Residents at Athlone asylum seekers centre refusing to eat

Nodin wrote: »

Rank food isn't inadequate?

It is inadequate "if" it's rank!

Nodin wrote: »

Better choice of food, more freedom of movement, an end to overcrowding, less restrictions. Its not that hard.

It's not even just about the choice of food either, in a lot of the centres they're not allowed to prepare their own food, assuming they could even afford to buy food. No doubt they should be grateful for not having to cook for 4 or 5 years though.

Frank Grimes wrote: »

It's not even just about the choice of food either, in a lot of the centres they're not allowed to prepare their own food, assuming they could even afford to buy food. No doubt they should be grateful for not having to cook for 4 or 5 years though.

They don't have to bloody worry about buying anything. Everything is provided free of charge.

walshb wrote: »

They don't have to bloody worry about buying anything. Everything is provided free of charge.

Why do you think so many people are taking issue with direct provision system if it's all as great as you appear to think it is? Can you honestly not see a problem with denying people the right to cook for themselves and their families for years?

Frank Grimes wrote: »

Why do you think so many people are taking issue with direct provision system if it's all as great as you appear to think it is? Can you honestly not see a problem with denying people the right to cook for themselves and their families for years?

I never said the system was great. It can hardly be great. It's an asylum situation. Great is subjective. You seem to want a free for all. No rules or regulations. That's ridiculous. The rules are there for a reason. Any rule that an asylum group moan and complain about and you will probably jump on and slate the system.

Frank Grimes wrote: »

Where have I said anything approaching that?

t.

So far you are complaining about the "restrictions" placed on the asylum seekers.

Hence I reckon you will juts latch onto their complaints for the sake of it. Like some politicians do. Not out of a sense of caring, but more out of something to get them noticed.

walshb wrote: »

So far you are complaining about the "restrictions" placed on the asylum seekers.

So basically you can't then.

Hence I reckon you will juts latch onto their complaints for the sake of it. Like some politicians do. Not out of a sense of caring, but more out of something to get them noticed.

Why would I do any of that? Is this the best you can really come up with? You could actually try to engage with what people are saying rather than just lobbing stupid and baseless accusations around.

Frank Grimes wrote: »

You're dismissing everything. Do you see a problem with this situation? http://www.childlawproject.ie/publications/eco-for-8-year-old-born-and-reared-in-direct-provision-centre/

One cannot dismiss such situations,and I don't see anybody posting here suggesting this ?

However I see other elements at play here too,which go to theheart of this Asylum process of ours.

The mother was also going through the process of applying for residency status but continued to live in direct provision, where the child, who was now eight, had been born.

Obviously the Court proceedings are designed to provide a degree of anonymity to this unfortunate child.

Her mother, also an asylum-seeker, was in the process of being involuntarily admitted into a psychiatric hospital under Section 5 of the Mental Health Act. The woman’s mental health state had been of concern for some time, she had been in hospital before and had stopped taking her medication.

I am curious as to the later use of the term"Residency Status" as opposed to "Asylum.

Is it the case that both Mother and Child are now seperately applying for this status ?

Is there a Father in any way involved in the situation ?

Either way,the Irish State is obviously allocating some considerable resources to this unfortunate Individual and her chile,which have to be funded by somebody else.

In some ways,this woman is indeed very fortunate to have chosen Ireland as her destination ?

Frank Grimes wrote: »

You're dismissing everything. Do you see a problem with this situation? http://www.childlawproject.ie/publications/eco-for-8-year-old-born-and-reared-in-direct-provision-centre/

Social Workers/Gardai/Psychiatrists/Judges all on hand to help the woman and child as best they could. All paid for by the state. Maybe the problem in this case is the asylum seeker?

Nodin wrote: »

So you're just making snide snipes at the contention of the OP and asylum seekers generally then. Fair enough.

Again,I'm afraid I have to suggest that is YOUR interpretation.
It's noticeable that your own responses to many Posters on a wide range of topics,generally appear to be single line or word with the occasional supporting allegation of snideness,or guff or whatever.

Many posters here,(Myself included) have slightly more difficulty in condensing their thoughts and views into small,concise sentences simply to satisfy one other posters desire.

Pointing out that the Woman in Frank Grimes's linked article is indeed fortunate to have landed in Ireland is far from snide sniping,as for a great many people it is merely stating the obvious.

She could have easily arrived in the UK had her baby adopted by court order then the mother deported

Nodin wrote: »

Sniping

...as is the suggestion that she's fortunate to have landed here.

On mature reflection,I'd replace the word "suggestion" with "statement".

A reading of the latest drop in the drip-feed of accusations against the "System" appears to confirm that the Athlone occurrence is part of a campaign devised and managed by somebody with a bit of media savvy.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/children-are-intimidated-in-asylum-seeker-food-boycott-30581533.html

A rather effective attention grabbing headline.

Luckily for "us" this intimidation appears to have been carried out by the residents themselves on their own children,which perhaps merits further investigation on it's own merits.

Two children were intimidated by adult asylum seekers into handing back their lunch as part of a food boycott in a direct provision centre.

Were these two children (and their parents NOT participating in the protest ?).

Of somewhat equal interest is the dawning realization that this media manipulation is an orchestrated occurence....

The boycott was carried out by residents in a number of provision centres around the country as part of a campaign by asylum seekers to be moved into houses and given the right to work.

Fresh protests are due to be launched in another centre today amid claims that assaults on staff have increased in recent weeks.

Immigration officials fear that "outside influences" are partly responsible for the growing tension within the centres.

I note the first appearance of a non-food related issue here too,with a call for people to be "Moved into Houses".....a belated appearance of a parallell agenda ?

I would also be quite interested at hearing about the "Outisde Influences" from a less biased source than the reports we have thus far.

Good to see also,that the real nub of the issue is reported in the article...

Some 800 deportation orders have been signed by ministers for justice but implementation of orders has slowed down.

As a matter of course,the outstanding Depo-orders should be acted upon immediately,with whatever resources required to get these people gone.

Then we can set about getting the Asylum System back working at it's intended rate,rather than watching it collapse under the weight of vexatious applications.

Welcome reference to our Nation not being the "worst" in how it deals with these applications....

Some EU states hold their asylum seekers for lengthy periods in special detention centres. But Ireland does not operate detention centres as a matter of policy.

The signs are however,that we don't have the luxury of time in which to address this manufactured "crisis",as the clouds are once again gathering...

Despite the complaints about the direct provision scheme here, there has been a big surge in the number of asylum applications recently.

New figures show a 40pc increase in applications for the first eight months of the year, compared to the corresponding period last year, up from 607 to 854. Last July's monthly total of 131 was the highest since January 2011 and last month (126) was the second highest.

Pakistan tops the table of asylum seekers with 13pc of the applicants, followed by Nigeria, Zimbabwe and Algeria.

A rather interesting set of Countries in the top spots I would suggest....;)

smurfjed wrote: »

But why end up in Ireland, surely people from Pakistan, Algeria and parts of Nigeria would be looking for a country more in line with their cultural and religious beliefs. As for Zimbabwe, how did they end up in Ireland?

That's a valid question,which will be misinterpreted as you not actually being familiar with the terms of the Dublin Convention.

However,the question does not relate to the DC at all,but rather the actual mechanics of rocking up to Erin's green isle from,mar shámpla,Cameroon......

Take today episode in the continuing drama......

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/justice-officials-to-meet-asylum-protesters-30583832.html

Married father-of-one Francois Fepessi from Cameroon arrived 11 years ago and claims to have stayed in as many as 10 hostels during his time in Ireland. "I came here I was 36, now I am 47," Mr Frepessi said.

The qualified air-conditioning technician said he could not understand why his application was not processed. "I am ready to work, they don't give me papers, why?" he asked as he stood next to his wife Adrienne Nganmo, cradling their six-week-old baby Simon. Mr Fepessi stills remains hopeful that he might be granted asylum.

With it's close (And continuing) associations with France,one could ask why Francois did'nt choose that country to apply for his Asylum status ?

Eleven years is very clearly an example of the Asylum System failing this gentleman,however,the article does not reveal any further details of M.Fepessi's case,such as for,example,whether he is in the appeal stage or if any deportation order was ever issued.

The presence of a new Baby also now ensures the media have another angle to attack the State with,should it belatedly get it's act together.

Earlier,Nodin asked if.....

There's nothing to flee in Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Algeria?

Currently I would suggest the answer is NO,in the context of making an application for Asylum in the Republic of Ireland.

Each of these countries,at least three of which maintain Diplomatic Realations with our State,are functioning entities with operational taxation,courts,health and education systems.

All of the countries mentioned have strong and ongoing links to their former Colonial Status with both the U.K. and France.

I would suggest that these links,extending to current membership of the British CommonWEALTH,actually impose a commonsense based compulsion on these people to be directed elsewhere in their search for employment.

In M.Fapossi's case,whether the HVAC Industry in Ireland is underprovided in Qualified Technicians is equally of interest.

Many other countries maintain lists of trades and professions which are short of personell and use managed Immigration to address these.

Australia would probably be the most familiar one to Irish people.

One of the stern rules of these systems however,is the requirement that NO current Citizens be available to fill that vacancy,something I cannot vouch for in the case of Air Conditioning Technicians in Ireland.

My own belief is that the Backlog of Deportation Orders must be cleared first.

Failure to do this leaves our system open to those who will remain for as long as possible,whilst continuing to soak up resources which Ireland urgently requires elsewhere.

AlexSmart,

That's a valid question,which will be misinterpreted as you not actually being familiar with the terms of the Dublin Convention.

My understanding of the Dublin Convention is that anyone seeking asylum in Europe must register as refugees in the first country where they arrive. As we don't have direct connections with any of the 4 countries mentioned above, why didn't these people register on arrival in Europe. The fact that they have shown up in Ireland is what i could consider to be Asylum shopping.

Currently I would suggest the answer is NO,in the context of making an application for Asylum in the Republic of Ireland.

I understand that in some of these cases they are claiming religious persecution based on their religious SECTS, i.e. the Ahmadi moslems claiming persecution from Sunny or Shi'ite moslems.

We seem to be hell bend on protecting their human rights, but I'm sorry, they should be sent to the first country of entry.

As for their DEMANDS and their rights.... well what about my right not to pay to support them?

The cheek of them to have a 6 week old baby. This must be stopped.

Seen the story plastered all over the news papers.
Aslyum seeker viciously rapes a woman after been only on the country a few months .
Rapist gets 7 years and gets his aslyum revoked and deportation order signed .
He goes to the high court to over turn the deportation order and wins he can't be removed and sent home because of his human rights.

A real danger to society and women he's even made threats against the jury legal teams in his trial.

Gatling wrote: »

Seen the story plastered all over the news papers.
Aslyum seeker viciously rapes a woman after been only on the country a few months .
Rapist gets 7 years and gets his aslyum revoked and deportation order signed .
He goes to the high court to over turn the deportation order and wins he can't be removed and sent home because of his human rights.

A real danger to society and women he's even made threats against the jury legal teams in his trial.

The legal system is a shambles in relation to deporting people from this island who fail to be accepted as asylum seekers. It's appeal after appeal after appeal. The whole system stinks. Big money being made from it though.

Gatling wrote: »

Proof that our aslyum system is no longer fit for use .
A dangerous Rapist can't be removed despite a rape conviction.

Shame on the high court

Yes, but that is not near as pressing as the poor quality of free food in the system.

walshb wrote: »

Yes, but that is not near as pressing as the poor quality of free food in the system.

I'm sure he complained about that too