Would you be in favour of Migrant checkpoints in Northern Ireland? - read OP before posting

Yes.

People? I assume you just mean you.

How would you implement the hard and soft aspects? How would anyone know you weren't a third world fraudulent asylum scammer without stopping you and checking?

Tough, the world has changed, again.

Come up to Donegal and campaign for that. I dare you.

In what way? do you think the people that didn't want a hard border and border checks in 'their country' have changed their attitudes?

Do you assume that people who consider Ireland to be one country, will stand for being stopped by authorities 'in their own country' going wherever they want? 😂

the world hasn't changed that much for some people on this island.

Also, what's the point? It won't stop anyone claiming asylum, they will just do it at the border with northern Ireland instead of anywhere else.

Pointless exercise

You'd better learn to read the room and understand society. Your fellow citizens in this Republic demand change.

The riposte 'Brits out, everyone else in' to SF policy sums up well hardening attitudes.

😂 read the room! you clearly don't read the room in afraid. You wouldn't want to see the 'protests ' that some people will participate in if they cannot pass through the border without checks.

If the checks are to be done in NI, as per the OP…

You'd think for the passionate Irish flag wavers, a hard border with the North and blocking their fellow Irish citizens up north freely accessing the 26 counties with be a complete non-runner. Seems not though.

Almost as if it was never really about Ireland in the first place…..

Not an option at all at all. To check for migrants, you have to check everyone.

Anybody wanting this, how do you expect it to work practically? Pulling in cars, trucks, busses. Enforcing a hard border essentially and causing traffic jams. Even if it was 1 in every ten vehicles, the slowing down and moving lanes of everyone else would be chaos. And how do you know there's nobody in the other 9? Pointless.

How can we have a common travel area, if we stop traffic and freight?

In addition, do you want checkpoints on the M1 causing havoc, when someone who really wants to could just walk down a random rural road, of which there are 100s.

Even if stopped, all a person has to do is say they are here to claim asylum, as they do in airports already. So it'd be purely for show to satisfy some weird desire of a few, and be a nightmare for every other practical reason.

There needs to be proper checks at every enter point into Ireland so yes I would be in favour for NI checks too

80% of asylum applicants are coming over the NI border.
https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/social-affairs/2024/04/23/80-of-asylum-applications-to-be-processed-within-three-months-under-new-eu-rules/

Actually, scratch that, it's 90%.
https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2024/0430/1446420-cabinet-migration-legislation/

And how would border checks stop that?

considering they are claiming asylum

How do people claim asylum?

What I mean is, what's the mechanism?

What do they have to do to claim asylum?

Here's the thing: they do have an obligation to stop this. It's an aspect of the common travel area.

One feature of the CTA is that if I arrive in, say, Heathrow in transit to Ireland, I go through immigration at Heathrow. Once the immigration officer learns that I am in transit to Dublin, he doesn't ask himself if I am entitled to enter the UK; he asks himself if I am entitled to enter Ireland. So UK immigration officers apply Irish immigration rules. This works the other way around if someone arrives in, say, Shannon in transit to London.

Part of this deal is that if UK stuffs up and admits me when I'm not, in fact, entitled to be in Ireland, if/when I'm detected in Ireland the Irish authorities can send me back to the UK. The UK admitted me to the CTA; I'm their problem. And, again, vice versa if someone is admitted at Shannon and travels on to the UK, despite not being entitled to enter the UK; they can be sent back to Ireland.

So, yeah, there's a long-standing bilateral arrangement about this between IRL and UK. It's part of the CTA; it predates both countries' EU membership; it's unaffected by Brexit.

It operates with respect to asylum seekers as weill as with respect to any other traveler. There are a couple of extra hoops but, yes, if UK admits someone who travels on to Ireland, isn't entitled to be in Ireland, and applies for asylum in Ireland, Ireland can send him back to the UK to apply there (and vice versa).

Until now. What has happened in recent weeks is that IRL has started complaining publicly about the number of asylum seekers entering via the UK, and the UK has responded by saying they won't take back asylum seekers from IRL any more. This was an astonishingly stupid thing for the Irish government to do; right now the UK government has very little room for manouevre and absolutely zero political capital; if you pick a fight with them about migrants of course they're going to do the perfidious Albion thing; what else can they do?

And this is why the question of policing the border comes up; if the UK unilaterally terminates one of the agreed arrangements that keep the border open, can IRL still deal with an open border or does it have to accept that, despite everything, the UK can bring about the closure of the Irish land border?

People aren't stupid, they'll find ways around the hundreds of km of largely unguarded border. Unless you make it like North Korea / South Korea.

Just make Ireland unattractive enough as a destination for unskilled migrants. Job done.

Try as you might to (patently obviously) astrotruf this claim into reality, "hur dur, the people I don't like would approve of this so it must be the wrong course of action and my position should be in opposition regardless of the facts", is more of a lefty type 'broke brained thinking' thing. I could give a toss if 'the Unionists would approve' of this or not. A stopped clock is right twice a day. There's a problem and the fix is obvious. Refuse entry to the state to those that don't have a right to enter the state at the border.

Engaging in a bit of stereotyping are we?