What’s the alternative for Direct Provision?

gailforecast

Do we just need to process applications sooner, or is there actually a practical solution that can be an alternative?

Multipass

gailforecast wrote: »

Do we just need to process applications sooner, or is there actually a practical solution that can be an alternative?

It’s a shambles how long the process takes. It should be a quick decision and swift deportation if not successful. There also needs to be a system where any crime committed means asylum is immediately revoked.

JRant

gailforecast wrote: »

Do we just need to process applications sooner, or is there actually a practical solution that can be an alternative?

Actually deporting those rejected and housing the legitimate cases in proper housing.
It's almost too simple to work really, so no chance of it being implemented.

Very curious about this myself. Constantly hearing end direct provision... But then what? What do they want to do with all these refugees?

Eric Cartman

gailforecast wrote: »

Do we just need to process applications sooner, or is there actually a practical solution that can be an alternative?

90 day max turnaround , 45 days first application , if all the info isn't gathered etc.. automatic deny , 45 day single appeal process , if its denied again you're on a plane out of here.

a quota system also , 1/3rd women, 1/3rd men, 1/6th male children, 1/6th female children. Stop some of these countries only sending men or 'children' with beards.

during that 90 days in effectively a detention centre near the airport.

if you make it through the process, be allowed in under strict conditions, regularly reporting to Garda stations , any convictions - you're out, any association with religious extremists - you're out, you must actively engage in education to learn the English language, provided group monitored accommodation with other asylum people. Reduced social welfare only on a card that cannot translate to cash. a complete 10 year post admittance monitoring and supervision program.

JRant

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Very curious about this myself. Constantly hearing end direct provision... But then what? What do they want to do with all these refugees?

The people calling for an end to it are usually the same type that don't want any of them deported either. Maybe some good old fashioned social housing needs to be built in their areas (usually nice leafy suburbs) and place them all there.

smelly sock

What do the like of Australia do in situations like this?

biko

People can sign up to take up to 2 immigrants in their homes for free.

gailforecast

smelly sock wrote: »

What do the like of Australia do in situations like this?

I think asylum seekers are all stuck on an island off the coast until they’re processed.

Rodney Bathgate

Process the applications to completion in 3 months including all appeals. Immediately deport the bogus applicants when appeals process finishes. By immediately I mean that day.

Immediately deport anyone who claims to have arrived here without papers. (They flushed them down the toilet on the plane if they arrived by air.)

Sonrisa

Eric Cartman wrote: »

90 day max turnaround , 45 days first application , if all the info isn't gathered etc.. automatic deny , 45 day single appeal process , if its denied again you're on a plane out of here.

a quota system also , 1/3rd women, 1/3rd men, 1/6th male children, 1/6th female children. Stop some of these countries only sending men or 'children' with beards.

during that 90 days in effectively a detention centre near the airport.

if you make it through the process, be allowed in under strict conditions, regularly reporting to Garda stations , any convictions - you're out, any association with religious extremists - you're out, you must actively engage in education to learn the English language, provided group monitored accommodation with other asylum people. Reduced social welfare only on a card that cannot translate to cash. a complete 10 year post admittance monitoring and supervision program.

Sounds really conducive to integration and good outcomes for employment, people's children and so on :rolleyes:

Eric Cartman

Sonrisa wrote: »

Sounds really conducive to integration and good outcomes for employment, people's children and so on :rolleyes:

keeping people away from crime and religious extremism, ensuring there isn't an oversupply of adult men, providing English language training and expediting deportations, ohh no how awful a functional system would be :rolleyes:

Fred Cryton

JRant wrote: »

Actually deporting those rejected and housing the legitimate cases in proper housing.
It's almost too simple to work really, so no chance of it being implemented.

It's that simple is it? And how do you know who is legitimate asylum seeker and who is an illegal economic migrant? Based on whoever can act out the greatest sob story?


And why should they be given "proper housing" even if they are legitimate asylum seeker? They should have to earn it like everyone else. Allow them to work by all means but they should earn their keep like everyone else. Why is the solution always for the nanny government to give free goodies.

weldoninhio

Sonrisa wrote: »

Sounds really conducive to integration and good outcomes for employment, people's children and so on :rolleyes:

Why would any of that stop integration or employment?

JRant

Fred Cryton wrote: »

It's that simple is it? And how do you know who is legitimate asylum seeker and who is an illegal economic migrant? Based on whoever can act out the greatest sob story?


And why should they be given "proper housing" even if they are legitimate asylum seeker? They should have to earn it like everyone else. Allow them to work by all means but they should earn their keep like everyone else. Why is the solution always for the nanny government to give free goodies.

They either come prepared with supporting documentation or it's back they go. This nonsense of arriving and destroying the fake documents they landed with needs to be stopped.

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

90 day max turnaround , 45 days first application , if all the info isn't gathered etc.. automatic deny , 45 day single appeal process , if its denied again you're on a plane out of here.

a quota system also , 1/3rd women, 1/3rd men, 1/6th male children, 1/6th female children. Stop some of these countries only sending men or 'children' with beards.

during that 90 days in effectively a detention centre near the airport.

if you make it through the process, be allowed in under strict conditions, regularly reporting to Garda stations , any convictions - you're out, any association with religious extremists - you're out, you must actively engage in education to learn the English language, provided group monitored accommodation with other asylum people. Reduced social welfare only on a card that cannot translate to cash. a complete 10 year post admittance monitoring and supervision program.

And maybe give them only 3/5's of a vote :pac:

Eric Cartman

Deleted User wrote: »

And maybe give them only 3/5's of a vote :pac:

They wouldn't have voting rights until they were citizens anyway so trying to equate a perfectly fair quota to weed out the massive over representation of adult men seeking asylum here to the American '3/5 of a white person' thing is really telling on your part. Why not just scream racist at me and let it be done with the lack of reasonable argument against my proposal.

We reject a load of asylum applications from white people too you know.

CrankyHaus

Sonrisa wrote: »

Sounds really conducive to integration and good outcomes for employment, people's children and so on :rolleyes:

Interesting that you don't list "helping genuine refugees" in your prioritised outcomes. Because I thought that's what the asylum system's primary purpose should be; not entertaining liars, chancers and fraudsters, to the long-term detriment of genuine cases.



I don't agree with all of his suggestions but a starting point for any asylum system reform should be to ask what we want the system to do. For too long the answer to this question seems to have been decided for us by unaccountable NGO's, Quangos and media bubbles.

take everything

biko wrote: »

People can sign up to take up to 2 immigrants in their homes for free.

Why isn't this happening more.
Serious question.

kildare lad

smelly sock wrote: »

What do the like of Australia do in situations like this?

I know two people that got deported from Oz. Both over stayed their visas and got caught by doing something stupid while drunk. One was arrested brought to a detention centre and shipped back here all in the space of three weeks. No prolonged court cases making lawyers rich off the back of taxpayers. Break the law you're gone .

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

They wouldn't have voting rights until they were citizens anyway so trying to equate a perfectly fair quota to weed out the massive over representation of adult men seeking asylum here to the American '3/5 of a white person' thing is really telling on your part. Why not just scream racist at me and let it be done with the lack of reasonable argument against my proposal.

We reject a load of asylum applications from white people too you know.

I was hoping the :pac: would flag that it was joke

biko

take everything wrote: »

Why isn't this happening more.
Serious question.

There was a system to pledge beds to Syrians
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/new-campaign-calls-on-irish-households-to-pledge-a-bed-to-syrian-refugee-1.3495120

The Irish Red Cross wants people to consider offering a spare bedroom to a Syrian refugee to use for up to a year.

We can replace DP with this system. I'm sure a lot of families don't mind paying for an extra person or two.

TheBoyConor

gailforecast wrote: »

I think asylum seekers are all stuck on an island off the coast until they’re processed.

Ireland, IS the island off the coast that they have been sent to.

Gods Gift

Indirect Provision.

ShamNNspace

Any reform of the Dp system has to be coupled with a complete recalibration of the foreign aid programme where billions have been siphoned off and redirected over the years by corrupt governments, also by now we should be looking for a lifting of blockades into Syria so they can rebuild their country. Imv the money they spend per claimant is not value for money it'd be cheaper to give them a lump sum, fingerprint and photograph them and send them on their way. Also if we had an independent media who reported on conflicts around the globe without constantly taking the US line as gospel it would be a start

JRant

JRant wrote: »

Actually deporting those rejected and housing the legitimate cases in proper housing.
It's almost too simple to work really, so no chance of it being implemented.

Housing them... that's great.

Sure I'll just keep and working and saving and some migrant can just come in and get it for half nothing.

Great system.

Silent Running

What countries would have Ireland as their first safe country?

If they've passed through a safe country on their way here, or if there are no direct flights to Ireland from their home country, they should be refused asylum. That would probably keep the numbers down, therefore needing less accommodation.

I can't help feeling that we're being taken for a soft touch by migrants that aren't real asylum seekers.

suicide_circus

1. Whatever system replaces DP, it's going to need to involve a faster decision making process which inevitably means faster deportations for some.

2. As for accommodation, if centres and hotels need to go, inevitably this means regular social housing.

Number 1 will be problematic for those many of those seeking DP reform. Number 2 will be problematic for many on a social housing waiting list.

weldoninhio

suicide_circus wrote: »

1. Whatever system replaces DP, it's going to need to involve a faster decision making process which inevitably means faster deportations for some.

2. As for accommodation, if centres and hotels need to go, inevitably this means regular social housing.

Number 1 will be problematic for those many of those seeking DP reform. Number 2 will be problematic for many on a social housing waiting list.

If 1 is sorted there should be no problem keeping DP centres.

suicide_circus

weldoninhio wrote: »

If 1 is sorted there should be no problem keeping DP centres.

Oh ok. I thought they were in and of themselves inhumane

weldoninhio

suicide_circus wrote: »

Oh ok. I thought they were in and of themselves inhumane

Because of the overcrowding etc. and the length of time people have to spend in them they are seen as inhumane, leaving people in limbo. They aren't dungeons. In reality, they're warm, safe, solid bedrooms, with dining halls where you get fed for free. You can come and go as you please and you get pocket money. Although, if it was to be sped up we'd maybe need to look into detention centres to ensure that those conning the system don't claim asylum, get put into DP and disappear. Like the chancers found on the ferry recently.