Visa amnesty for immigrants

Dub13

Should we go down this road....?Spain are,I was just reading this.

Spain opens visa amnesty for immigrants
07/02/2005 - 12:42:44

Illegal immigrants lined up at their consulates seeking documents to help them qualify to live and work in Spain under a three-month amnesty that began today.

The Socialist government projects about 800,000 illegal immigrants will apply by May 7. The goal is to reduce worker exploitation and tax evasion.

Under five previous amnesties during the past 15 years, about two million people – mostly from Latin America, north Africa and eastern Europe – who had arrived in Spain without proper documentation were legalised.

To qualify for amnesty, employers must provide evidence that applicants have a job, while applicants must document they have no criminal record in their home country and have lived in Spain since before last August.

When the three-month period ends, employers who hire illegal immigrants are subject to fines reaching.

***

So should we do the same...?

arcadegame2004

No! It is my firm opinion that if we did this it would constitute a huge pull factor for immigrants and we would be absolutely flooded. The Irish people, in my opinion, are totally opposed to such drivel!

You should not be rewarded for commiting a crime. Illegal immigration is a crime.

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

No! It is my firm opinion that if we did this it would constitute a huge pull factor for immigrants and we would be absolutely flooded.

They have to show they lived in Spain since before August, if something similar was done here why would it be a pull factor?

The Irish people, in my opinion, are totally opposed to such drivel!

What are you basing this on? (and don't use the Citizenship referendum as "proof", that was nothing to do with immigration)

Hobbes

Frank got there first, but it would not encourage more people to come. It is currently giving an amnesty for the people who are there illegally. From what I recall illegals in Spain are seriously exploited.

Btw, Frank don't you know Arcade if the voice of the whole of Ireland by now. :rolleyes:

bobbyjoe

Good on Spain for showing some consideration for their immigrants. Recognising that immigration is an important feature of a progressive society and the contribution they make.
Doubt it would happen here but it wouldn't be the worst idea, considering that people have been waiting years to get processed.

arcadegame2004

Good on Spain for showing some consideration for their immigrants. Recognising that immigration is an important feature of a progressive society and the contribution they make.

There is the good and the bad. Immigration is a double-edged sword and by no means are all its consequences positive.

There is no law of nature that says letting in huge numbers of immigrants improves the lot of society. In the UK now public opinion is showing up in polls as well and truly fed up of being flooded with illegal migration, with 75% in the latest polls calling for tougher rules on immigration and asylum. The British people are exasperated by the politically-correct nonsense from certain left-wing politicians (like the Lib Dems)that endless immigration is inevitably a good thing. The British Labour government now seems likely to crack down on it, given the newspaper revelation that he feels people are right to be worried about loose immigration controls.

We must protect ourselves from terrorism, and even from people who, while perhaps being well meaning in their own eyes, can constitute a burden on the taxpayer in one form or another, as well as cheap-labour competition.

I propose an Australian-style immigration and asylum-system in Ireland, albeit with more comfortable living conditions for the applicants.

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

I propose an Australian-style immigration and asylum-system in Ireland, albeit with more comfortable living conditions for the applicants.

Immigration is totally different from asylum seeking.
Are you seriously suggesting we lock up people who are looking to emmigrate to this country in a similar fashion to how Australia treats asylum seekers? Or does it just depend on the colour of their skin? (and I'm not suggesting we lock up asylum seekers in that fashion either, whatever excuses people want to use for treating them that way, there is no way you could justify doing that to immigrants)

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

We must protect ourselves from terrorism

Oh yeah, how exactly do you propose doing this?

arcadegame2004

Oh yeah, how exactly do you propose doing this?

911 and Madrid showed that where Islamic terrorism is concerned, we are dealing with something far more extreme even than the IRA or the Loyalist terrori groups. They are in separate league altogether from the homegrown terrorists we have on this island.

We must do all in our power to stop AQ operatives from claiming asylum in Ireland. This scum deserves detention, not protection.

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

911 and Madrid showed that where Islamic terrorism is concerned, we are dealing with something far more extreme even than the IRA or the Loyalist terrori groups. They are in separate league altogether from the homegrown terrorists we have on this island.

We must do all in our power to stop AQ operatives from claiming asylum in Ireland. This scum deserves detention, not protection.

You didn't answer my question. What do you suggest we do about it?

bobbyjoe

I propose an Australian-style immigration and asylum-system in Ireland, albeit with more comfortable living conditions for the applicants.

Think your getting immigration and asylum mixed up.
Should all those Americans working for banks in the IFSC have to spend a few months locked up while their papers are processed?

arcadegame2004

bobbyjoe wrote:

Think your getting immigration and asylum mixed up.
Should all those Americans working for banks in the IFSC have to spend a few months locked up while their papers are processed?

The asylum-seekers should be kept in reception centres and forbidden to get out (except to go home) until their asylum claims are processed.

bobbyjoe

The asylum-seekers should be kept in reception centres and forbidden to get out (except to go home) until their asylum claims are processed.

Like Mosney?
Or would you prefer them to be locked up?

MadsL

Is it just me, or are there flecks of foam in the corner of Arcade's avatars mouth?

arcadegame2004

bobbyjoe wrote:

Like Mosney?
Or would you prefer them to be locked up?

Like Mosney, but they wouldn't be allowed to leave, unless to leave the country - whereupon the Gardai would escort them to their plane.

Allowing asylum-seekers to move freely through this country allows potentially illegal-immigrants to escape deportation and this is unacceptable.

Drapper

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Like Mosney, but they wouldn't be allowed to leave, unless to leave the country - whereupon the Gardai would escort them to their plane.

Allowing asylum-seekers to move freely through this country allows potentially illegal-immigrants to escape deportation and this is unacceptable.

Dont agree.................. Some of the best nations in the world were built by migrants.... US Australia and even the Uk to an extent post WW2............. giving amnesty takes the illegality away from the current asylum seekers and get them in the PRSI tax net to contribute to the host nation..... Can't see the problem in that....... I think the Irish are greedy with the wealth and dont want to share it ...... ahhh the 1980's the shoe was on the other foot...... plenty of illegal irsh in the US and OZ ?

All agree.??

simu

Drapper wrote:

Dont agree.................. Some of the best nations in the world were built by migrants.... US Australia and even the Uk to an extent post WW2............. giving amnesty takes the illegality away from the current asylum seekers and get them in the PRSI tax net to contribute to the host nation..... Can't see the problem in that....... I think the Irish are greedy with the wealth and dont want to share it ...... ahhh the 1980's the shoe was on the other foot...... plenty of illegal irsh in the US and OZ ?

All agree.??

Yeah, give them a chance. It wouldn't surprise me to hear that there's quite a bit of exploitation of illegal workers happening in this country - 'twould be nice to do something about it now rather than it being the 2020 version of the industrial schools/Magdalen laundries scandals that have been revealed in recent years.

And I really don't see the connection between visa amnesty proposals and terrorism...

Drapper

simu wrote:

Yeah, give them a chance. It wouldn't surprise me to hear that there's quite a bit of exploitation of illegal workers happening in this country - 'twould be nice to do something about it now rather than it being the 2020 version of the industrial schools/Magdalen laundries scandals that have been revealed in recent years.

And I really don't see the connection between visa amnesty proposals and terrorism...

Well said Simu......

Maybe we shoulld get gas chambers in these detention centres too ?? hey arcadegame2004 ?? and give them blue and white striped uniforms or was that orange??........

arcadegame2004

Drapper wrote:

Well said Simu......

Maybe we shoulld get gas chambers in these detention centres too ?? hey arcadegame2004 ?? and give them blue and white striped uniforms or was that orange??........

I'll thank you to stop making out that anyone who disagrees with you is a Nazi. That is a very undemocratic position to take. All of you here (who have been debating since the Citizenship referendum debate here) who are opposed to tougher immigration controls stated your opposition to the citizenship-law changes in the referendum, so let's stop pretending (as a few here are doing like Frank Grimes) that the issues are separate. They are far from separate. The campaign, on both sides, was fought on immigration. The only people who were going to be affected by it were immigrants. Therefore it related to immigration. Therefore the referendum result can be taken as a basis for analysing public opinion on immigration. It is a far more accurate sample than the MRBI or TNS/IMS surveys we see in our newspapers every so often, with a 60% turn out.

I believe that the Irish people are dead against any blanket amnesty for all asylum-seekers. Illegal immigrants have committed a crime and a crime should not be rewarded.

Granting an amnesty to all asylum seekers is effectively the same thing as an open-door immigration policy with zero restrictions. By bringing in a blanket amnesty, you are saying that ALL immigrants coming to Ireland will get to stay here and get citizenship, irrespective of whether they work or not. This is a crackpot idea and will bankrupt the health-service, and the social-welfare system, not to mention the competition for Irish jobs and housing on the basis of cheap labour competition, and the heightened racial tensions that would cause.

The people spoke in the Citizenship referendum, and if you seriously think that they weren't voting for reasons due to immigration, then I suggest you talk to some people who voted yes in the referendum and ask them why.

pete

arcadegame2004 wrote:

I believe that the Irish people are dead against any blanket amnesty for all asylum-seekers. Illegal immigrants have committed a crime and a crime should not be rewarded.

JESUS ****ING CHRIST MAN HOW MANY ****ING TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO BE TOLD THAT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS ARE NOT THE SAME ****ING THING????!??!?!?!?!

therecklessone

arcadegame2004 wrote:

I believe that the Irish people are dead against any blanket amnesty for all asylum-seekers. Illegal immigrants have committed a crime and a crime should not be rewarded.

Given your claim that all Irish emigrants pre-Independance were refugees, I'll make this simple for you.

Do you believe that every single illegal immigrant who left these shores for the US and further afield post-Independance should be turfed out of the current state they reside in? They have after all committed a crime...

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Granting an amnesty to all asylum seekers is effectively the same thing as an open-door immigration policy with zero restrictions. By bringing in a blanket amnesty, you are saying that ALL immigrants coming to Ireland will get to stay here and get citizenship, irrespective of whether they work or not.

Not if you support a similar system to that proposed by the Spanish authorities. Lets recap, shall we? Want me to walk you through it?

To qualify for amnesty, employers must provide evidence that applicants have a job, while applicants must document they have no criminal record in their home country and have lived in Spain since before last August.

I've put the relevant part of that quote in bold. Thats the darker text.

In addition, the quote also highlights the inaccuracy of your previous comment that:

arcadegame2004 wrote:

It is my firm opinion that if we did this it would constitute a huge pull factor for immigrants and we would be absolutely flooded.

I only mention that one because you have yet to acknowledge the fact that Frank and Hobbes have already pointed out your mistake. Care to comment, or are you too busy fantasising about the invading hordes?

arcadegame2004

To qualify for amnesty, employers must provide evidence that applicants have a job, while applicants must document they have no criminal record in their home country and have lived in Spain since before last August.

Do you seriously expect criminals to openly admit that they have a criminal record in their country of origin? Yeah right! HAHAHAHA!

Having a job on its own is not good enough. Non-EU citizens from the developing world constitute cheap-labour and must be barred from jobs where the relevant industry is not experiencing skills-shortages. They should be confined to skills-shortage jobs.

We need a points system, like Australia, to ensure that the only immigrants from the developing world let in are the skilled workers who can't be found from the Irish citizenry. I make no apologies to taking the patriotic option of protecting the jobs of Irish men and women.

therecklessone

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Do you seriously expect criminals to openly admit that they have a criminal record in their country of origin? Yeah right! HAHAHAHA!

:rolleyes:

And whats to stop the Justice Department from running background checks? You'll really have to try harder Enoch, I know you usually grasp at straws, but I think you may have scraped the ar*e out of the bucket altogether...

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Having a job on its own is not good enough. Non-EU citizens from the developing world constitute cheap-labour and must be barred from jobs where the relevant industry is not experiencing skills-shortages. They should be confined to skills-shortage jobs.

Then why didn't you say that in the first place. We're not mind readers. I take it you now accept that this:

arcadegame2004 wrote:

By bringing in a blanket amnesty, you are saying that ALL immigrants coming to Ireland will get to stay here and get citizenship, irrespective of whether they work or not.

is bull? Can we have confirmation on that? Without a soundbite?

arcadegame2004 wrote:

I make no apologies to taking the patriotic option of protecting the jobs of Irish men and women.

You say patriotic, I say hysterical.

Tell you what, you run along there now and do a little research. I think sceptre has suggested some secondary school economics in the other Enoch-rails-against-the -darkies thread, start there and work you way forwards.

bobbyjoe

arcadegame2004: believe that the Irish people are dead against any blanket amnesty for all asylum-seekers. Illegal immigrants have committed a crime and a crime should not be rewarded.

An amnesty hasn't even been proposed (as far as I know)
Why don't you keep the hysteria for the things that you think are actualy happening.

arcadegame2004: Do you seriously expect criminals to openly admit that they have a criminal record in their country of origin? Yeah right! HAHAHAHA!

They have to have a clean criminal record from their home country. So if they have one they won't qualify or should they all be presumed guilty?

I make no apologies to taking the patriotic option of protecting the jobs of Irish men and women.

Its not a patriotic option you are talking about its something that would bring great shame and embarrassment to this country.

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

All of you here (who have been debating since the Citizenship referendum debate here) who are opposed to tougher immigration controls stated your opposition to the citizenship-law changes in the referendum, so let's stop pretending (as a few here are doing like Frank Grimes) that the issues are separate.

I stated my reasons for objecting to that referendum at the time, and again I'll say it has nothing to do with immigration simply because it does not.
People will still want to come here as immigrants regardless of whether they can get citizenship or not.

Granting an amnesty to all asylum seekers is effectively the same thing as an open-door immigration policy with zero restrictions

In the context of this thread, that statement is wrong.

This is a crackpot idea and will bankrupt the health-service, and the social-welfare system, not to mention the competition for Irish jobs and housing on the basis of cheap labour competition, and the heightened racial tensions that would cause.

You forgot terrorism.
Are you serious about housing btw? Have you actually looked at how much houses cost these days? All these immigrants taking our jobs and working for nothing would never be able to afford a house.

I make no apologies to taking the patriotic option of protecting the jobs of Irish men and women.

There's nothing "patriotic" about what you're constantly spouting on this forum. Stop deluding yourself.

And, I'll never get tired of asking this, but can you explain to me how you propose keeping all these Islamist terrorists out of Ireland?

chewy

okay only baiting!

I am hereby putting arcadegame on my ignore list, so one can try to have a a discussion about immigration without his bigoted nonsense...anyone with me???

Drapper

chewy wrote:

okay only baiting!

I am hereby putting arcadegame on my ignore list, so one can try to have a a discussion about immigration without his bigoted nonsense...anyone with me???

YES

arcadegame2004

chewy wrote:

okay only baiting!

I am hereby putting arcadegame on my ignore list, so one can try to have a a discussion about immigration without his bigoted nonsense...anyone with me???

I'm not the bigoted one!

Drapper

arcadegame2004 wrote:

I'm not the bigoted one!

Ohh yes you are .................. if your kid came home with a boyfriend who was a refugee what would you do............ welcome him into your house or not?

arcadegame2004

I don't have children but if I did, I quite frankly would not care what race his/her boyfriend/girlfriend was. However, I don't really think any of the asylum-seekers, having crossed so many EU Western countries before getting here, can expect the Irish people to take them seriously when they claim that getting to Ireland was necessary to save their life. Really? Weren't they safe in Italy, Spain, France, Germany, or the UK? Don't think so! That's not bigotry, that's common sense. Ireland isn't exactly the nearest EU country to the zones of conflict, or to poor countries.

As far as I am concerned, you are not a genuine refugee for the purposes of the asylum and immigration system, unless you claim asylum in the first EU state you enter, and/or are fleeing war, famine or persecution.

Economic migration is what you are otherwise and I don't think it's appropriate to use the term "refugee" when referring to this particular category of immigrant, which, judging by the failure rate of asylum-applications (93% in 2003, and still the vast majority on appeal), constitutes the overwhelming majority of asylum-seekers. Saying someone is a refugee doesn't make it so.

Zombrex

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Economic migration is what you are otherwise and I don't think it's appropriate to use the term "refugee" when referring to this particular category of immigrant, which, judging by the failure rate of asylum-applications (93% in 2003, and still the vast majority on appeal), constitutes the overwhelming majority of asylum-seekers. Saying someone is a refugee doesn't make it so.

You are a refugee if you apply for refugee in another country. You are an aslyum seeker if you seek aslyum in another country.

Refugee is not an award of privilage. It is simply a description of the persons legal status. You are an aslyum seeker if you seek aslyum.

Now you may be turned down for aslyum. As your own stats point out a good portion of aslyum seekers are turned down for aslyum. They are still refugees.

Please, without ignoring the actual question, explain what exactly is wrong with our system or the system that we are required to have in place under UN law? Asylum seekers cannot work. They cannot claim welfare benenifit. They are not given money to decide their own food or their own accomondation. As you said most are eventually deported. How exactly is this system not working as it is.