DCC to consider putting traveller accommodation in public parks

Mike Murdock

WrenBoy wrote: »

One thing I'll say about Ol' Hazel you can always depend on her to throw around accusations of racism.

Like Ebun Joseph, it is her USP. And she will never be questioned by journalists in this country about anything she says on the subject.

Mike Murdock

bubblypop wrote: »

No

Why not?

Mike Murdock

Mike Murdock wrote: »

Why not?

Because the constitution is not the place to put laws.
Legislators make laws

Niallof9

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

West Dublin and North Dublin have their share South East Dublin needs a good taste of the culture the residents champion so much

what are you on about. There's traveller accommodation all over South East Dublin.

Shakey_jake

Its mad how much attention we give travellers, were a right bunch of push overs in this country

Mrs OBumble

Hmob wrote: »

Not really

You can provide as much free accomodation as you want

Some will settle down but they are mainly traveler at heart

How can you tell, given that some now fitting very well with settled society?

thomas 123

bubblypop wrote: »

Because the constitution is not the place to put laws.
Legislators make laws

Put it wherever it’s needs to be lol - my bad.

endacl

WrenBoy wrote: »

Even so, according to the article ."...“The demand/need for Traveller-specific accommodation is outstripping what is available,” the council said in a report to councillors on Monday."

Jaysus. The demand/need for everybody-specific accommodation is outstripping what is available. Can I have a free gaff in a leafy suburban park too, while you're at it?

That'd be nice.

padd b1975

Stihl waters wrote: »

Great idea, plenty grass for the horses as well, at least they wont have to go far to dump the rubbish

They never do.

Patches oHoulihan

endacl wrote: »

Jaysus. The demand/need for everybody-specific accommodation is outstripping what is available. Can I have a free gaff in a leafy suburban park too, while you're at it?

That'd be nice.

If you get one will you ask for me as well.

I might demand to the bank that I want to not pay my mortgage and then go live in the Park in a Trailer.

Snake Plisken

Just goes to show you that DCC are utter morons between this and the messing up the city centre for motorists, all those in management and planning who come up with these idiotic ideas should all be sacked!

Gunmonkey

endacl wrote: »

Jaysus. The demand/need for everybody-specific accommodation is outstripping what is available. Can I have a free gaff in a leafy suburban park too, while you're at it?

That'd be nice.

Yeah, its like we're not in some kind of a housing crisis or anything!

If whomever commissioned this report is so worried about the lack of gaffs in Dublin they should have recommended just building more houses in general and letting the Traveling community buy/rent the same as everyone else!

Hmob

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

How can you tell, given that some now fitting very well with settled society?

Cos I know a lot of them for a start I suppose

purifol0

I know damn well most of ye haven't read the link, but you really should its pretty eye opening.

Imagine being a councillor and trying to talk openly about this issue at the meeting. Literally everything they say has to be be preceeded with "I'm not rascist" and "Not all travellers" before they even get to mention the actual issues.

According to the article:

Travellers had moved onto sites which had previously been closed, and these sites now required “significant refurbishment”

Some “but by no means all” Traveller sites were subject to dumping and anti-social behaviour

There were two sites where dumping was on-going on a “massive, commercial scale and efforts of the staff to respond have been met with threats and intimidation” the council said.

“Travellers and advocates point to the condition of a given site and the local authority points to endemic issues of dumping and/or estate management issues that are or have contributed to the problems.”

Marcos

PintOfView wrote: »

I don't think you should be putting up references to anyone's home address!!!

I don't know her address, and wouldn't put it up even if I did. It is a matter of public record that she lives in Ranelagh.

Hazel Chu was born and raised in Dublin, in the suburb of Firhouse, before moving to Celbridge, and now lives in Ranelagh . . .

And as for the suggestion of a pilot scheme in Dartmouth Square, it's a nice square in Ranelagh where houses cost northwards of €1.5 million, each so not the place that you'd imagine would welcome traveller's accommodation given their reaction to Noel O'Gara buying up the ground rents of property there in 2005, giving him a stake in the park and then he tried to get money out of DCC by proposing that it be turned into a carpark, or place to sell tiles from. That was the only reason why I referenced it.

Thankfully that failed, but I can't see any of the residents of the square voting for Hazel Chu if there were any traveller accommodation put in there. I'd go further and say that if any actually were put in there it would be the end of her political career.

Rodney Bathgate

It was the Amish all along.

suicide_circus

Looks like designating Travellers as "other than" the rest of the Irish people hasn't quite prompted unity yet.

IngazZagni

suicide_circus wrote: »

Looks like designating Travellers as "other than" the rest of the Irish people hasn't quite prompted unity yet.

Bingo. By designating them a separate race it has done nothing but further separate them from Irish society. As with other races, we are all citizens of this Country and we should be seen as one. With travellers we have done the opposite.

As for the parks suggestion. Absurd but it's DCC we are talking about here.

Donald Trump

biko wrote: »

Trinity College has a big park.
Merrion Square has a big park.
These two should be able to handle all the unsettled Travellers in Dublin.

Ah here. What do you want to do? Turn the place into another UCD?



Actually maybe they could park them out in UCD. Plenty of space and might give the place some character

discodiva92

How do you become a Traveller legally in Ireland?How do they prove it?

WrenBoy

discodiva92 wrote: »

How do you become a Traveller legally in Ireland?How do they prove it?

You say so.

ThunbergsAreGo

Isnt removing public parks from the Public very "un-Green"?

There is little enough public parks as it is.

Mad_maxx

Shakey_jake wrote: »

Its mad how much attention we give travellers, were a right bunch of push overs in this country

Most over indulged group in the land

Hmob

Hmob wrote: »

Not really

You can provide as much free accomodation as you want

Some will settle down but they are mainly traveler at heart

It depends on how it's handled. The council in my town gave a group of houses to a series of Traveller families, who were long known for drug dealing, and fighting, moving them out of an unofficial halting site. They were told if they wrecked the houses, or were caught doing anything dodgy, they'd be evicted and lose any help in the future.

Those families have mostly assimilated. Oh, the parents are obviously still Travellers, but their kids have changed. The accents have mellowed, they're not fighting, and some have managed to get into university. I know one couple who are indistinguishable from other Irish people, and you'd never know their parents are travellers. They have embraced the chance to leave it all behind. Some will resist changing, but they'll die out over time, leaving behind people who will have little choice, as their 'cultural' group shrinks in size.

Assimilation and a zero tolerance policy towards dodgy behavior should be the aim here. Many Travellers would give up their lifestyles in a heartbeat if they could.. but they're stuck in an endless cycle because of peer pressure, and conformity.. along with the governments willingness to bend over for them. Take away the government supports, make them exactly the same as every other Irish citizen, and we'll see them assimilate, or feck off to another country.

GreeBo

Deleted User wrote: »

Assimilation and a zero tolerance policy towards dodgy behavior should be the aim here.

I'm all for zero (or at least low) tolerance to anyone receiving state aid, but assimilation is not and should not be required for anyone.

In any case, what is the target behaviour you want everyone to assimilate into?
Is it leafy suburbs with only a few murders outside nightclubs and an inconvenient cocaine habit or is its more working class areas with a worrying blackmarket, cash in hand lifestyle?

GreeBo

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm all for zero (or at least low) tolerance to anyone receiving state aid, but assimilation is not and should not be required for anyone.

In any case, what is the target behaviour you want everyone to assimilate into?
Is it leafy suburbs with only a few murders outside nightclubs and an inconvenient cocaine habit or is its more working class areas with a worrying blackmarket, cash in hand lifestyle?

It's the assimilation of expectations and values. You focused on class (which I figure is mostly an outdated term in Ireland). I'm talking about the expectations from living. ie. work, educate, acquire wealth, further the advance of your family over time. The adherence to laws, and acceptable behavior.

Assimilation is a requirement because Traveller culture is not compatible with living in a first world nation. Unless you want to subsidise them forever, continuing a special status within society to protect them.

Wibbs

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm all for zero (or at least low) tolerance to anyone receiving state aid, but assimilation is not and should not be required for anyone.

Why not? Societies are made up of shared cultural values and norms that evolve over time and if a person or group doesn't want to conform to those then fair enough, but that non conformity should not be supported and enabled when it leads to negative outcomes. That's before we get to the debate that not all cultures are equal or equally positive and beneficial for the people living within them.

In any case, what is the target behaviour you want everyone to assimilate into?
Is it leafy suburbs with only a few murders outside nightclubs and an inconvenient cocaine habit or is its more working class areas with a worrying blackmarket, cash in hand lifestyle?

Both those cultures however cliched you want to portray them are significantly and demonstrably more positive for those living within them than current Traveller culture.

conorhal

Deleted User wrote: »

It depends on how it's handled. The council in my town gave a group of houses to a series of Traveller families, who were long known for drug dealing, and fighting, moving them out of an unofficial halting site. They were told if they wrecked the houses, or were caught doing anything dodgy, they'd be evicted and lose any help in the future.

Those families have mostly assimilated. Oh, the parents are obviously still Travellers, but their kids have changed. The accents have mellowed, they're not fighting, and some have managed to get into university. I know one couple who are indistinguishable from other Irish people, and you'd never know their parents are travellers. They have embraced the chance to leave it all behind. Some will resist changing, but they'll die out over time, leaving behind people who will have little choice, as their 'cultural' group shrinks in size.

Assimilation and a zero tolerance policy towards dodgy behavior should be the aim here. Many Travellers would give up their lifestyles in a heartbeat if they could.. but they're stuck in an endless cycle because of peer pressure, and conformity.. along with the governments willingness to bend over for them. Take away the government supports, make them exactly the same as every other Irish citizen, and we'll see them assimilate, or feck off to another country.

That might be optimistic, multiculturalism as practiced today does little to facilitate integration and some groups, to the surprise of globalists, are highly resistant to abandoning their cultural identity and practices to become one world global consumers.
Take the Roma for example. Under his rule in Romania, Ceausescu forcibly settled the lot of them and insisted they go to school and participate in civil society but he wasn't 5 minutes swinging from a lampost before all that was abandond in favour of returning to their traditional lifestyle.


The most depressing aspect of this thread is just how pathetic the 'big brain' solutions are that the people we elect to run things come up with.
This is their outside the box solution to an accomodation crisis? The last time the parks were filled with encampments of people trying to scrape a living was during the famine, they are literally proposing a famine era refugee crisis solution to a counsel housing issue.

conorhal

conorhal wrote: »

That might be optimistic, multiculturalism as practiced today does little to facilitate integration and some groups, to the surprise of globalists, are highly resistant to abandoning their cultural identity and practices to become one world global consumers.

Multiculturalism doesn't work, except in countries where there is a dominant culture that remains constantly, dominant. The awareness that the dominant culture is "superior" and that there are benefits in adopting the dominant culture, cause natural assimilation to occur.

Under the modern system, that's bypassed because minorities receive special privileges, removing any need to conform to the 'dominant' culture, and as such, the dominant culture loses focus, splintering under the weight of so many "accepted" identities, without any national pride or belief.

I've lived in multicultural and mono-cultural (a primary dominant culture) societies.. and the mono-cultural societies tend to be far more stable.

Take the Roma for example. Under his rule in Romania, Ceausescu forcibly settled the lot of them and insisted they go to school and participate in civil society but he wasn't 5 minutes swinging from a lampost before all that was abandond in favour of returning to their traditional lifestyle.

Dunno. I don't know much about Romania.. but I'm sure their history, and culture, are far different from ours. Along with the expectations and beliefs of their people(s).

The most depressing aspect of this thread is just how pathetic the 'big brain' solutions are that the people we elect to run things come up with.
This is their outside the box solution to an accomodation crisis? The last time the parks were filled with people trying to scrape a living was during the famine, they are literally proposing a famine era refugee crisis solution to a counsel housing issue.

Nobody wants to be unpopular and make the difficult choices. Problems will be deferred on to the next generation, and the next.

Invidious

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm all for zero (or at least low) tolerance to anyone receiving state aid, but assimilation is not and should not be required for anyone.

Most people today accept that children in their mid-teens should be studying for their Junior Cert rather than getting ready to walk down the aisle. But when the Irish government first proposed closing a loophole that allowed 16- and 17-year-olds to marry with judicial approval, singer Kelly McDonagh Mongan claimed that “It’s part of our tradition and any law that stops young people getting married is against Travellers.”

This is the classic problem. Practices such as marrying at 16, while frowned upon by the rest of society, are defended by Travellers as "part of our tradition" — and forcing them to comply with societal norms is decried as some racist project of assimilation.

Laws stating that children should not be taken out of school at 12 and married off at 16 exist for a reason, i.e., they protect children's right to receive an education and not to be forced into marriage before they are mature enough to take that step. When Traveller culture conflicts with the laws of the land, as it frequently does, then the law should prevail. If that means that Travellers are "forced to assimilate," then so be it — the rest of us are forced to obey the same laws as well, whether we agree with them or not.