Visa amnesty for immigrants

Poker_Peter

Information and Services for People Seeking Asylum in Ireland in Direct Provision.

So which of these do you have a problem with? Specifically.

By themselves they might seem reasonable. However, the cost of the taxpayer accumulates as more and more of these people come in. Remember that although the disposable income these people are getting may only be 29 euro, that there is a cost to the taxpayer in terms of "in kind" costs, including accommodation (judged as costing 99.70 euro a week in your link).

Hence, we are entitled to express our disquiet at the sheer nonsense of someone already in safety elsewhere in Europe, being allowed to get Irish taxes spent on them by coming here on the pretence of seeking refuge from something.

If you are not seeking refuge from something then you are not a refugee, as far as any sensible person is concerned.

Saying that someone from Bulgaria can cross into Poland, then five other EU states on the way to Ireland should be allowed to "become" a refugee through being recognised as such by Irish Asylum-Appeal procedures, is like saying that I can apply to be recognised as someone who comes from Mars, or someone born outside the State, in spite of what my birth-cert says. It's like saying that someone is a "refugee" because they are legally given that as a label, in spite of coming from a safe country. There is no sense in this.

Economic migration and the asylum-system need to be firmly made separate in law.

pete

Poker_Peter wrote:

By themselves they might seem reasonable. However, the cost of the taxpayer accumulates as more and more of these people come in. Remember that although the disposable income these people are getting may only be 29 euro,

um...

the facts wrote:

Each adult will receive a personal allowance of 19.05 euro per week

that there is a cost to the taxpayer in terms of "in kind" costs, including accommodation (judged as costing 99.70 euro a week in your link).

That figure is not simply the total cost of accommodation divided by the number of people staying there - it's a notional amount used as part of a means assessment.

I'm sure the actual cost to the taxpayer is out there somewhere. Go find it and then complain.

Poker_Peter wrote:

they're someone else's problem

Economic migration and the asylum-system need to be firmly made separate in law.

Guess what - they are.

Poker_Peter

Guess what - they are.

Not if economic migrants are allowed to use the system to facilitate residency and eventual citizenship in Ireland, or allowed to work as asylum-seekers were until 1999 (when it led to a huge increase in asylum-numbers as Michael McDowell pointed out a few months ago on RTE Radio 1).

The numbers seeking asylum here continue to rise. The total number of asylum applicants this year has already exceeded the total figure for 1998 with 4,636 applicants to 6 October. The numbers applying during 1999 increased from 234 in January to 453 in June but jumped dramatically to 571 in July, 963 in August, 938 in September and 259 last week alone.

www.irlgov.ie/debates-99/s13oct99/sect4.htm

That's what happens when you let them work. You are giving them an incentive to bypass legitimate channels of economic migration like work-permits in favour of pretending to be a refugee. Some refugee that crosses multipled national boundaries of perfectly safe EU states to then land in Ireland and say their life is in danger unless we let them stay!

MadsL

Three points @ Peter;

1. You may wish to educate yourself on current legislation relating to Asylum Seekers
http://www.oasis.gov.ie/moving_country/seeking_asylum/dublin_convention.html

2. You may also wish to quote current figures rather than those which are 7 years out of date which you prefer to bring up as supporting your argument. Probably because that shows increasing numbers of applications, the current stats shown that the dramatic reverse is true.

Applications                               Pre-2002..2002..2003..2004
No. of new applications for 
a declaration as a refugee                    10316..11598..7483..4265

Total No. of applications for 
a declaration as a refugee                    10325..11634..7900..4766

http://www.orac.ie/pdf/PDFStats/Monthly%20Statistics/2004/December_ORAC_Monthly_Statistics.pdf

3. Asylum seekers are not the topic of this thread. Stop obscuring the discussion with your prejudices about asylum seekers.

Dhimmi76

pete wrote:

Information and Services for People Seeking Asylum in Ireland in Direct Provision.

So which of these do you have a problem with? Specifically.

The part which doesn't tell you what they get after they leave Mosney maybe!!!!! :rolleyes:

Poker_Peter

MadsL wrote:

Three points @ Peter;

1. You may wish to educate yourself on current legislation relating to Asylum Seekers
http://www.oasis.gov.ie/moving_country/seeking_asylum/dublin_convention.html

2. You may also wish to quote current figures rather than those which are 7 years out of date which you prefer to bring up as supporting your argument. Probably because that shows increasing numbers of applications, the current stats shown that the dramatic reverse is true.

Applications                               Pre-2002..2002..2003..2004
No. of new applications for 
a declaration as a refugee                    10316..11598..7483..4265

Total No. of applications for 
a declaration as a refugee                    10325..11634..7900..4766

http://www.orac.ie/pdf/PDFStats/Monthly%20Statistics/2004/December_ORAC_Monthly_Statistics.pdf

3. Asylum seekers are not the topic of this thread. Stop obscuring the discussion with your prejudices about asylum seekers.

I don't have prejudices I have common sense enough to know that there are things called economic pull factors that cause migration from poorer countries to richer countries. While someone on this or the other immigration thread mentioned 1 million Canadians living in the US, there is a veritable stampede of Mexicans crossing into the US every year and it is ludicrous to suggest that the latter is not due to economic factors. You are not seeing comparable %s of Canadians moving into the US because Canada is one of the 7 richest economies on earth in terms of GDP per capita.

It probably takes some time for knowledge of some pull-factors differentiating Ireland from other EU states to become known in parts of the Third World, but I still contend that initially, it was the decision to let the asylum-seekers work up to 1999 that was the main impetus in the rise in asylum-numbers from where they had been before. Yes, your figures do show the numbers kept increasing for a time. I suggest that although we already had the rules on automatical Irish citizenship since 1937 and perhaps before, that the GFA made this far more widely known about and thus constituted the next pull factor drawing in massive numbers of migrants. The fall in numbers in 2003 may be accounted for my the January 2003 Supreme Court ruling that the parents of babies born in Ireland do not automatically qualify for citizenship, while the coming and referendum on laws removing the citizenship-baby rules, together with EU enlargement with makes former would-be asylum seekers EU citizens with full rights to live in Ireland explains lthe rest of the fall, together perhaps with tougher enforcement of the rules with Gardai now being stationed in Calais to monitor suspected attempts at illegal immigration in Ireland. If anything the changes in the figures proves my point about the role of pull-factors in immigration numbers.

What I am saying comes not from prejudice, but from the centuries of experience the world has of economically-motivated migration, together with a view of the world that isn't as naieve as some others in this room may be. Let's keep economic migration separate from the asylum-system. If that requires a change in the UN Refugee Convention then bring it on. If that can't happen, and that requires Ireland to leave the UNRC, then I say, Bring it on!

MadSL, I don't agree with you that illegal immigration has nothing to do with this discussion. Remember that this thread was begun by someone who referred to what was happening in Spain. Unless you are saying that somehow there are many illegal immigrants outside of the asylum-system in Ireland, I would conclude that illegal immigrants in Ireland are asylum-seekers. Indeed our geographic location makes it hard to believe that any of these people coming here are not illegal immigrants or SHOULD not be counted as such. Why? Because they did not stay in the first port of call in the EU. The EU is entirely safe. They should stay in the first EU country they entered.

One thing is for sure. If we do what Spain did and just say "right illegals, you can all work now", then a lot more illegal immigrants are going to come here. Illegal immigration is an action - a process. Some on this forum seem to be implying that regardless of whether this illegal action was committed, the persons doing it need not necessarily be considered "illegal immigrants" for the purposes of the law. I would really love to hear a justification of that from them.

Next thing will they be saying that robbers should not be considered as thieves for the purposes of the law etc. Where woudl it end? Crime should not be encouraged, but by allowing illegal immigrants to work, we would be rewarding it. We have a sovereign right to decide who can and cannot come into our country from outside the EU.

Now

MadsL

If anything the changes in the figures proves my point about the role of pull-factors in immigration numbers.

So if the numbers go up it proves your point and if the numbers go down it proves your point. Hmmm.

I don't agree with you that illegal immigration has nothing to do with this discussion.

I didn't say that. You brought this off topic talking about asylum-seekers (by definition NOT illegals)

Unless you are saying that somehow there are many illegal immigrants outside of the asylum-system in Ireland, I would conclude that illegal immigrants in Ireland are asylum-seekers.

How do you reach that conclusion? Once more - asylum-seekers by definition NOT illegals even if at one point they enter the country illegally before they apply - once they apply they have legal status as asylum-seekers.

Why? Because they did not stay in the first port of call in the EU. The EU is entirely safe. They should stay in the first EU country they entered.

the persons doing it need not necessarily be considered "illegal immigrants" for the purposes of the law.

FFS! RTFM!!! Why don't you just read the legislation and have a dog's notion of what you are talking about.

If we do what Spain did and just say "right illegals, you can all work now", then a lot more illegal immigrants are going to come here.

Not necessarily, we could regulate for those illegal now and offer an amnesty and then put in place a realistic immigration points system, work-visa and work permit system, with strict penalties for employers abusing that system.

We have a sovereign right to decide who can and cannot come into our country from outside the EU.

Yes, we do, within the bounds of the Dublin II regulation. If you don't like that, you know how to try and change it. What exactly is your beef?

Zombrex

Dhimmi76 wrote:

The part which doesn't tell you what they get after they leave Mosney maybe!!!!! :rolleyes:

They either get nothing, leave the country or are deported.

What exactly do you think they get?