Direct Provision - Should it be ended?

Gatling

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

My preference is a purpose built centre for asylum seekers on or near the dublin airport land

They should have good facilities there and a fair system including 1 appeal.

If they fail that appeal then off on the next flight home.

See that's common sense but others find everything offensive

ELM327

DelaneyIn wrote: »

Revoke our signatory to the asylum convention. It’s become nothing more than a means for fraudsters to gain residency in the state.

I agree, too much money for accomodation. Too much money holding these people hostage, they are economic migrants in most cases but we shouldnt be keeping them here.


Ship them back from whence they came. There's no country at war that has a land border with Ireland so it's impossible for this to be the first port of call.

Lundstram

I voted yes. Abolish it and just don't allow them here at all.

We've no room, sorry.

chosen1

This is one area where it appears that the media and general opinion are at complete odds with one another.

DP is getting huge coverage on radio and articles the like of the Journal and yet a massive majority of comments here and on the Journal seems to suggest that most want it replaced by a quick system that actually deports the bogus asylum seekers.

I've yet to hear any public commentator on radio or any articles that come out and question why there people from the likes of Albania, Georgia and Nigeria (all relatively safe countries) allowed to clog up the system? Why is are they allowed countless appeals? Why so few deportations when applications are refused? Why do they go on holidays to the place they fear so much, once they are granted leave to remain in Ireland? Not one fact check ever done.

The current system is inhumane, especially for children in their formative years growing up in limbo but the individuals who are pursuing more and more appeals are actively contributing to this. Government also have a huge proportion of blame also for keeping the status quo as it is.

Nesta2018

Yes, the media and ordinary people are completely at odds. The most frantic virtue signalling in my experience comes from affluent liberal people who will never compete with newcomers for housing, school places, public healthcare or jobs. They will never feel like a stranger in their own neighbourhood and wonder why it has transformed beyond recognition.

The more ordinary kind of low to middle earning taxpayer types are disgusted at what a scam and a racket it all is, pouring money into the pockets of the legal profession, NGOs and DP providers, while the rest of us pick up the tab. Far from the multicultural fantasy, the truth about neighbourhoods that contain lots of different ethnic groups is that they are unfriendly and impersonal, and people leave them if they can.

Rodin

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Here, they start an appeal in the local paper and social media, get the kids pictured with classmates or GAA teams, RTE are happy to include on the 6 1 news and the minister immediately caves in and gives leave to remain. Then the rest of the extended family are brought over. Then they go back home for a holiday.

By drawing out their appeal process they significantly increase the likelihood of being allowed to stay, even if they are ultimately found to be bogus asylum seekers.

The taxpayer can’t win.

That's exactly why they shouldn't be kept in DP for 10 years to go through all their schooling here.
They either have a legitimate case or they don't.
Decide quickly.

Rodin

Gatling wrote: »

See that's common sense but others find everything offensive

Already have Mosney.

Mr. Karate

Nesta2018 wrote: »

Yes, the media and ordinary people are completely at odds. The most frantic virtue signalling in my experience comes from affluent liberal people who will never compete with newcomers for housing, school places, public healthcare or jobs. They will never feel like a stranger in their own neighbourhood and wonder why it has transformed beyond recognition.
.

Rte and the rest of the media have proven they are completely disconnected from the average person a long time ago.

suicide_circus

Gatling wrote: »

There has been 60,000 + through direct provision but yet over a 12 year period we only managed 1300 deportations

that figure is insane

suicide_circus

chosen1 wrote: »

This is one area where it appears that the media and general opinion are at complete odds with one another.

one of many and increasing

Ahh well, I feel that Asylum/refugee status should be a temporary thing, dependent on the reasons for the application. If they're coming from a war-torn country, and the country later resolves the war (and they can't prove genuine real danger direct to themselves), then they should be given a period to get their affairs in order, and then sent home. I genuinely don't feel that Asylum should be a permanent state of affairs, except in the most extreme of cases.

Economic refugees/migrants should be flat out denied. We have a legal immigration system based on educational and financial considerations, and that should be the rule followed. If people are not able to contribute to the economy (not as low end workers), then they should be denied.

I've been an expat for over a decade now, and I've lived in four Asian countries. I've also done work in another 9 countries under business or temp work visas. As such, I've looked at their visa/residency rules... and it's only really Europe that is a soft touch. Unless you're able to fulfill the requirements, (and often not threatening the jobs of natives), you don't get in. In every instance, I paid for my admittance to countries, and was expected to support myself. If I couldn't support myself, I would be expelled. That's logical, and perfectly reasonable.

I have never understood this need in Ireland to show/prove to everyone that we're more compassionate than everywhere else. I could understand it more if Ireland was an economic powerhouse, but it's not. Some good periods of economic growth, but the countryside lags far behind the cities. It doesn't make sense to me the amount of money spent on virtue signalling, with very dubious returns. Unchecked/unplanned Multiculturalism is dangerous, which can be seen from other nations, but we're unable/unwilling to recognise those dangers. Cause we're different. Special. Somehow.

DP serves a purpose. I would be inclined to modify it... to streamline the claim process and to improve conditions overall... but also to reduce the burden for the taxpayer. It's a system that is incredibly inefficient. However, it's also a way to limit the effects of migration... and migration will only increase as time goes by.

Spanish Eyes

The minute flights are ok again, there will be more arriving. As if we didn't have enough troubles ourselves at the minute.

Anyway, it is all blx and leftie leaning luvvies supporting this scam. As another poster said, those who shout loudest in favour of this scam will never have to suffer the consequences because of where they live and their position in life.

Such double think is abhorrent. Either you are a genuine asylum seeker or you are not. I reckon 90% are not. I want someone to disprove this now.

MrMusician18

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The minute flights are ok again, there will be more arriving. As if we didn't have enough troubles ourselves at the minute.

Anyway, it is all blx and leftie leaning luvvies supporting this scam. As another poster said, those who shout loudest in favour of this scam will never have to suffer the consequences because of where they live and their position in life.

Such double think is abhorrent. Either you are a genuine asylum seeker or you are not. I reckon 90% are not. I want someone to disprove this now.

From memory, I think around 70% are denied asylum.

Gatling

MrMusician18 wrote: »

From memory, I think around 70% are denied asylum.

But yet the majority who came here seeking asylum over the last 20 + years are still here ,
We've no real process to remove failed asylum seekers they can walk out of dp move to a rented property change a name and they can't be found , but will then be able to access services including welfare

irishproduce

The solicitors and their lobby will have a say in it all because if you make the process efficient then they stand to lose a lot of work/ legal welfare.

jones

You have to laugh at the media in this country they portray direct provision as some Nazi style camp where the poor seekers are kept locked up for years never to see the light of day. I remember an rte article not so long ago which had a picture of asylum seekers behind a big gate protesting about DP as if they were locked in and the tone of the piece suggested they were. The alternative to dp is as Leo said containers or else social housing for people who have *literally* said the word ASYLUM. I don't think many would have a problem with granted refugees being housed in an actual house paid for by the state but to house the vast majority of chancers we're getting into dangerous territory and can you imagine the influx from all over the world when word got out?

Majority of claimants are here for monetary reasons or to get to the UK. Up until 2017 any applicant could appeal 3 different negative decisions and then could take out a judicial review, which itself can take years. Basically it was a near endless appeal system which meant you could still be "in the process" ten years after applying but this was only in part to inefficiency and more to do with appeal after appeal after appeal.

These appeal cases are inevitably the ones you hear about in news articles who are "languishing" in DP for many years because of the slow system (in actuality it's more to do with a number of appeals). The process has been shortened since 2017 but still takes years when you add in appeals (and judicial reviews if applicable).

It's funny how DP is painted so badly yet no one who is in it will leave it, some even after they have been granted full refugee status..funny that.

the immortals

A billion euro spent on direct Provision since 2000
70-80% refusal rate of asylum applications
You couldn't make it up, no one will challenge it for fear of the racist card being used against them, it's an absolute disgrace,

Richard Hillman

I have seen a couple of posts on social media about repealing the 27th amendment about the right of Irish citizenship by birth.

I haven't seen anything from the leftist parties about it. I think they know they will lose it and don't want to be putting any ideas into their constituency strongholds about being put to the back of the queue for social housing.

They could campaign all they like, it won't pass

Kivaro

the immortals wrote: »

A billion euro spent on direct Provision since 2000
70-80% refusal rate of asylum applications
You couldn't make it up, no one will challenge it for fear of the racist card being used against them, it's an absolute disgrace,

Just for clarification, there has been a great deal more money than €1 billion of tax payers money spent on Direct Provision since 2000. Links are available on another thread on this forum.

goose2005

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I have seen a couple of posts on social media about repealing the 27th amendment about the right of Irish citizenship by birth.

I haven't seen anything from the leftist parties about it. I think they know they will lose it and don't want to be putting any ideas into their constituency strongholds about being put to the back of the queue for social housing.

They could campaign all they like, it won't pass

They've been talking about workarounds that would not need a referendum. I think that would meet a massive pushback though

Beechwoodspark

Build a center adjacent to the airport

Nice facilities, food, outdoor park with children’s playground

Quick process and then 1 appeal

If unsuccessful then off on the next plane home

tobefrank321

Once you let a bogus asylum seeker in the country its very hard, costly and time consuming to remove them, which is why you shouldn't let them in, in the first place.

If someone from Georgia or Albania wants to apply for asylum, they should be told to apply via their nearest Irish embassy. If asylum is granted welcome them in, if not don't. If they turn up in Ireland and seek asylum, straight home on the next flight.

The same for other countries with a history of bogus claims.

For those from genuine areas like Syria, they should be welcomed in and accommodated.

But its the bogus claimants who overwhelm the system.

kildare lad

Gatling wrote: »

But yet the majority who came here seeking asylum over the last 20 + years are still here ,
We've no real process to remove failed asylum seekers they can walk out of dp move to a rented property change a name and they can't be found , but will then be able to access services including welfare

It's a joke , there's too many people making money out of the whole situation, landlords , hotel owners , solicitors etc. We need to do what Australia does, you go there and work, if you're a good worker you'll get sponsored and they'll extend your visa . Over stay your visa or break the law , bye bye. I'd a friend over there that over stayed his visa . He got in a fight one night. Cops came and arrested him. They found out he was visa was out of date so he got out in a detention centre and was deported three weeks later.

Direct Provision should stay but nobody should be in it for 5 or 10 years. Max stay should be 6 months because that's the most a decision should take if they had the will to make it so.

DelaneyIn

The Direct Provision system will be ended within the lifetime of the next government, under a commitment outlined in the draft deal between Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Greens.

Abolishing Direct Provision was a key demand of the Green Party and programme for government is understood to say: “We are committed to ending the Direct Provision system and will replace it with a new international protection accommodation policy centred on a not for profit approach.”

The change will be made over the lifetime of the next government and a white paper on the way forward for the international protection process will be drawn up by the end of the year. It will be informed by the current review into the system being carried out by Catherine Day.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/direct-provision-system-to-be-ended-within-life-of-next-government-1.4278954

Provided this is followed up with a swift deportation process for failed asylum seekers and a clamp down on spurious claims in an attempt to exhaust the system, I am fine with it.

But I very much doubt that will happen. They will be hooked up with HAP and social welfare, spend years fighting any refusal and if a deportation letter is ever sent, go to the media with a sob story. A few pictures of them and their children in school uniform and leave to remain will be quietly granted by the MoJ a few days later.

It will cause a huge pull factor. No Western European country is as lax with immigration control as us and nobody else provides private social housing for asylum seekers upon their entry to the state.

Eric Cartman

goose2005 wrote: »

They've been talking about workarounds that would not need a referendum. I think that would meet a massive pushback though

when you're already trying to work around the referendum, you know you're on the wrong side of the majority.

love their faith in democracy.

Galwayguy35

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I have seen a couple of posts on social media about repealing the 27th amendment about the right of Irish citizenship by birth.

I haven't seen anything from the leftist parties about it. I think they know they will lose it and don't want to be putting any ideas into their constituency strongholds about being put to the back of the queue for social housing.

They could campaign all they like, it won't pass

For the last week or so we have been hit with daily stories in the media about how white paddy is just a step below a KKK member so I don't think anyone is in the humour to hear about repealing that amendment.

Labour and the far left want it brought back on the table of course but I think its safe to say it would be roundly defeated if voted on.

SporadicMan

Cool, time to pay for even more people to come to Ireland and get air time on RTE to say how terrible a person I am.

And the gradual 'Irish were colonisers too' creep will continue.

double jobbing

If anyone would care to check Twitter tonight they will find the Irish left in sincere belief that asylum seekers are given a smidgen of sauce/ pasta and two bits of bread as their main course for dinner because someone took a photo of it :pac::pac::pac:

I used to think lefties were pure welfare leeches but it's quite clear a good amount of them do have mental difficulties that actually do entitle them to disability benefits. Being this gullible and naive isn't just being a bit daft, it's something more medically serious.

double jobbing

In today's Dail debate Richard Boyd Barrett complained the proposals for DP reform/ scrapping were a rebranding exercise as it sounded like asylum seekrs would still be housed in institutions.

The inference being, of course, that they should be housed in actual houses and flats, as tenants, same as any other local authority tenant. Something that until we have more social homes than we have applicants for social housing, would mean asylum seekers get a preference for said housing.


Mick Barry complained that there was nothing in it that hinted at an end to deportations, and that it even hinted at faster, accelerated deportations.

Mick didn't explain whether he is opposed to all deportations (e.g rapists, Islamists) or just thinks that absolutely everybody who manages to get here should be allowed to stay in one of these bottomless amount of social homes he wants the state to provide at a priority to affordable and social homes for those of us who pay the taxes.

These were clips on FM104 news, if anybody has any more links to them in full I'd be amused to hear it.

It's actually shocking that two elected representatives can stand in a national parliament, when we are on the potential precipice of an economic disaster, and complain that people who have never spent a red cent in the country, most of whom are not fleeing any sort of danger at home, should have preferential access to housing.