Time for a zero refugee policy? - *Read OP for mod warnings - updated 11/5/24*

Nope. I correctly quoted him.

Where are you getting this from though? Who is telling you that being proud of the tricolour is a bad thing?

You say you're proud to be Irish but really the vast majority of Irish people are proud to be Irish — some may simply be less vocal and expressive about it. Some people find the use of the tricolour in certain circumstances to cheapen its meaning or to be a hijacking of it, particularly when it's used in the context of divisive issues. One is allowed to have that opinion without being subjected to some accusation that they think being proud of the flag is wrong.

But yet, that's still the interpretation you take, and it actually backs up what I'm saying here — what you are trying to do is create a mentality where one side is proud to be Irish and the other side is self-hating and detests pride in Irishness. Maybe you aren't even doing it deliberately, and it's part of how you justify your beliefs in your head — you are proud to be Irish and they aren't and therefore your beliefs are more trustworthy as regards Ireland's interests.

And I fear that you will read this and still just believe that you are being told flying the flag is bad.

You're so close to becoming self aware. You're agreeing there's no deterrent for people who choose to come here illegally.

There's an infinite number of these people across the 3rd world. Now do the math and just make that small step that you think is a giant leap.

We need proper deterrents before we get overwhelmed(if we're not already).

Well I'm slightly confused here as, if you were at all familiar with my posts, the difficulty of formulating effective deterrents to illegal migration more or less underpins almost every post I have ever written on this topic. It's the very reason why I tend to criticise those who make out that it all comes down to Lefties and that so-called common sense solutions could solve the problems.

The problem is that the Right — when all is said and done, and as we have already seen with Right leaning governments time and time again — is no more willing to implement the "proper deterrents" than the Left is. They'll implement measures here and there of varying effect, but the people keep coming — and generally the ebbs and flows of migration have more to do with global events than any policy.

So it brings me back to my point that there is a distinct lack of true sincere honesty among many who talk about migration, because when talking about how hard we need to be on it, they never actually really set out their own limit on how far they are willing to go to minimise it. And if they don't do that, then you can never actually tell if they really have any vision for migration at all, when they have no idea how far they would be willing to go.

OK so you say that if people arrive on our shores illegally — they will be treated with "hostility". So what does that mean, in practice?

All the stuff about detaining them as criminals, is all well and good. But you end up detaining them in dedicated centres which, grim as they may be, for many they represent at the very least a bed, food and shelter — and the possibility of eventually being allowed out into society.

In any of your given solutions there, migrants still have a chance to get their foot in the door. Where there is the chance, people are going to take it because they will deem that they have very little to lose by trying.

If people — particularly Right leaning politicians and commentators, and indeed a lot of posters here — were actually more honest about this, it would open the path to a better discussion on immigration and actual feasible consensus between Left and Right. Instead — it's just the age old finger-point at Lefties and the constant trotting out of simplistic solutions that dishonestly evade practical examination or admission of flaw — because that would just make them the same as Lefties, and that won't do as Lefties are stupider and less common sense-er.

Well, it's pretty obvious from your last paragraph that you have no idea what I'm trying to say as it has absolutely no relevance to any opinion I have expressed whatsoever.

But anyway — what's that you say about criminality? It sounds like when it comes to crime you are able to talk about how it is inevitable and that all we can do is try to have measures that deter it? And presumably you also feel that the tolerance of a certain level of crime is probably a necessary component of upholding other things we want from our society — namely things like freedom, privacy, rights of individuals versus the State etc. Yes?

So why is it so difficult for you or other people on this thread to apply the same nuances to illegal migration or asylum seeking and to actually be honest as to the fact that — just like the Left — you have no answer to the inevitability of illegal migration and to be honest about what downsides and sacrifices your proposed measures would require, just as our current migration policies have downsides.

But as I have found on this thread, the name of the game is to say: Left stupid, Roderic stupid, we should do this, problem solved, no downsides only upsides.

There is nothing criminal about seeking asylum.

As for people smuggling, I'm not sure that's solely related to IPAs, but I believe people have been convicted of same in this country.

It would be very different in the case of arriving with, or having cocaine, as that is a crime.

Being in the country to seek asylum is not a crime, regardless of how the person entered.

For some reason, which I can't fathom, it seems to be both legal and illegal to enter the country to seek asylum without documents.

It's clearly not working as a 'deterrent', and I guess was only introduced to play to the anti-immigration crowd.

It looks to me like the center right parties are unsure now about how to proceed on immigration and particularly asylum.

Historically I think it was seen as a bit of an easy vote winner to make vague promises about getting tough on asylum seekers, but some center right figures seem to be realizing an honest approach is safer in the long run. The likes of Macron, von der Leyen and several our own FF/FG figures have been pretty upfront with statements acknowledging to various degrees that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.

I think a lot of center right politicians are getting wise to what happened to the likes of the Tories and the Republican party, who've lost what they always represented by opening the door to more extremist and populist figures.

Borrisokane now paying heavy price for their asylum seeker hospitality, with the (mostly women) of 5 years ago now being replaced with single males fleeing their war-torn countries of Georgia, Algeria, Somalia, Jordan, Bangladesh (likely). Hope they enjoy the riverside accommodation.

Other historically hospitable towns are likely shaking in their little bootys with this backstab by the government.

I for one am happy. The least desirable migrants should be sent to the most bleeding-heart towns who have been claiming for years how great at integration they are and how others should follow their lead.

I don't think it's their fault they are being constantly moved around, to be fair.

If our own citizens born and bred here are struggling to get on the housing ladder and if legal immigrants on high salaries are struggling to get on the housing ladder. What chance do those in the ipas system ever have of getting out of state provided accommodation. I don't know what its going to take for people to wake up to the fact, this influx of asylum seekers is bad news for the country.

You seem to be only willing to accept the perfect solution to this problem, knowing full well there isn't one. Admittedly I have not read the full thread but generally no one has suggested that this issue is easy to solve, or that any one suggestion is going to solve the problem. So its not entirely clear why you keep saying this?

There are two options, either do something or do nothing and continue the way we are. If as you suggested neither the right or left have any solutions and there seemingly is no middle ground what do you suggest is the next step? No one with a functioning brain can suggest we continue as is - this is not sustainable. You can talk about nuance etc till the cows come home it does not change the fact the current situation cannot continue.

Maybe the EU pact helps address some of the issues, maybe it does not. We are at best years away from seeing if it does or not. What should we do in the meantime? The government, NGO's , asylum seekers and even the lefties on here have admitted that the majority are not genuine. Should we continue to let the country be taken advantage of at the cost of billions while we wait for the EU to maybe solve our issue? If it does not work - back to square one, more years of negotiation and maybe have something that might work - rinse and repeat.

And just to add, stupid is not a word i would use to describe Roderic - dangerous/out of touch are far more suitable ones.

This response is funny coming from you. You have even admitted yourself that those who cannot get work visas will come here via asylum. Use whatever term makes you feel better, does not change the situation - but as always circle that drain.

As you have shown, a lot of what "you think" is wrong.

If there is no criteria for a refugee how is it you expect all this to work?—- but then i suppose bringing the entire world here seems to be your thing.

Also the UK has nothing to do with us - so again not really relevant.

Do you get paid by the word? I've never seen so much written with so little said.

We already have the tools, laws and indeed infrastructure to deal with human criminals.

We need only apply that existing process to AS. So yes a stroke of a pen if even.

How about, in as few a words as you can. Give us your proposed attempt at a better solution other than rambling?

I'll say it again, louder this time for those in the back.

DETAIN, PROCESS, DEPORT or GRANT STAY. Absolutely nothing needs to be reneged on re Geneva convention etc.

Simply apply logical due process to illegal entry to our country as is our right as a sovereign nation.

Its quite simple really, no idea why it causes so many on here such confusion.

In Germany If your application for asylum has been accepted you can work but in good old Paddy land after 5 months you can work. This has to be a major draw for people to abuse our asylum system.

If you have no documents, come in via the UK after been there months/years you should not be allowed work until your status has been decided. Absolute banana stuff from our government.

It's a fair point but lack of supply is the real problem, not so much the demand. Treating population growth, even strong growth, as an aberration and something that actively needs to be stamped out may not be the wisest of ideas - any country that is depopulating is usually in absolute rag order and on the ropes.

What's all this about a 'simple stroke of the pen' so?

What exactly do you want to change?

https://tippfm.com/news/community/people-power-won-borrisokane-now/

Absolutely ridiculous

The same people cheering this on, also give out when there is no ipas accommodation for recently arriving asylum seekers. Despite what is claimed, these families in Borrisokane have not integrated into the community. Yes they may attend schools, local clubs etc. They haven't been able to stand on their own feet and been able to move into other accommodation.

We are constantly told that asylum seekers are a benefit to the country and will not be a drain on state accommodation or social wlefare, once their status is confirmed and they can work. But this clearly is not the case.

Well we've had lots of experience of this, even in the last three decades. The country was depopulating in the late 1980s and again in the early to mid 2010s - nearly always accompanied by recession and high unemployment.