Why is Traveller disadvantage not a mainstream concern?

murphaph · 29-03-2012 12:44pm

later12 wrote: »

As far as I can see, nobody is actually arguing the poor conditions that travellers tend to live in, and the cycle of poverty, lack of education and weak employment. That's sort of the point.

I'm not so sure travelers are all that poor. There are certainly poorer travelers and richer travelers, as in wider society, but being a traveler does not mean you will automatically be in poverty. Judging from some of the vehicles and wedings they have, travelers are reasonably well off.

Perhaps this begs the question how a society with 73% male unemployment can afford so many extravagant weddings and 4x4s? Something doesn't add up......With 73% male unemployment (and that during the boom), travelers really should generally be very poor, but the trinkets say otherwise.

Pedro K · 29-03-2012 12:49pm

later12 wrote: »

Just out of curiousity, when you highlighted north inner city of dublin, Moyross in limerick, Moneymore in Drogheda, did you not think that references to unemployment rates amongst people in these areas were what the lividduck was talking about, as opposed to the national average?

As far as I can see, nobody is actually arguing the poor conditions that travellers tend to live in, and the cycle of poverty, lack of education and weak employment. That's sort of the point.

link

The above link, found after a quick google search, states that in 2006 (not too far away from 2002 and still technically 'boom time') moyross had unemployment of 24.6%. Well above the national average yes, but a far cry off 73%.

link for Dublin inner city stats This link again, you won't find a figure as high as 73%. At a cursory glance the highest in dublin seems to be 23.3%

I didn't think people would even need proof that the unemployment in such areas wasn't as high as 73%.

later12 · 29-03-2012 12:53pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Eh, first of all: this is the internet. Your argument is only as good(bad) as the evidence or logic(baseless arguments) you put forward. I don't expect to endure anyone else's CV and I won't bore them with mine either. This is about logical evidence.

What is in question here, however, given that this is the politics forum, not the sociology forum, is what the state should do (if anything) about the plethora of issues afflicting the traveller community.

That's one question, yes. But you made a baseless suggestion without any evidence, and I challenged it with evidence. If you want to respond and perpetuate the claim that traveller parents are seemingly deliberately avoiding educating their children for the good of their culture, then back it up.

You can't treat an alcoholic by buying him a drink — but that's a fair analogy to what the state does when it "supports" travelers.

Not at all. If that were the case no travellers would ever make progress.

I agree there needs to be welfare reform, but there are lots of different types of support that have been shown to have positive effects elsewhere. I referred earlier to TESS in the UK and provided a reference for that.

I could just as easily propose that the state should prevent Muslim parents from indoctrinating their children into following the violent teachings, repressive culture, and morally depraved ideology of Islam, or even that Catholic parents should stop brainwashing their children into a morbid culture of self-abasement, self-denial, and guilt. I don't know that you'd be quite so eager to accept those arguments, though.

If those teachings were correlated with the undesirable effects observed with high frequency amongst travellers like poor health, unemployment, ostracisation, and lack of education, then I would have no hesitation whatsoever in promoting exactly the same action toward those groups.

I recommend watching the recent Channel 4 documentary Gypsy Blood if you are in doubt that many traveller fathers do indeed inculcate their sons into the violent tradition of bare-knuckle brawling.

Statistics please? I hope those are not just anecdotes...

Yes, you have made your authoritarian statist position abundantly clear by now.

I don't inform my opinions on ideological grounds. I have lots of statist opinions on some matters, libertarianesque opinions on others, and so on. I am not some ideology wallah deciphering everything I think according to what that some ideology would have me think. I think it's rather a shame when people lose their independent faculties like that.

later12 · 29-03-2012 1:02pm

murphaph wrote: »

Judging from some of the vehicles and wedings they have, travelers are reasonably well off.

That's a terrible way to judge travellers wealth in fairness. Obviously you're going to notice one traveller who drives a gold mercedes before you notice fifty travellers riding the bus or walking or driving cheap Japanese imports like everyone else.

Interestingly, the ESRI report indicated that "25 per cent of Irish Travellers in the younger age group and 22 per cent in the older age group do not have access to a car, compared with figures of 8 and 10 per cent respectively for other white Irish adults".

Valmont · 29-03-2012 1:21pm

later12 wrote: »

I don't inform my opinions on ideological grounds. I have lots of statist opinions on some matters, libertarianesque opinions on others, and so on. I am not some ideology wallah deciphering everything I think according to what that some ideology would have me think.

Since when is the large state void of ideology? You may argue your 'solutions' to various issues are based on cold hard evidence but the authority you claim for the state to act upon such academic solutions is just as steeped in its own exclusive ideology as libertarianism or Marxism. We are all ideologues when it comes to politics; because there is no hard scientific evidence for how people should treat one another.

later12 · 29-03-2012 1:30pm

Valmont wrote: »

We are all ideologues when it comes to politics; because there is no hard scientific evidence for how people should treat one another.

My point was that one should try and inform his or her opinions on arguments that appeal to reason, rather than finding some ideological harbour to shelter in and remaining there, barking insults on outsiders and assuming emotional levels of loyalty to that school, or harbour.

If someone wants to call their opinions statist, or socialist or a libertarian or Luxemburg Marxist then so be it. That's perfectly legitimate. What I dislike is the dismissal of whole complex individuals under these categories as though one must, or might, adapt the same ideology on all questions.

SupaNova · 29-03-2012 1:56pm

later12 wrote: »

Statistics please? I hope those are not just anecdotes...

This always pops up in these threads, one poster in defense of travellers even dismissed all personal stories(I could share a few but won't) as hearsay, and newspapers and TV as hype and propaganda.

I mean how many statistical surveys would or could ask travellers questions like:
1) Do you partake in bare knuckle boxing, or enjoy it as a spectator? If yes how often?
2) Do you mostly settle disputes though violence or through the legal system?
3) How frequent is fighting at christenings, communions, weddings and funerals?
etc etc

Permabear · 29-03-2012 1:59pm

This post has been deleted.

steelcityblues · 29-03-2012 2:01pm

The disadvantaged today are the 'working poor', who are still holding on to largely unfulfilling jobs, or who have been recently unemployed, but who are desperate not to be sitting on the couch at home in another two years.

I don't think the majority of travellers accurately fit your description, OP.

later12 · 29-03-2012 2:03pm

SupaNova wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

What's the alternative?

Trial by Channel 4?

The Lunchtime Commission Into Traveller's Rights Using Anecdotal Data Gathered From Mates and Aquaintances?

If you make observations about a group of people, this observation should be subject to examination. I think that's fair. The curious thing is, hardly anybody here (if anybody) is arguing that travellers often live very dysfunctional lives. That core point is not really in question.

Permabear wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yep. I guess I am definitely guilty of cultural genocide. Definitely.

RandomName2 · 29-03-2012 2:10pm

With all due respect later12, you are not going to get statistics from an isolationist, defensive, suspicious, tight-knit community (particularly one that has many illegal elements).

Gypsy Blood is highly notable as it was one of the most in depth documentaries conducted within the gypsy community (albeit in a keyhole exploratory manner).

Kim Jong-un of North Korea is rich, North Korea's population is poor, and there is a crazy devotion to the Party within the state. You would accept all of the above, I assume, even though obtaining statistics (or any reliable figures) to prove any of these statements would be nigh on impossible. :pac:

Permabear · 29-03-2012 2:12pm

This post has been deleted.

SupaNova · 29-03-2012 2:16pm

later12 wrote: »

What's the alternative?

Trial by Channel 4?

The Lunchtime Commission Into Traveller's Rights Using Anecdotal Data Gathered From Mates and Aquaintances?

If you make observations about a group of people, this observation should be subject to examination. I think that's fair. The curious thing is, hardly anybody here (if anybody) is arguing that travellers often live very dysfunctional lives. That core point is not really in question.

It really is baffling that someone would even need to demand statistics to confirm that travellers enjoy bare-knuckle boxing. If bare-knuckle boxing was no more prominent amongst travellers than any other group, there would be no documentaries about it. For example the reason there is no documentary about immigrant Nigerians engaging in bare knuckle boxing is because it is not part of their culture or tradition.

steelcityblues · 29-03-2012 2:16pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It was noticeable too in the RTE documentary. 'Knuckle', how in every fight you could see a few young boys (no girls, of course) looking on, at these pathetic guys sparring. You can brainwash the young more successfully, of course.

later12 · 29-03-2012 2:18pm

RandomName2 wrote: »

With all due respect later12, you are not going to get statistics from an isolationist, defensive, suspicious, tight-knit community (particularly one that has many illegal elements).

I agree actually. Traveller surveys are notoriously difficult to execute, apparently.

Nevertheless, just because the data is lacking on one specific area is not a license to fill its gap with silly anecdotes from a young boy and extrapolate this onto the whole traveller community.

We all have our own experiences of travellers. It's actually quite positive to see that this discussion, with a few exceptions, has not been denigrated with unreliable personal reports, be they good or bad.

later12 · 29-03-2012 2:20pm

SupaNova wrote: »

It really is baffling that someone would even need to demand statistics to confirm that travellers enjoy bare-knuckle boxing.

When I asked for statistics it was in relation to the points that bare knuckle boxing characterises traveller life and "many traveller fathers do indeed inculcate their sons into the violent tradition of bare-knuckle brawling".

I asked for statistics, as in what's the incidence.. what is 'many'?
Of course these statistics don't exist or we wouldn't be resorting to arguments like OMG did you not see that show on Channel 4??!

Permabear · 29-03-2012 2:20pm

This post has been deleted.

Laminations · 29-03-2012 2:24pm

Can I try and summarise the differing opinions because it's a simple answer to the OP, I think.

Permabear: disagrees with state supported lifestyles and believes that welfare perpetuates dysfunction and idleness. He is probably right re the welfare trap. He disagrees with a carrot approach.

Later12: isn't actually advocating a carrot approach (throwing money/facilities/programs) by itself. He has mentioned the need for a stick, forcing conformity amongst travellers and introducing some minimum standards.

Now I'd tend to agree with both. Carrot alone exacerbates the disadvantage. So you use a carrot and stick approach - I'd differ from the libertarian reluctance to give state supports because I recognise the hardship and difficulty - in other words I agree with Later12 that the problems are cyclical and the decisions at the bottom are harder.

BUT where I disagree with the OP is that I believe he is being disingenuous about the effect of a carrot and stick approach. It's end effect, if it successfully addressed disadvantage would be the destruction of traveller culture - for the reasons Permabear has repeatedly pointed out. Now if Later12 was more honest about the consequences of his solution then it could be described (by some) as an attack on traveller culture and a statement of racial hate.

Everyone recognises this 'solution' but to utter it is to invite derision - so as people are prevented from offering this solution in an honest way, that is to end traveller problems is to end traveller culture, the silence comes across as lack of concern.

SupaNova · 29-03-2012 2:32pm

later12 wrote: »

When I asked for statistics it was in relation to the points that bare knuckle boxing characterises traveller life and "many traveller fathers do indeed inculcate their sons into the violent tradition of bare-knuckle brawling".

I asked for statistics, as in what's the incidence.. what is 'many'?
Of course these statistics don't exist or we wouldn't be resorting to arguments like OMG did you not see that show on Channel 4??!

Many could be 20%, could be 50% or whatever depending on the subject. It is not unreasonable to suggest from the fact that there is multiple documentaries covering the subject that many more (or a higher percentage of) travellers encourage this behavior in comparison to other groups.

Permabear · 29-03-2012 2:34pm

This post has been deleted.

later12 · 29-03-2012 2:35pm

SupaNova wrote: »

Many could be 20%, could be 50% or whatever depending on the subject. It is not unreasonable to suggest from the fact that there is multiple documentaries covering the subject that many more (or a higher percentage of) travellers encourage this behavior in comparison to other groups.

Did you ever see a documentary about a traveller sitting at home watching x factor, or boiling the kettle?

The incidence of bare knuckle fighting amongst traveller men could be 10%, could be 90%.
Who knows?
Not us apparently.

later12 · 29-03-2012 2:39pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Well I did say it was related to educational attendance and failure to comply with orders, not culture. But yes, argue what you like, fair enough. Sounds like I'm definitely a pretty genocidal kind of guy alright. Definitely up there with the big guys. Adolf Hitler. Nicolae Caucescu. Me and all the lads.

Laminations · 29-03-2012 2:49pm

later12 wrote: »

Well I did say it was related to educational attendance and failure to comply with orders, not culture. But yes, argue what you like, fair enough. Sounds like I'm definitely a pretty genocidal kind of guy alright. Definitely up there with the big guys. Adolf Hitler. Nicolae Caucescu. Me and all the lads.

This is my point, you are now getting super defensive when the consequence of a carrot and stick approach is made obvious to you. Be honest, it may not be your intendeed aim but a by-product of your appraoch would be the diminution of traveller culture and its demise over a few generations.

I agree with a carrot and stick approach and for me child welfare trumps cultural sensitivities. I wouldn't refer to it as genocide but I'm saying that because it can be referred to as such and people can be derided for suggesting such an approach, people just keep their mouths shut.

I'm wondering if I'm on Later12's ignore list....

SupaNova · 29-03-2012 2:51pm

later12 wrote: »

Did you ever see a documentary about a traveller sitting at home watching x factor, or boiling the kettle?

The incidence of bare knuckle fighting amongst traveller men could be 10%, could be 90%.
Who knows?
Not us apparently.

What point are you trying to make if any with the above post? That people can't suggest many travellers engage and perpetuate a culture of bare knuckle boxing unless it is accompanied with a specific statistical number? And documented evidence of travellers engaging in bare knuckle boxing is meaningless without such a number?

OldNotWIse · 29-03-2012 2:55pm

Quazzie wrote: »

Travellers don't like to go to school or work, and love having babies.

Wheres the shock?

I'm not shocked...

I dont see why "we" are to be held responsible for their living conditions... Why? Do we have some kind of obligation to them by nature of the fact that we are not travellers? Why is everything always "society's fault"? The question, "why are you not concerned about this" is posed... my answer - why should I concern myself with the welfare of one specific group in our society when all MY experiences (yes, my experiences all to date) with them have been negative? Pets poisoned, rubbish dumped, imtimidation from rehoused traveller neighbours... I am more than willing to change my view if given good reason to but...yes you guessed, still waiting for good reason!! I can only go on what I have experienced.

later12 · 29-03-2012 2:57pm

SupaNova wrote: »

What point are you trying to make if any with the above post? That people can't suggest many travellers engage and perpetuate a culture of bare knuckle boxing unless it is accompanied with a specific statistical number?

No. That television crews don't make documentaries about peaceful travellers who have their own stresses and worries and lives to get on with and don't want their children to live with violence. A family sitting down in their council house, doing whatever they do in the evenings, doesn;'t make good tv.

Violence is disproportionately evident in traveller communities, perhaps, but I would not say that bare knuckle fighting actually characterises traveller life.

You can't just say what you want because there's no evidence to say your argument isn't true. There is a certain burden of proof that individuals making such claims should be expected to supply.

Again, the issue here is not whether or not traveller populations display a good deal of what we in the mainstream would describe as dysfunctional behaviours. That is a given. So I'm not really sure why we're squabbling over this issue except to say that you cannot apply instances like bare knuckle fighting covered on tv to the entire traveller population.

Permabear · 29-03-2012 3:01pm

This post has been deleted.

K-9 · 29-03-2012 3:01pm

later12 wrote: »

When I asked for statistics it was in relation to the points that bare knuckle boxing characterises traveller life and "many traveller fathers do indeed inculcate their sons into the violent tradition of bare-knuckle brawling".

I asked for statistics, as in what's the incidence.. what is 'many'?
Of course these statistics don't exist or we wouldn't be resorting to arguments like OMG did you not see that show on Channel 4??!

I think we've established that there are no statistics at this stage, the issue is the degree of the problem which is a matter of opinion as well, we've no stats!

Well I did say it was related to educational attendance and failure to comply with orders, not culture. But yes, argue what you like, fair enough. Sounds like I'm definitely a pretty genocidal kind of guy alright. Definitely up there with the big guys. Adolf Hitler. Nicolae Caucescu. Me and all the lads.

That isn't what the poster was hinting at, he referenced a UN human rights convention and that taking children away from traveler families could be a violation of that, a perfectly legitimate point.

A little less handbags please.

Kinski · 29-03-2012 3:03pm

later12 wrote: »

No. That television crews don't make documentaries about peaceful travellers who have their own stresses and worries and lives to get on with and don't want their children to live with violence. A family sitting down in their council house, doing whatever they do in the evenings, doesn;'t make good tv.

You might want to tune in to RTE next Monday evening...

K-9 · 29-03-2012 3:07pm

Scofflaw wrote: »

I'm going to second lividduck's point here from a mod perspective. People often apparently don't think such legislation applies to Travellers, or doesn't apply to their comments, but it does, and this:

is not a legal defence, or even an analogy. People are Liverpool supporters by choice, not by birth.

I obviously don't want to shut down discussion of the topic, but I'd ask people to be aware of the legislation in question, and to refrain from offering either blanket condemnations of "Traveller culture" or silly "justifications" for such blanket condemnations.

moderately,
Scofflaw

A reminder to posters of a previous thread warning.

Laminations · 29-03-2012 3:15pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'd agree with him, the power of the state should be used to protect children and to ensure minimum standards of health and eduction. It should be used to support the disadvantaged and give them opportunities to improve and become self-sufficient. The current welfare system doesn't do the last point very well, actually without checks and enforcement (devil's words to libertarians

), the state doesn't do any of these things well.

Again a social capitalist approach would mean the state would only interfere with the raising of your child if you were failing them in your responsibilities. We of course disagree wholeheartedly on this... but unlike Later12 I'm willing to face the consequences of my ideology - something he claims to be able to separate his opinions from.

Seeing as the OP isn't engaging with me at all on this, I'll leave it there.

later12 · 29-03-2012 3:20pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Not at all. Long before you tried on this latest tack, I reminded you that

later12 wrote: »

I wouldn't suggest removal of children from their parents as anything but a last resort. I think one has to be very careful so as not to alienate the traveller community, which appears to place a very heavy importance on family.
But that option (after other penalties have been applied) should certainly be explored as part of the stick approach in allowing traveller children access to education.

Actively or passively conditioning children to disengage from education or not to aspire to any reasonable degree of educational attainment can be challenged in the school and via support services at home. One such model in Australia involved gypsy parents and older siblings being taught classes at home, alongside their offspring outside of school hours.

If this destroys traveller cultural traditions like nomadic lifestyles or language traditions, then that's an unintended transactional consequence of education. Personally I'm fine with that.

Permabear · 29-03-2012 3:33pm

This post has been deleted.

murphaph · 29-03-2012 4:17pm

later12 wrote: »

Interestingly, the ESRI report indicated that "25 per cent of Irish Travellers in the younger age group and 22 per cent in the older age group do not have access to a car, compared with figures of 8 and 10 per cent respectively for other white Irish adults".

How do the ESRI get their figures? Travelers are not the sort of people to give out information about what cars they drive to "official types" at the ESRI tbh.

If a traveler with an untaxed UK reg 4x4 is asked by some ESRI head what sort of car he has, he'll say "none boss".

later12 · 29-03-2012 4:27pm

murphaph wrote: »

How do the ESRI get their figures?

They are based on official census returns.

gizmo555 · 29-03-2012 4:28pm

murphaph wrote: »

How do the ESRI get their figures? Travelers are not the sort of people to give out information about what cars they drive to "official types" at the ESRI tbh.

If a traveler with an untaxed UK reg 4x4 is asked by some ESRI head what sort of car he has, he'll say "none boss".

Indeed. Always remember Stamp's Law:

The government is extremely fond of amassing great quantities of statistics. They collect them, add them, raise them to the nth power, the cube roots are extracted and the results are arranged into elaborate and impressive displays. What must be kept ever in mind, however, is that in every case, the figures are first put down by the village watchman, and he puts down anything he damn well pleases.

Sir Josiah Stamp, 1849-1941

Permabear · 29-03-2012 4:35pm

This post has been deleted.

K-9 · 29-03-2012 4:57pm

Just to try and get some discussion going and not stifle the thread as Scofflaw alluded to:

We have a suggestion to cut benefits for those in long term employment which would by its very nature mean a large section of the traveller community not receiving state assistance.

The problem is that many don't participate in the labor market, so would that just mean more reliance on the black market? And how would this effect participation rates in education, the social problems mentioned et al?

Then there is the role of the State which doesn't really step in with cases like later12 mentions and if they did take a more direct approach it could well lead to more resentment and a greater feeling of isolation. Plus if traveller traditions like fist fighting are now unacceptable (even on main streets after pub closing times!), doesn't that leave a direct contradiction between that tradition and modern society?

A poster mentioned it yesterday I think, society has changed so that the traditional trade of travelers are now largely extinct, the social problems still remain which contribute to the welfare and black market dependency.

SupaNova · 29-03-2012 5:25pm

K-9 wrote: »

We have a suggestion to cut benefits for those in long term employment which would by its very nature mean a large section of the traveller community not receiving state assistance.

The problem is that many don't participate in the labor market, so would that just mean more reliance on the black market? And how would this effect participation rates in education, the social problems mentioned et al?

That is a problem when state supports are rolled back, there will be some pain whether it is subsidies for farmers or assistance to the travelling community. At first, a lot will turn to the black market to maintain their income, but in the long run the repercussions of breaking the law should divert them more and more toward legal employment.

MadsL · 29-03-2012 6:02pm

Meanwhile in the UK....

Here we go again..

http://www.thisistotalessex.co.uk/Dale-Farm-travellers-face-fresh-eviction/story-15656078-detail/story.html

later12 · 29-03-2012 8:31pm

K-9 wrote: »

The problem is that many don't participate in the labor market, so would that just mean more reliance on the black market?

It's interesting you mention this because there is a school of thought which suggests there may be some value in the underground economy for social advancement amongst marginalised groups.

Of course, this idea is likely to come in for criticism that the underground economy is less socially cohesive and causes resentfulness towards those who undercut other market participants. Those in the black economy might also be perceived not to contribute anything of value to the white economy.

I don't know which is correct. However, I think we all agree that welfare dependence is the least desired solution, since it possibly gives rise to a mentality that views travellers as social parasites anyway, and hands the bill to the exchequer to boot.

gizmo555 · 29-03-2012 8:48pm

Given that the ESRI report cited in the first post by the OP was based on figures from the 2006 census, it's interesting to note some headline figures from the 2011 census, released today:

The number of people enumerated as Irish Travellers has increased by 32 per cent
Perhaps one of the most surprising findings was that only 12 per cent of Irish Travellers now lived in caravans and mobile homes, compared to 25 per cent in 2006.

Whatever disadvantages travellers are labouring under, they seem to be thriving, not to mention for the very large part only being travellers in name, not in practice.

later12 · 29-03-2012 8:53pm

gizmo555 wrote: »

Whatever disadvantages travellers are labouring under, they seem to be thriving

They exhibit the same characteristics as third world populations: high fertility rates and low life expectancies. That's hardly thriving.

There is a suggestion that the reason the increase may have come about in the traveller population was because the question about membership of the traveller community was worded differently in 2011 relative to previous years.

Monty Burnz · 29-03-2012 8:58pm

Laminations wrote: »

Be honest, it may not be your intendeed aim but a by-product of your appraoch would be the diminution of traveller culture and its demise over a few generations.

But what is 'traveller culture'? If it is travelling to work, then IT consultants etc. are greater exponents of traveller culture than the travellers are.

Having decided what traveller culture is:

1. Is it worth preserving? (is every/any culture worth preserving?)
2. Are there aspects worth preserving?
3. What aspects of the culture are not in conflict with the modern world?

seavill · 29-03-2012 9:27pm

later12 wrote: »

I would suggest that anyone putting forward a notion that traveller children being born today are allocated the same level of opportunity as other Irish children is kidding themselves.

.

I would like to say that I am in no way against travellers or their culture but I would like to argue your point above.

I would suggest that some of the levels of opportunity are down to choices made by traveller parents in relation to their children's level of opportunity.
If I decided tomorrow to live on the side of the road in a caravan with my children I am not giving them the same level of opportunity to have a healthy life due to living in damp cold conditions that may not exist in housed accommodation.

I am not giving my child the same level of opportunity if I decide to make my child attend 60 days out of the 167 secondary school days.
I am not giving my child the same level of opportunity if I decide to withdraw my son from school aged 12 years old to work.
(both actual examples from schools I worked in)

I would argue in fact that traveller children are given a greater opportunity than some lower level so called "middle class" children.
If I am from a traveller background up to last year we would have had a dedicated traveller teacher who's job it was to travel to us in our homes to teach us. Settled children do not get this.
If I am from a traveller background my school gets a greater allocation of teachers hours within the school due to me being a teacher. This increase in teacher hours are not afforded if a child from a settled home is to join a school.

I will quote a traveller mother I met one day in relation to her son that I was teaching. Her son repeatedly lost his locker keys, lost his school bags, "lost" his books (I have put "lost" like this as I caught him throwing them in the bin one day). She told me that you (the school) get €3000 a year to "keep my son in books and all that stuff".
We "the school" certainly do not get €3000 a year to keep the "middle class" kids in books and stuff each year.

So I would argue with you that traveller children are afforded some huge opportunities that some settled children are not given, however it is their parents that are getting in the way of some of this opportunity.

later12 · 29-03-2012 9:44pm

I didn't say these children were denied equal opportunities by discrimination or other social barriers alone.

I've acknowledged the role of parents as well as the role for society, at length.

The only crowd of people I can see issuing denials here are those who deny that society might have a role in correcting this problem. Certainly, I don't doubt that travellers themselves have one.

gizmo555 · 29-03-2012 9:46pm

later12 wrote: »

They exhibit the same characteristics as third world populations: high fertility rates and low life expectancies. That's hardly thriving.

There is a suggestion that the reason the increase may have come about in the traveller population was because the question about membership of the traveller community was worded differently in 2011 relative to previous years.

I don't think anyone seriously believes recorded traveller numbers have increased 32% in five years solely through natural reproduction. The changes since the last census only highlight the complete unreliability of statistics in this area.

seavill · 29-03-2012 9:47pm

later12 wrote: »

I didn't say these children were denied equal opportunities by discrimination or other social barriers alone.

I've acknowledged the role of parents as well as the role for society, at length.

The only crowd of people I can see issuing denials here are those who deny that society might have a role in correcting this problem. Certainly, I don't doubt that travellers themselves have one.

I never mentioned that it was one sections fault over another or that one is more to blame than another. I did not get into this discussion with you.

You claimed that these children are not afforded the same opportunity my counter argument was that I feel at times they are afforded a greater opportunity.
You are changing the argument and not responding to the point made.

K-9 · 29-03-2012 10:24pm

gizmo555 wrote: »

I don't think anyone seriously believes recorded traveller numbers have increased 32% in five years solely through natural reproduction. The changes since the last census only highlight the complete unreliability of statistics in this area.

Or that they are becoming more reliable as more can declare on the census, through education, support and help?

I'd have though more self declaring would be seen as a small advancement?

Considering how some some homeowners seem to have a problem with the self assessment concept for the Household tax, a 32% increase in Traveler for census participation should be a good thing.

AlekSmart · 29-03-2012 10:33pm

later12 wrote: »

Why is Traveller Disadvantage not a mainstream concern.

Q: Does anybody else find these statistics frighteningly damning of Irish society and our ability to address travellers' disadvantage?

A: In "mainstream" Irish society,a few would concur,but obviously not enough to please the OP

I would be curious to explore what people think of these statistics, and why we think this is not more of a mainstream political issue?

It is somewhat obvious that "Mainstream" Irish society,or at least those at the "Contributing" end of it remain largely unconvinced that our Political system should be involving itself any further in Traveller Rights or Culture issues,except perhaps to ensure that a far better return results from the substantial resources already allocated under various headings to the group.

As the thread meanders along in the manner of so many more "Traveller" related ones before it,the original Questioning Title needs to be borne in mind.

Later12 posed the question,then had it answered pretty comprehensively by many posters,most of whom appear to have difficulty with the use of the term "Disadvantage" in relation to the grouping mentioned.

However,it then appears that those folk who dispute the assertion with anecdotal or personal experience are thoroughly derided for daring to enter the debate without the benefit of comprehensive statistical "evidence".

The unfortunate, but pertinent,fact that the group under discussion are remarkably,and often violently,averse to ANY form of statistical collection by Authority figures is then glossed over in the pursuit of a positive outcome to the original question,which by now has been considerably broadened in it's scope.

Why is Traveller disadvantage not a mainstream concern?

Comments