Immigration to Ireland - policies, challenges, and solutions *Read OP before posting*

I would have thought American liberals were more right wing than European liberals?

No we do not "need" Deliveryoo drivers. Our economy works just fine without them.

That's not all healthcare workers in direct provision though. That's only the numbers who specifically applied for covid specific accomodation. There would have been many who couldn't goto that accomodation cause it was too far away.

You were proved wrong 👍

You tried to.

You were proved wrong 👍

Well, firstly there's the overarching fact that undocumented persons still have rights and still are subject to fair procedures. There is no distinction in international law that says from the moment someone is undocumented they lose all their rights — so there is still a need to actually process them on arrival.

It's in that process that the difficulty arises. Even if they are rejected, the practicalities and feasibility of deportation is often hamstrung by various elements such as the difficulty in determining the country of origin definitively, successfully co-operating with the proper authority of the origin country to even deal with the matter and accept the deportee, or indeed getting another EU country through which they travelled to accept the re-assignment of this deportee (i.e. the old stick 'em back on the plane to Belgium). This has long been one of the major difficulties with deportations and I have long said that the answer to this lies at the EU level — that through collaboration and combined effort the EU states can create a more effective and functioning system for deportations.

So no, there is not necessarily an explicit obligation to "accept" undocumented persons but there are basic obligations that combine to require that you do have to at least give them fair procedure. The problem is what you actually do with them if that procedure rejects their application.

Well yeah....to an extent....but it's also possible that someone with nefarious intent could just enter the country legally (or via the legal entry with illegal or fraudulent means) right? It's not a risk that's limited to undocumented persons but is a risk that's inherent in the entire system of global travel including the openness of the world to tourism etc.

But anyway, my issue with it more so is that it will continue to sap the good will of people towards those who are fleeing genuine persecution and danger and also represents a form of migration that is difficult to control.

Like there is nobody who really disagrees with you here. If you enter without documents, especially in the case that it's likely you destroyed them, it should stand against your claim and you should be denied entry. Great — you then proceed to attempt to remove that person but nobody is accepting them. Then you have the problem of what you do with them — this is the practical problem that often leads to them just being given leave to remain.

There are also people arrested and charged with crimes that have refused to identify themselves to the court. They end up in a gaol cell until they decide to establish their identity. Don't see why the same rules wouldn't apply.

What I can't understand is when people say we can't return them to where they came from if they show up with no ID.

Their is no direct lights from where a lot of these people are coming from.

If they are scanned before a flight, then when they arrive with no ID the airport will have a history of what countries they travelled through.

Return them to where they first boarded a plane and let them improve security of there borders.

Doesn't seem like a whole lot of effort to be implemented by airlines, I thought a database would already exist with your passport history.

There's a lot of problems with this though. Not least among them os that imprisoning someone for an indefinite period for showing up without a passport is pretty harsh but, but even if one plays the miniature violin and says boo hoo to that, it doesn't really stop the problem.

By all means, these types of centres are something I think we probably will need to eventually have. But it's definitely not going to solve the problem of what you do with the ones you can't remove from the country. I was looking there at stats in relation to similar types of deportation centres in the UK and it seems that pretty much half of them never end up leaving at all.

Well hold on. That's not really how it works because there is an end point to that. The accused is entitled to fair procedures on arrest, and will be entitled to a fair trial and legal representation. If they are charged with a crime and the authorities wish to pursue that, the fact that the accused simply refuses to acknowledge their own name doesn't create some interminable legal limbo. Their identity would become a matter of evidence along with any other evidence linking that particular individual to a crime whether or not that individual identifies themselves.

Anyway if a person is happy to languish inside a prison for the rest of their lives, then they are also likely to languish on the dole the rest of their lives. So what is cheaper? Housing and feeding them in a DP centre, or paying to house and feed them in a town?

If you refuse to identify yourself, you're charged with contempt of court and gaoled until you remedy that contempt.

So yes, you can be held indefinitely, obviously depending on the laws of the jurisdiction.

The figures I saw from the US suggested they only deport about 18%. I think similar figures have been shared here from the UK and Australia.

Id say there's several reasons behind that figure being so low. One being that the unwillingness of countries to accept deportees.

After that perhaps you can force airlines to provide documentation, but the same can't be done for people arriving by sea, so when that option is chosen as an alternative it's even more difficult to deal with.

Yes but thats the end point right ? You would be in contempt of court and sentenced to a term of imprisonment not to mention whatever other term is imposed for the crime. The convicted person is then released from prison back into the community.

There is a clear distinction here. What you seem to be talking about is effectively imprisonment for an undefined term but also ignoring the fact that the end point will still remain in many if not most cases that the detained migrant will simply be released anyway.

Why should the migrant be released if they are here without ID?