Minister McDowell at it again

Dormant accounts cash to be used for immigrant families
31/08/2006 - 08:45:03

Immigrant families are to benefit from more than half a million euro lying in dormant Irish bank accounts.

The funding will support those trying to make a new life for themselves in Ireland, providing pre-employment training programmes, job-seeking programmes and measures to promote access to employment.

Support groups in Blanchardstown, Drogheda, Waterford, Mayo, Cork and Kerry will benefit from the allocation of €574,989.

Disbursements from the Dormant Accounts Fund target those affected by economic and social disadvantage, those affected by educational disadvantage, and people with a disability.

The funding will increase the employability of vulnerable immigrant families who have been granted refugee status or who have been granted leave to remain in the State.

“The integration of refugees and other non-nationals into Irish society is an urgent and important issue,” said Minister for Justice Michael McDowell.

“This funding is a further step in the process of integration and is directed primarily at facilitating access to employment in the short to medium term.

“I have no doubt that this group of people will be a rich resource for the future economic, social and cultural development of this country. The projects are innovative and cover a wide range of initiatives from language training, information, referral and advocacy to employment training.”

This should be used to help our own out first, I think it's a disgrace :mad:

Rb

hellboy99 wrote:

This should be used to help our own out first, I think it's a disgrace :mad:

I agree, its an absolute disgrace.
Theres far, far too much support for immigrants in this country as it is.

Not saying I've a problem with legal immigrants, but it pisses me off to see Irish homeless people sleeping on our streets while our government uses the tax payers cash(and now dormant accounts) to fund our lovely new arrivals.

Sick thing is they'll more than likely be re-elected next time around.

Miguel_Sanchez

hellboy99 wrote:

Dormant accounts cash to be used for immigrant families
31/08/2006 - 08:45:03

This should be used to help our own out first, I think it's a disgrace :mad:

You could say that about all money that's spent on immigrants. I think it's not an excessive amount to be spending considering the amount of immigrants it will aid.

Theres far, far too much support for immigrants in this country as it is.

Really? Like what? Like all the free cars that they get from the dole and other such urban legend nonsense?

I say - if people want to come over here and make a life for themselves then fair play, soon they will be 'our own' too.

dr.bollocko

Yeah we should help them starting a new life. At least most of these immigrants are willing to work for their money, more than we can say for the Irish claiming assistance from the govt.

delop

Jeff_Lebowski wrote:

I say - if people want to come over here and make a life for themselves then fair play, soon they will be 'our own' too.

Finally some sense....

Re: Homeless, There must be something wrong with you if you cant get a job in Ireland today... So I guess there is something wrong with them, they may need help, if they would accept it...

Now if I were an employer, who would I employ?? A foreign national that would work his balls off and be happy with the job, or the alternative.....

Rb

Jeff_Lebowski wrote:

I think it's not an excessive amount to be spending considering the amount of immigrants it will aid.

So, tell me this, how or why is it our governments(with funding from the tax payers,owners of these dormant accounts etc) responsibility to "aid" these people?

They come into our country, and we're supposed to support them?

seamus

rb_ie wrote:

Not saying I've a problem with legal immigrants, but it pisses me off to see Irish homeless people sleeping on our streets while our government uses the tax payers cash(and now dormant accounts) to fund our lovely new arrivals.

Education isn't a issue but for a handful of disadvantaged Irish people. The majority of people who are living homeless or otherwise jobless, are alcoholics, junkies and lazy bastards. Half a million euro would be of no help to them, and would be far better spent educating people who at least have made an attempt at a better life for themselves.

There's no good excuse for being jobless in Ireland today, save disability.

They come into our country, and we're supposed to support them?

We're not going to hand them everything they need, but do you think that when they come off the boat/plane, they should be left on their own? How many immigrants would end up living on the street within two days, without some sort of support structure? The basic fact is that we need immigrants. Without immigration, our economy would have stalled abruptly and died a few years back.

Miguel_Sanchez

delop wrote:

Re: Homeless, There must be something wrong with you if you cant get a job in Ireland today... So I guess there is something wrong with them, they may need help, if they would accept it...

I'm not saying we shouldn't help homeless people. And I don't believe that there's something 'wrong' with someone who finds themselves homeless.

dr.bollocko

dr.bollocko wrote:

Yeah we should help them starting a new life. At least most of these immigrants are willing to work for their money, more than we can say for the Irish claiming assistance from the govt.

I've nothing against immigrants willing to work but i do when it's ones that will do jobs for under the minimum wage, it is these people that are forcing more and more Irish people out of their jobs every month to go and claim welfare as they are better off, fact.
I was on welfare for a time up until last year and was getting more money than what i was for a 39 hour working week, i was far better off by a long shot as is the case for a lot of people on welfare at the moment.

Miguel_Sanchez

rb_ie wrote:

So, tell me this, how or why is it our governments(with funding from the tax payers,owners of these dormant accounts etc) responsibility to "aid" these people?

They come into our country, and we're supposed to support them?

Yes. Yes we are supposed to support them. People who are legitimate refugees should be helped. I think wealthy nations (of which we are one) should help people who are fleeing persecution.

I'm not suggesting that everyone who wants to come into the country should be let but people who have valid reasons to need shelter should be aided.

Do you think that the majority of refugees that come here just want to live off hand-outs? Of course not. Once processed and accepted these people want to work and make a life for themselves here. I think as a nation which is pretty well off we should help.

Miguel_Sanchez

hellboy99 wrote:

I've nothing against immigrants willing to work but i do when it's ones that will do jobs for under the minimum wage, it is these people that are forcing more and more Irish people out of their jobs every month to go and claim welfare as they are better off, fact.
I was on welfare for a time up until last year and was getting more money than what i was for a 39 hour working week, i was far better off by a long shot as is the case for a lot of people on welfare at the moment.

I've been in that situation too. However do you not think that the problem therein lies with the minimum wage? If the minimum wage was higher and was enforced then people would be better off working than claiming the dole.

Also - the reason that some immigrants will work for these ridiculous wages is that they aren't entitled to any benefits so this is the only way they have of making money - it's work for low wages or starve.

Minimum wage should be enforced. Employers who pay below it should be fined.

flogen

hellboy99 wrote:

I've nothing against immigrants willing to work but i do when it's ones that will do jobs for under the minimum wage, it is these people that are forcing more and more Irish people out of their jobs every month to go and claim welfare as they are better off, fact.
I was on welfare for a time up until last year and was getting more money than what i was for a 39 hour working week, i was far better off by a long shot as is the case for a lot of people on welfare at the moment.

If they're paid under the minimum wage then that's illegal.

If you were in a job that paid you so badly for a f/t hours that the welfare was a better deal for you, you should have found another job or reported them for paying you less than you're legally entitled to.

Hobbes

hellboy99 wrote:

[The funding will increase the employability of vulnerable immigrant families who have been granted refugee status or who have been granted leave to remain in the State.

This should be used to help our own out first, I think it's a disgrace :mad:

Legally according to the story they would be "our own". Although I Am not sure what you mean by "our own".

It is not talking about immigrants at all its referring to people who have refugee status. Totally different thing.

tbh

hellboy99 wrote:

Dormant accounts cash to be used for immigrant families
31/08/2006 - 08:45:03



This should be used to help our own out first, I think it's a disgrace :mad:

It's not a case of either/or tho. The money would still be provided, all that's happening is that it's coming from a different source. You'd probably be more annoyed if it were coming directly from tax, as a matter of fact it probably means that less funds have to be diverted from tax and so there is more in the general pot.

I'm afraid that we can't any longer divide people in the state into Irish and Not Irish. We're just people. The government has a duty to look after the welfare of all the inhabitants of this state, whether or not they were born here. If you don't like it, I suggest you vote for one of the immigration control parties in the next election, fortunately the majority of the people here have a "live and let live" mentality.

seamus

hellboy99 wrote:

I was on welfare for a time up until last year and was getting more money than what i was for a 39 hour working week, i was far better off by a long shot as is the case for a lot of people on welfare at the moment.

I don't know how that works. Even at the lowest possible minimum wage (5.36/hour if you're under 18) you'll still earn €50 more per week than if you were on the dole. Unless you're claiming benefits for children, rent and spouses, then it's not possible to be getting paid the minimum wage and earning less than the dole.
And if you have a wife and kids, you shouldn't settle for minimum wage

manonthemoon

hellboy99 wrote:

Dormant accounts cash to be used for immigrant families
31/08/2006 - 08:45:03



This should be used to help our own out first, I think it's a disgrace :mad:

If an immigrant is allowed stay in ireland/ gains residency, are they not our own then?

dr.bollocko

Its a ****ing disgrace that Irish people, who owe their prosperity as a nation to emigrating to richer countries, should now turn around and close the book on people in a similar situation coming to us for help. This is the way that the world works. And as for people claiming the dole being better off than if they worked a full 39 hour week, who in the **** is paying you that bad? Also how were you getting so much dole? Also, dole is a means to an end for those who are looking for jobs, not a long term solution or something to be compared to working. Welfare is not a career.

seamus

seamus wrote:

I don't know how that works. Even at the lowest possible minimum wage (5.36/hour if you're under 18) you'll still earn €50 more per week than if you were on the dole. Unless you're claiming benefits for children, rent and spouses, then it's not possible to be getting paid the minimum wage and earning less than the dole.
And if you have a wife and kids, you shouldn't settle for minimum wage

I'm married with a child, when i was working i was coming out with round €300 a week for 39 hours. On the dole i was getting €290, then all the benefits that came with it, my rent dropped by €50 a week, medical cards, fuel allowance etc.. .
I wasn't even entitled to get FIS :mad:

dr.bollocko

Jesus hellboy that is ****ty. I cant believe that you werent entitled to anything further for working. I mean from that its fairly obvious that the 39 hour week is not the good option! And you checked absolutely everything you were entitled to, and still came up with those figures?

No wonder this counry is ****ed.

Hobbes

hellboy99 wrote:

I'm married with a child, when i was working i was coming out with round €300 a week for 39 hours. On the dole i was getting €290, then all the benefits that came with it, my rent dropped by €50 a week, medical cards, fuel allowance etc.. .
I wasn't even entitled to get FIS :mad:

Was your wife working? If not you can get her tax credits (backdated too) also if she is looking after the kid at home then you get child carer credits too (again backdated). Add to that other benifits if your overall wages doesn't go over a certain limit and the 1,000 a year if the child is under 6.

300 a week would suggest you are not on minimum wage but you certainly should be coming out with more then 300 a week if you have done everything detailed above. What was your hourly rate?

dr.bollocko

dr.bollocko wrote:

Its a ****ing disgrace that Irish people, who owe their prosperity as a nation to emigrating to richer countries, should now turn around and close the book on people in a similar situation coming to us for help. This is the way that the world works. And as for people claiming the dole being better off than if they worked a full 39 hour week, who in the **** is paying you that bad? Also how were you getting so much dole? Also, dole is a means to an end for those who are looking for jobs, not a long term solution or something to be compared to working. Welfare is not a career.

I'm willing to work but why should I go out and work when I was in a situation where i was better off on welfare , i couldn't even get FIS.
You go out find a job and work to better one's self. Something not right if you’re better off on the dole.

ScottishDanny

€574,989 is sweetie money - and its not coming from the governments (taxpayers budget). If that cash is distributed evenly between the 6 support centres mentioned, each centre will get just under 96k. How many immigrants are there? About 300,000 total? So thats less than 2 euro each. Is this the (rarely seen) caring side of the PDs or a one off stunt? General Election in May people!

Hobbes

You can only stay on the dole for a year before it changes (or get forced into a fas course). If you are not actively looking for a job and have no way to claim why you can't get a job then you stop getting the dole.

You still haven't mentioned your hourly wage or if you tried changing your tax credits?

tbh

hellboy99 wrote:

why should I go out and work when I was in a situation where i was better off on welfare

Self-respect.

dr.bollocko

hellboy99 wrote:

I'm willing to work but why should I go out and work when I was in a situation where i was better off on welfare , i couldn't even get FIS.
You go out find a job and work to better one's self. Something not right if you’re better off on the dole.

You are right there, something is really not right about that situation! I just cant believe how this country works some times.

Hobbes

ScottishDanny wrote:

€574,989 is sweetie money - and its not coming from the governments (taxpayers budget). If that cash is distributed evenly between the 6 support centres mentioned, each centre will get just under 96k. How many immigrants are there? About 300,000 total? So thats less than 2 euro each. Is this the (rarely seen) caring side of the PDs or a one off stunt? General Election in May people!

Actually according to the story the money only relates to those who have refugee status. Has nothing to do with immigrants at all.

As of 2005 there were approx 6,814 total with refugee statusin Ireland (from 2000-2005). Thats about 84 euros each refugee.

I wouldn't be getting all worked up over that just yet.

and remember Refugee Status and Asylum Seeker and Immigrant are all three totally different things.

aidan_walsh

I'm willing to work but why should I go out and work when I was in a situation where i was better off on welfare

Get a better job. There are lots of people out there working jobs where they wouldn't be better off on the dole.

Answering Hobbe's questions would be nice to understand your situation too.

Degsy

Jeff_Lebowski wrote:

Yes. Yes we are supposed to support them. People who are legitimate refugees should be helped. I think wealthy nations (of which we are one) should help people who are fleeing persecution.

I'm not suggesting that everyone who wants to come into the country should be let but people who have valid reasons to need shelter should be aided.

Do you think that the majority of refugees that come here just want to live off hand-outs? Of course not. Once processed and accepted these people want to work and make a life for themselves here. I think as a nation which is pretty well off we should help.

According to the department of justice 98% of asylum seekers have no legitimate claim to asylum in this country.That means that they are bogus asylum seekers and that they are illegal immigrants.If people so desperatly want to work for a ;living let them apply for work permits and not asylum.The country is being conned by these people and the taxpayer is the one footing the bill.

dr.bollocko

Conning the country? Really? Thats what you think?

Degsy

dr.bollocko wrote:

Conning the country? Really? Thats what you think?

If you tell a pack of lies in order to qualify for state benefits you are attempting to con people are you not?

scojones

Moved from After Hours.

Hobbes

Degsy wrote:

According to the department of justice 98% of asylum seekers have no legitimate claim to asylum in this country.That means that they are bogus asylum seekers and that they are illegal immigrants.

Actually a person claiming Asylum is not an immigrant (illegal or otherwise). I wish people would cop on actually know there is a difference.

Also this money mentioned by the OP does not even go to Asylum seekers at all. In fact Aslyum seekers are not entitled to work/get dole or anything like that at all. Even attempting to do so would get thier Asylum request rejected.

Lastly your 98% is a bullsh!t statistic. While the number is exceptionally high it is not 98%. For example 2004 around 80% where denied Refugee status.

tbh

Degsy wrote:

According to the department of justice 98% of asylum seekers have no legitimate claim to asylum in this country

Source?

Degsy

tbh wrote:

Source?

Department of Justice.

tbh

Degsy wrote:

Department of Justice.

no, I meant *show* me the source. No offense, like, I'd just be interested to see that.

Degsy

Hobbes wrote:

Actually a person claiming Asylum is not an immigrant (illegal or otherwise). I wish people would cop on actually know there is a difference.

Also this money mentioned by the OP does not even go to Asylum seekers at all. In fact Aslyum seekers are not entitled to work/get dole or anything like that at all. Even attempting to do so would get thier Asylum request rejected.

Lastly your 98% is a bullsh!t statistic. While the number is exceptionally high it is not 98%. For example 2004 around 80% where denied Refugee status.

Yes a person claiming asylum is an immigrant.Asylum seekers arent entitled to work but they are "entitled" to be housed,fed and provided with an allowance(dole if you will).

Immigrant:
noun

1. Someone who immigrates or has immigrated.

Thesaurus: settler, newcomer, foreigner, ; Antonym: emigrant, native.


Definition of immigrant (noun)
form: immigrants
a foreigner who enters a country to settle there

tbh

Degsy wrote:

Yes a person claiming asylum is an immigrant.Asylum seekers arent entitled to work but they are "entitled" to be housed,fed and provided with an allowance(dole if you will).

An allowance of 20 poxy euro a week, remember. Let's keep things in context.

Degsy

tbh wrote:

no, I meant *show* me the source. No offense, like, I'd just be interested to see that.

http://www.irishrefugeecouncil.ie/stats.html


the 98% statistic comes from McDowell himself,i cant remember exactly when he said it.

Hobbes

Degsy wrote:

Yes a person claiming asylum is an immigrant.

No they are not. I noticed you looked up immigrant in the dictionary. Notice it says nothing about claiming Asylum. You will find Asylum seeker has its own defination.

Even so they are distinctly different legally in Ireland as well.

Asylum seekers arent entitled to work but they are "entitled" to be housed,fed and provided with an allowance(dole if you will).

Thier allowance is so far removed from what we refer to as Dole. Also what do you suggest we do with someone who claims asylum? Throw them onto the streets until they get processed?

Incidently most of those who claim Refugee status because they can't go back to their country, not because they want to live here.

Degsy

tbh wrote:

An allowance of 20 poxy euro a week, remember. Let's keep things in context.

They make the decision to come here,we dont ask them to come.Try getting 20 quid a week out of the US government and look at the wealth of that country.

Hobbes

Degsy wrote:

http://www.irishrefugeecouncil.ie/stats.html


the 98% statistic comes from McDowell himself,i cant remember exactly when he said it.

No where in that page does it say 98%.

In fact if you do the math..

38,950 = Total took in 2000-2005 (2% of total for europe).

6814 (refugees) + 617 (leave to remain) = 7431.

7,431 is 19% of 38,950.

This would mean that 81% where denied Asylum in Ireland so far.

As I said you making statistics up or misreading them.

Degsy

Hobbes wrote:

No they are not. I noticed you looked up immigrant in the dictionary. Notice it says nothing about claiming Asylum. You will find Asylum seeker has its own defination.

Even so they are distinctly different legally in Ireland as well.



Thier allowance is so far removed from what we refer to as Dole. Also what do you suggest we do with someone who claims asylum? Throw them onto the streets until they get processed?

Incidently most of those who claim Refugee status because they can't go back to their country, not because they want to live here.

You're being incredibly naive.They come here because thier friends back home tell them they can expect an easy life when they get here.The people genuinly fleeing war and persecution cannot afford to come to this country which is why we are left by and large with the chancers from the likes of Nigeria.There is a ring operating whereby people in nigeria can be brought to this country via several others and finally by taxi from the north heavily pregnant and make a claim for asylum hoping to obtain citizenship.They usually vanish into the system while waiting on the application to be processed and bleeding-heart liberal groups help them launch expensive court cases for them to remain here.

Degsy

Hobbes wrote:

No where in that page does it say 98%.

In fact if you do the math..

38,950 = Total took in 2000-2005 (2% of total for europe).

6814 (refugees) + 617 (leave to remain) = 7431.

7,431 is 19% of 38,950.

This would mean that 81% where denied Asylum in Ireland so far.

As I said you making statistics up or misreading them.

I actually have made a mistake.The figure of 98% related to nigerians,not asylum seekers as a whole.In your eagerness to prove how wrong i was,you've arrived at a figure of 81%.A HUGE majority in anybody's language i t hink you'll agree.Now,in case you think these 81% are being treated premptorarily and railroaded home.Here is the official process for dealing with claims.Please bear in mind that the applicant bears none of the cost for this process themselves.

http://www.ecre.org/conditions/2000/ireland.shtml

tbh

Degsy wrote:

http://www.irishrefugeecouncil.ie/stats.html


the 98% statistic comes from McDowell himself,i cant remember exactly when he said it.

I can't see anything like 98% quoted there, but it does look like there is a very low percentage of successfull applications. Some other interesting tid-bits:

In the 5-year period 2001-2005
A total of 1,946,200 people sought asylum in Europe. 38,950 (2%) of these sought asylum in Ireland.
The UK, France and Germany accounted for a combined total of 881,940 (45.3%) Ireland was in 13th place behind the Czech Republic and just ahead of Greece and Poland.

966 asylum-seekers were newly recognised as refugees in Ireland in 2005.

The top 5 countries of origin of new asylum applicants to date this year are:

Nigeria – 557;
Somalia – 88;
Romania – 77;
Afghanistan – 57
and Sudan – 32


Under the ‘direct provision’ system, introduced in April 2000, asylum seekers are housed in shared, hostel-type accommodation centres across the country. Residents of direct provision centres are provided with food and lodging and a guaranteed cash payment of €19.10 per adult or €9.60 per child per week. In Ireland, asylum seekers are not allowed by the state to take up paid work – Ireland and Denmark, uniquely, have opted out of this year's EU-wide 'Reception Directive' which includes proposals granting (limited) access to employment to asylum seekers in the asylum process – and are denied access to third level education, regardless of their performance in the Leaving Cert. or their length of time in Ireland.


In 2004, the number of former asylum seekers deported (599) was 8 times the number who got leave to remain (75).

Hobbes

Degsy wrote:

HUGE majority in anybody's language i think you'll agree.

I never denied the count was high only that yours was. However you are still incorrect the percentage of Nigerians claiming asylum is around 80%. Still not 98%

But what is it you are exactly trying to argue?

Remember the OP was about a lump sum of money being given to actual refugees not Asylum seekers.

Degsy

Hobbes wrote:

I never denied the count was high only that yours was. However you are still incorrect the percentage of Nigerians claiming asylum is around 80%. Still not 98%

But what is it you are exactly trying to argue?

Remember the OP was about a lump sum of money being given to actual refugees not Asylum seekers.

No that the percentage of nigerians REFUSED was 98%.
I'm trying to argue that if you come here with a cock and bull story in order to try and milk the system you should get zero assitance from the government.The OP didnt say "actual refugees",he said "immigrants".Asylum seekers are immigrants in the sense they have come to this country to stay.If soembody is granted "refugee" status then they are allowed to work are they not?Well in that case why should they require a lump sum of money?We're all equal in the eyes of employers.Should not everybody on bad wages be entitled to a little cash "boost" every so often then?

Hobbes

Degsy wrote:

No that the percentage of nigerians REFUSED was 98%.

I don't see that figure there either. Can you point that out?

I'm trying to argue that if you come here with a cock and bull story in order to try and milk the system you should get zero assitance from the government.

How do you determine that beforehand? Treat everyone who comes as a chancer until proven otherwise? Like I said what is it your exactly trying to say.

The OP didnt say "actual refugees",he said "immigrants".

Read the news report quoted. It says the money is to actual Refugees not immigrants. I suspect the immigrant title is just to get peoples attention.

Asylum seekers are immigrants in the sense they have come to this country to stay.

If I was you I would read up on what an Asylum Seeker is. An Asylum seeker don't come to the country because they wanted to live here, they came here because they faced death or worse in thier home country.

IIRC most refugees return thier home country once it is safe to do so.

And pointing out the majority are refused just says to me that we have a good system in place that keeps out the chancers while ensuring those with real refugee needs are dealt with.

If soembody is granted "refugee" status then they are allowed to work are they not?

Once someone is given Refugee status they are given the same rights as an Irish person (don't recall on the voting though, probably not).

Well in that case why should they require a lump sum of money?

Probably because an actual refugee tends comes to this country with no money or items, and just giving them Refugee status doesn't mean we throw them out onto the street.

We're all equal in the eyes of employers.Should not everybody on bad wages be entitled to a little cash "boost" every so often then?

The OP (and yourself somewhat) seem to imply that "our own" should get the money first. Well if people bother to investigate it is possible to get money to look after yourself. However the OP seemed to be somewhat moot on what thier setup was which means we can't tell if it was geniune or they just screwed up.

For example, the tax suggestions I said earlier. I only found out about them recently. After I got it switched over I got quite a lot of money back from the tax office and nice lump of cash extra a month. There are probably more things I can claim for but haven't investigated.

Miguel_Sanchez

Degsy wrote:

You're being incredibly naive.They come here because thier friends back home tell them they can expect an easy life when they get here.

20 euro a week is hardly an easy life. And if 98% of Nigerians are being denied entry then surely word that would be sending a message to the non genuine Aslyum Seekers.

The people genuinly fleeing war and persecution cannot afford to come to this country which is why we are left by and large with the chancers from the likes of Nigeria.

Where did you get this from? There are many people fleeing war and persecution that have come to this country. I know some of them personally and they're not 'conning' me as you put it. Do you believe that the majority of Aslyum Seekers aren't genuine because of your stated reason above? Now *that's* naive.

There is a ring operating whereby people in nigeria can be brought to this country via several others and finally by taxi from the north heavily pregnant and make a claim for asylum hoping to obtain citizenship.

Didn't our recent referendum put a stop to this practice? I'm not sure but I think it did.

constitutionus

if you seriously believe the majority of asylum seekers are genuine your deluding yourself. its a con job and these guys are laughing all the way to the bank. you think 20quid a week is bad? try living on 1dollar a day. financially its in these guys interest to spoof their arse off for the three years or so it takes to get processed and exaust all the legal routes to kick em out in a loveley state paid house with all bills paid , a medical card and free education for the kids. and when your snared at the end of it? its back home to where your mates have been saving all the 20s youve been sending over through western union where you can then buy the entire village.

some of you guys said you know these people, well ive seen so much money flood out of this country by people who're "refugees" that the financial and legal sector have changed the law to hold ME accountable to their moneylaundering, not the company who makes millions in charges, me the fecking teller! you used to be able to send 6000punt out of the country with out ID 8yrs ago. now its 780punt (or 1000euro). some countries banks actually ran out of currencies so much money was being sent there!

the bogus aslyum seekers in this country are the biggest fraudsters outside of the politicians. its costing us in the region of 300 to 400 million and none of the politically correct muppets in power will do a damn thing about it cause they dont want to look "racist", compleatly missing the ****ing fact they are by treating these people differently than you or me if we tried benefit fraud.

if you people actualy knew what was going on you'd be appalled

*edit. by the way, in 2004? of the 4700 odd asylum applications only 400 odd were accepted as being genuine. thats 90% lads and if you dont believe me it on the CSO website for all to see.

oh and as to the original post i think it IS discracefull cause i dont believe this or any other government has the right to simply moneygrap private citizens money and treat it as gov expenditure. the idea that there isnt anyone somewhere related to the estate of the person involved is laughable. even if their the bastard secound cousin of the person they still have a better right to the money than the government.
it was bad enough when the banks covered the extent of these accounts up to shore up their profits but to have to gov just nicking it is sick

The things we think of to have a go at MM.

I heard he bought an Issues magazine lately. Shame on him, he should have donated it to a hospital beds fund...

constitutionus

Deleted User wrote:

The things we think of to have a go at MM.

I heard he bought an Issues magazine lately. Shame on him, he should have donated it to a hospital beds fund...

of course he shouldnt have. the real ones called "the big issue", he obviously got stung by a fraudster. more money down the drain