it ‘left up to themselves’.

Beechwoodspark

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Can I ask ppl to be honest and say if they think deportations should actually be enforced??

But they are.
When someone doesn't leave themselves, they are physically enforced.
Why would you think they are not?

Happyilylost

alastair wrote:

No deflection. It’s not odd at all. Why would you believe that people wouldn’t, in the main, obey the law?

What people struggle to believe is that people think every asylum seeker comes here with the belief their claim will be accepted. Either through friends or relatives some of these asylum seekers are making journeys they know are bound to end in failure. So for that reason I think it is acceptable to believe they will enter Ireland and claim asylum. Enter a Direct Provision system and then quickly move themselves on to somewhere else to avoid the possibility of an enforced order. For people to believe this is not possible/plausible would be fanciful to say the least.

High risk asylum seekers have gone missing in the DP system only to reappear again. If the system can't help and track these it's hard to believe they can keep a handle on the rest.

Gatling

bubblypop wrote: »

But they are.
When someone doesn't leave themselves, they are physically enforced.

Can you at least provide some evidence to back this claim up or are you reposting someones else claim unvarfied claim at that ??????

alastair

Happyilylost wrote: »

What people struggle to believe is that people think every asylum seeker comes here with the belief their claim will be accepted. Either through friends or relatives some of these asylum seekers are making journeys they know are bound to end in failure. So for that reason I think it is acceptable to believe they will enter Ireland and claim asylum. Enter a Direct Provision system and then quickly move themselves on to somewhere else to avoid the possibility of an enforced order. For people to believe this is not possible/plausible would be fanciful to say the least.

High risk asylum seekers have gone missing in the DP system only to reappear again. If the system can't help and track these it's hard to believe they can keep a handle on the rest.

Except that most asylum seekers do remain in the system until the bitter end. So your theory is rather compromised by the facts on the ground.