What are your views on Multiculturalism in Ireland? - Threadbanned User List in OP

kildare lad

jmreire wrote: »

Roll on the next GE,,,,,,the sooner the better !!

It'll be a waste of time , sure look at the last election , sinn fein topped the polls and yet fine gael and fianna fail ended up in power again . There's no parties that put Irish citizens first. They're all on this pro mass immigration, pro multicultural bandwagon that's going to have serious social and economic problems that the rest of europe are dealing with now .

Strumms

Why ? Because they want to introduce cheaper labour for their corporate **** off buddies and get more companies here paying less tax as it is, super tax breaks, now they want them paying significantly less wages...

The money-making goons benefit, the ordinary Irish citizens and taxpayers certainly don’t...not one bit...

Pay more to house, accommodate, transport and finance them.

Wait longer on hospital waiting lists because we might not have medical cards, they will..

Fast becoming or already are second class citizens in our country... and paying for that privilege.

Those arriving certainly benefit, Irish people don’t.

ThunbergsAreGo

KevRossi wrote: »

SF have historically been very pro-immigration and pro asylum seekers. In fact their policies have usually been the more radical of all parties.

It doesn't really work when your protest vote is for a party who have pretty much the same views as those you are protesting...

Kivaro

From the BBC this morning:
"People who enter the UK illegally to claim asylum will no longer have the same entitlements as those who arrive legally, under new immigration plans. Home Secretary Priti Patel said those who arrived legally would immediately be given the right to remain in the UK indefinitely."

So let me ask you, in order to stop the constantly perilous flow of economic migrants to our borders, does this policy not make sense? Watching the Home Secretary this morning, she talked about the unsustainable numbers of migrants arriving from Europe in order to claim asylum in the UK. She said that those asylum seekers are departing from safe countries in order to gain entry into the UK, which is wrong.

If only we had a politician with a backbone like Priti Patel in Ireland.

ThunbergsAreGo

Kivaro wrote: »

From the BBC this morning:
"People who enter the UK illegally to claim asylum will no longer have the same entitlements as those who arrive legally, under new immigration plans. Home Secretary Priti Patel said those who arrived legally would immediately be given the right to remain in the UK indefinitely."

So let me ask you, in order to stop the constantly perilous flow of economic migrants to our borders, does this policy not make sense? Watching the Home Secretary this morning, she talked about the unsustainable numbers of migrants arriving from Europe in order to claim asylum in the UK. She said that those asylum seekers are departing from safe countries in order to gain entry into the UK, which is wrong.

If only we had a politician with a backbone like Priti Patel in Ireland.

Watch her be demonised for it

Kivaro

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Watch her be demonised for it

The BBC presenter was almost crying this morning when she asked the Home Secretary questions about judging asylum seekers based on where they apply for asylum. It was typical BBC. However Priti Patel was well able for her inquisitor by answering in a non-emotional, non-hysterical, and logical manner that was fact-based.

clytemnestra

Kivaro wrote: »

The BBC presenter was almost crying this morning when she asked the Home Secretary questions about judging asylum seekers based on where they apply for asylum. It was typical BBC. However Priti Patel was well able for her inquisitor by answering in a non-emotional, non-hysterical, and logical manner that was fact-based.

It's interesting the way they can't throw the "racist" epithet at her. They do try to accuse her of being heartless considering her own parents were Ugandan Indians fleeing Idi Amin, but there's no comparison. Ugandan Indians had deep ties to Britain, with many of them already holding British citizenship. They were in genuine danger of death - Amin had threatened to kill them all. And they were overwhelmingly hardworking, entrepreneurial, self-sufficient and culturally compatible.

Arthur Daley

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Watch her be demonised for it

Stuff 'em. The Tories got a landslide in December 2019 due to issues like this. Seat after seat in the north fell. People have had enough.

It's time for the loony left to resume their traditional station in life, before Facebook and Twitter amplified them way beyond their capabilities. A rag tag fringe minority with a handful of votes.

kildare lad

Feadog999 wrote: »

I did. But not expecting much.


Dear Eoin,

Many thanks for your swift reply. While I strongly disagree with the points you made, I very much appreciate the engagement and exchanging of ideas in a friendly manner.

It appears you have strong faith in this government to deliver (successfully) such a programme. Something I do not.

I think if the Irish enter a country illegally the Irish Government should not lobby for their status to be regularised. Indeed it would be hypocritical, therefore I don't (and many Irish dont) beleive that illegal Irish abroad should be allowed to remain in the new host country. Breaking the law certainly should not be encouraged, especially with generous social programmes.

There is a large difference between skilled migration and low skilled / asylum migration. The Irish when traveling abroad are doing so in search of work. They do not (and have not) relied on the generous social programs of their new host country to get by. Indeed, this is a point also parroted by your colleagues in Fine Gael, maybe political parties in Ireland are not as different as we think. There is an existing legal process for skilled people to come here already.

The Irish, when abroad, won't get free own door accomodation within four months of arriving, they don't get free physical and mental health care, they don't get free education, they don't get free legal aid. In fact, I live in Ireland and pay taxes here and I don't get any of the above but yet I will end up paying for it.

There no possible way that tax income received from these people will cancel out the expenditure implications. There are a plethora of reports showing that low earners in Ireland, in comparison to other European countries, pay very little in income tax and these migrants will not have the updward social mobility in one generation to climb out of this bracket. Therefore, of course it will end up costing a significant amount of money to the tax payer. We already operate in an environment where the Irish tax payer sees absolutely minimal return for their taxes.

In fact, I believe that the introduction of a massive influx of low skilled workers (who decide to work) will create a surplus of labour forcing the wages of hard working families down rather than up.

Ireland being a rich country with plenty of resources is also something I disagree with. We were approximately €200 billion in the red pre-covid. Likely to climb to €240 billion. A central bank news article yesterday outlined we can't borrow forever and that the programmes announced in budget 21 last year will likely have to be funded through increased in taxes. Let's not forget that Ireland also has the second highest cost of living in the EU - behind Denmark. Insurance, house prices, child care, taxes, general cost of living are significant costs to hard working families as is, without funding such migration programmes.

Under the current circumstances there is no way that the housing of these people can be provided for without impacting people already living and working here. We are kidding ourselves if we think otherwise. People are already competing with local authorities and AHBs to buy houses - while I understand you have a different housing policy, we unfortunately are currently operating in a FF/FG/GP system that puts public housing providers in competition with people buying houses.

Migration has created some pretty serious issues in other European countries and we would do well not to ignore it. Indeed, Denmark has begun to strip Syrian residents of residency permits and have begun sending some home citing it is now safe to return. Like always, Ireland is late to the party and will be late to the party introducing counteracting policy measures when we eventually have to.

Again, going back to the article 27 referendum. I really think the regularisation process totally goes against the vote. And agreeing with it or not, it was a democratic process. However, I realise it also gave future governments power to change it.

If you look at the Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll From 2015, 70% of Sinn Fein voters were against taking any migrants with the majority of citizens also against the idea and I think if such a poll was carried out today the general citizen result would be largely the same.

As part of the plans, there appears to be no upward ceiling applied to how many people can come / be catered for which of course will only serve to attract more migration. Indeed, there also dosent seem to be any reference to improving the process to let genuine asylum seekers in while denying others or economic migrants.

There really seems to be a total lack of evidenced based policy making and analysis present in both the plans and that is my largest worry. That we will rush into such programmes while blindfolded in order to appear as progressive as possible while throwing caution to the wind. I think it will only serve to foster division and social unrest in the future. But who knows, maybe I am wrong. But that is the way it is panning out in other European countries currently.

Again, thank you for the engagement and at least I know where Sinn Fein stands.

Great reply . I wonder why politicians are so oblivious to their constituents when it comes to this subject. Political parties in Ireland can count themselves lucky that there isn't a viable centre right leaning party for the electorate to vote for . The right was non existent in Europe till the EU decided to open its borders up to everyone .

Sand

kildare lad wrote: »

Great reply . I wonder why politicians are so oblivious to their constituents when it comes to this subject. Political parties in Ireland can count themselves lucky that there isn't a viable centre right leaning party for the electorate to vote for . The right was non existent in Europe till the EU decided to open its borders up to everyone .

NGOs have direct access to TDs, ministers and civil servants. NGOs often run 'training courses' which TDs and their staff attend to be 'informed' on the issue. Constituents get no such access or representation. So a TD is always going to be far more influenced by the NGOs than by their constituents.

I think its reasonable that the NGO industry/complex is considered a threat the democratic process in Ireland. Certainly they should receive no state funding and no access to politicians or civil servants.

jmreire

kildare lad wrote: »

It'll be a waste of time , sure look at the last election , sinn fein topped the polls and yet fine gael and fianna fail ended up in power again . There's no parties that put Irish citizens first. They're all on this pro mass immigration, pro multicultural bandwagon that's going to have serious social and economic problems that the rest of europe are dealing with now .

In the last election, people did so much vote SinnFein in, ( I'd say that the majority did not even read the Sinn Fein election manifesto!! ) as try and vote FFG out...and it nearly worked. Had Sinn Fein fielded more candidates, they would have won too, so much was the angst and dissatisfaction amogst voters. But what happened ? The two deadly enemies of Irish Politics, buried the hatchet and cobbled together a"Power sharing" agreement rather than form a coalition with Sinn Fein. But the next election???? Now that's the question...Sinn Fein will not make the same mistake a second time of not fielding enough candidates, but will the voters still feel the same way?

ThunbergsAreGo

jmreire wrote: »

In the last election, people did so much vote SinnFein in, ( I'd say that the majority did not even read the Sinn Fein election manifesto!! ) as try and vote FFG out...and it nearly worked. Had Sinn Fein fielded more candidates, they would have won too, so much was the angst and dissatisfaction amogst voters. But what happened ? The two deadly enemies of Irish Politics, buried the hatchet and cobbled together a"Power sharing" agreement rather than form a coalition with Sinn Fein. But the next election???? Now that's the question...Sinn Fein will not make the same mistake a second time of not fielding enough candidates, but will the voters still feel the same way?

SF are not an alternative though....

They are more of the same

Sand

Sand wrote: »

NGOs have direct access to TDs, ministers and civil servants. NGOs often run 'training courses' which TDs and their staff attend to be 'informed' on the issue. Constituents get no such access or representation. So a TD is always going to be far more influenced by the NGOs than by their constituents.

I think its reasonable that the NGO industry/complex is considered a threat the democratic process in Ireland. Certainly they should receive no state funding and no access to politicians or civil servants.

It's a way to mirror what happens in the US with lobbies and corporations. The corporations already have direct access to the politicians, and have enormous power here... The NGO's are just another addition to increase that influence, along with all the cheap labor that they provide which can be paid by the taxpayer.

TBH I suspect we're seeing another mirror with the US. Instead of looking for the Black/minority votes as what happened in the US, our politicians are importing a disenfranchised underclass that they hope to manipulate into voting for them. After all, offering further benefits and services has worked wonders in the past for Irish people... and I suspect that many Irish are getting tired of those strings attached promises, but the migrants wouldn't be.

jmreire

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

SF are not an alternative though....

They are more of the same

Maybe so, but like I mentioned in my post, the whole thrust of the Sinn Fein vote was to knock FFG of the perch they have occupied for so long, and many who voted for them would not even had read or paid any attention to their election manifesto. The general opinion at the time was, Sinn Fein could not be any worse anyway.

ThunbergsAreGo

jmreire wrote: »

Maybe so, but like I mentioned in my post, the whole thrust of the Sinn Fein vote was to knock FFG of the perch they have occupied for so long, and many who voted for them would not even had read or paid any attention to their election manifesto. The general opinion at the time was, Sinn Fein could not be any worse anyway.

I totally agree, and I think the same will happen again next time. Was more a general comment than aimed at your good self

But I think those that vote them in will be severely disappointed. They are a vote for more of the same.

DeadHand

I’ll tell you an anecdote that I believe reflects the position of Sinn Fein and their voters on mass immigration.

I asked an associate after the last election who he had voted for (I shouldn’t have). This is a competent man, but not well versed in politics. He replied SF. I ask why. His reply was “because they’ll get the foreigners out of Ireland”.

There’s your SF vote.

They are, as a political force, deeply reliant on the ignorance of their voter base.

DerekC16

DeadHand wrote: »

I’ll tell you an anecdote that I believe reflects the position of Sinn Fein and their voters on mass immigration.

I asked an associate after the last election who he had voted for (I shouldn’t have). This is a competent man, but not well versed in politics. He replied SF. I ask why. His reply was “because they’ll get the foreigners out of Ireland”.

There’s your SF vote.

They are, as a political force, deeply reliant on the ignorance of their voter base.

Many such cases.

TomTomTim

Deleted User wrote: »

It's a way to mirror what happens in the US with lobbies and corporations. The corporations already have direct access to the politicians, and have enormous power here... The NGO's are just another addition to increase that influence, along with all the cheap labor that they provide which can be paid by the taxpayer.

TBH I suspect we're seeing another mirror with the US. Instead of looking for the Black/minority votes as what happened in the US, our politicians are importing a disenfranchised underclass that they hope to manipulate into voting for them. After all, offering further benefits and services has worked wonders in the past for Irish people... and I suspect that many Irish are getting tired of those strings attached promises, but the migrants wouldn't be.

How does this even work in Ireland when all political parties are selling the same product? It makes sense in America, because it gives Democrats votes, it makes sense in the UK, because it gives the likes of Labor and the Lib Dems votes. I can't make out how it works in the Irish context, where all the parties are pro immigration.

TomTomTim

TomTomTim wrote: »

How does this even work in Ireland when all political parties are selling the same product? It makes sense in America, because it gives Democrats votes, it makes sense in the UK, because it gives the likes of Labor and the Lib Dems votes. I can't make out how it works in the Irish context, where all the parties are pro immigration.

Planning for the future? After all, we've seen a variety of "new" parties come into being all in the last few years. That speaks volumes considering the lack of change in politics throughout my childhood and 20s. The first groups were easy to dismiss, but people will learn from what went before, and seek to create more moderate and appealing mandates.

They must see that there will be competition in the future. Sure, not now, but in another five or ten years time?

The other side, is a continuation of what's already been going on. They get the split the votes among them, decreasing the effectiveness of any dissenting Irish voices.

jmreire

DerekC16 wrote: »

Many such cases.

Just as in the Peter Casey case, where he got 330'000 votes, all on just one issue. In my opinion anyway, there is or will be the same "pool" of voiceless voters based on the Immigration issue. Just because they are not highly vocal, does not mean that they do not exist. Casey proved that. Any forward thinking politician would do well to see which way the immigration wind is blowing, and act accordingly.

ThunbergsAreGo

We should stop doing things in a blanket fashion.

Take the recent reduction of time needed for kids to gain citizenship.

By all means reduce it to three if

*parents is a legal resident
*parent has tax returns for 2 of last 3 years

Otherwise leave at 5.

Esho

jmreire wrote: »

Just as in the Peter Casey case, where he got 330'000 votes, all on just one issue. In my opinion anyway, there is or will be the same "pool" of voiceless voters based on the Immigration issue. Just because they are not highly vocal, does not mean that they do not exist. Casey proved that. Any forward thinking politician would do well to see which way the immigration wind is blowing, and act accordingly.

If that's the case, how come the anti- immigration party bombed out at the last election?

Esho

Sand wrote: »

NGOs have direct access to TDs, ministers and civil servants. NGOs often run 'training courses' which TDs and their staff attend to be 'informed' on the issue. Constituents get no such access or representation. So a TD is always going to be far more influenced by the NGOs than by their constituents.

I think its reasonable that the NGO industry/complex is considered a threat the democratic process in Ireland. Certainly they should receive no state funding and no access to politicians or civil servants.

I think it's more like the NGO attitude chimes with the cancel culture. So politicians are too scared to call out any issue that could be spun as "racist".

Remember the Wexford TD who pointed out some facts about the problems asylum seekers are causing truckers? She was branded a racist by the mefia and twitterati.

Irish politicians listen to their constitutents- well the ones who get re-elected do.

ThunbergsAreGo

Esho wrote: »

If that's the case, how come the anti- immigration party bombed out at the last election?

Cos they are racist scumbags, and other undesirable characteristics

ThunbergsAreGo

Esho wrote: »

I think it's more like the NGO attitude chimes with the cancel culture. So politicians are too scared to call out any issue that could be spun as "racist".

Remember the Wexford TD who pointed out some facts about the problems asylum seekers are causing truckers? She was branded a racist by the mefia and twitterati.

Irish politicians listen to their constitutents- well the ones who get re-elected do.

And she got elected, so maybe it chimed

Esho

randd1 wrote: »

Prove what? That they can fit into Irish society/culture? Look around you, it does happen. I'm sure you know plenty that do. Most immigrants work and contribute.

Or is it that they can't learn a skill here? Can't hold down a job? Can't make themselves useful to society despite their lack of skills/education? Give them a shot.

And if they don't contribute, or are unwilling to contribute to Irish society, then they should be sent home.

I agree, it's always been true that historically immigrants are harder working than the natives- they had to be, as the natives would have taken any better opportunities.

I know many refugees who came to Ireland in the 00s who availed of Ireland's very well developed adult education system and took their shot - and built a life for themselves and their families. And are now Irish.

Some were unable to, and we are paying for them via taxes. I've no problem with this by and large as they were facing/ had fled death or imprisonment where they came from.

I came across a small number of sacks who had no intention of ever working, including types who fled religious persecution for being radical Islamists.
It made me angry to hear them express their desires for a Sharia Ireland. I know of at least one who was on the first boat to IS in Syria when the call went out.

There are no protections or safeguards for the internationally very valuable Irish Passport, in terms of telling people to gtfo if they are abusing their welcome.

And there won't be, as any politician who speaks out on this will be branded a racist.

Esho

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Cos they are racist scumbags, and other undesirable characteristics

There you go.

Esho

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

And she got elected, so maybe it chimed

Maybe indeed. I'd put money that the politician who spoke against the Oughterard asylum seeker center will be re-elected. Can't remember his name now
His constituents were against it.

Maybe more established politicians will take on anti-immigration policies if they have the backup.

But unfortunately being pro-immigration controls also seems to translate into being anti-immigrant.

Esho

TomTomTim wrote: »

Being able to discuss the topic on a national level would be a start. As bad as many European countries may be, there's at least the ability to discuss immigration on the radio or on TV. In Ireland it's the elephant in the room, it can only be discussed positively, anything else is heresy. This kind of mindset is honestly a throw back to the Soviet Union, where any societal issues that can be used against the ideology of the state, must be suppressed and never spoken of. Our masters have clearly learned nothing from the past, as that kind of mindset brought down the Soviet Union.

I agree completely.
Or it is if you had a baby out of wedlock in the 50s - you are shunned, marginalised and it's over for you

I like your comparison with the Soviet Union- if you step out of the party line, it's Siberia or the bullet.

jmreire

Esho wrote: »

If that's the case, how come the anti- immigration party bombed out at the last election?

Give it time..the Traveller issue in Ireland goes back generations, and the 330'000 who voted for Casey, all had personal experience's with them. Now the immigration issue on the other hand is relatively new here, at least in the present Nrs. But there is growing dissafaction with the whole immigration issue, but like many have posted here, to speak out or even seek informed discussion on the subject is tabboo , lest you bring the hellfire of racism, the woke and PC brigade's down on you. The problem is that the longer it takes to address the whole issue, the worse the problem will become, and the harder it will be to fix it.