BBC on mass immigration to Ireland - we have messed it up basically

Latchy

Wertz wrote: »

I will however agree that benefit fraud was a mainstay of a lot of emigrants that chose the UK as their new home.

It was not uncommon in the grapevine during 70s and 80s to hear some returning irish immigrants boast about how they were signing on at several different dole offices in London .Some would even tell about how they got married (for a day ) to an african at a registry office for the sum of between £500/1000 .It wasn't just the irish who were involved in these scams, far from it but if anyone can recall Roger Cook were in one of his programmes about 7 years ago ,he exposed some irish people in London involved in scams as mentioned above and how their greed eventualy caught up with them .

Hydroquinone

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

The driving purpose of the government at the time wasn't the good and welfare of the nation, it was basically that the people in government not be among the huddled masses. What makes you think it has changed since then?

What makes you think I think it has?

I was doubting the idea that the government was engineering a downturn in the economy to get rid of foreigners, that's all.

HollyB

Hydroquinone wrote: »

What makes you think I think it has?

I was doubting the idea that the government was engineering a downturn in the economy to get rid of foreigners, that's all.

A downturn in the economy could also be politically disastrous for those in office at the time.

A large percentage of the immigrants who are in the country at present are likely to remain. It's the immigrants who could potentially arrive in the future that the government may wish to dissuade.

OPENROAD

Wertz wrote: »

?

Also to anyone harping on about the irony of us giving out about immigration; the major difference about when we all had to emigrate was that we went to work and to work only...most countries except the UK did not hand us social welfare/housing if things turned rough...you either worked, wenmt home or starved and went homeless. It's not the same as the cakewalk immigrants and asylum seekers face upon arrival to this island.

Yup and most immigrants here like when the Irish went abroad, do so to work and better themseles. Are you suggesting that we Irish are unique or something. The Irish are the only hardworking people, next you will be telling me that all Catholics are Irish. Come on !! You are going to get immigrants who will be here who will milk the system, just like some Irish who went to the UK did the same. They got social payments, free housing etc,. and then would go down the pub and slag off the English. You know times were tough in the UK, what would your reaction had been if the English had decided, we are not going to take any more Irish.

OPENROAD

HollyB wrote: »

That's an excellent point. Ireland is a comparatively small country; there are limits to the number of immigrants the country can cope with.

EU citizens have the right to come and go as they please, but much stricter controls should be enforced regarding non-EU immigrants - for example, work visas should be granted only if there are no suitably qualified EU citizens and employers should have to prove that they made every reasonable effort to recruit EU applicants.

If 2,000 people are here illegally and subject to deportation, those 2,000 people should be deported - not just 40 of them.

Nice to see you have got your head around the fact that EU citizens can come and go as they please. Well done.

justcallmetex

fcuk it the thing people opposed to emigration to this country are concerned about is that they may have to pay a little more in tax to keep families out of poverty in their own country.

Seems to me we're too fcukin greedy to give a **** about the poor. emigration is not the issue here.

The_Conductor

justcallmetex wrote:

fcuk it the thing people opposed to emigration to this country are concerned about is that they may have to pay a little more in tax to keep families out of poverty in their own country.

Seems to me we're too fcukin greedy to give a **** about the poor. emigration is not the issue here.

Between PAYE, Class A PRSI, compulsary Contributory Superannuation and other deductions- I pay a little shy of 56% of my income in various taxes and surcharges. I also voluntarily help run a charity that provides educational opportunities in third world countries. Grow up and open your eyes. Its not black and white out there- not everyone who is worried about immigration to this country is a greedy rich fcuk who doesn't care about the poor. Come back after you've served in APSO and moan about the ingrates if you feel like it. Moaning that people who are worried about immigration are simply being greedy- is even worse than the idiots on soapboxes bleating racist crap. Its not a black and white world. People naturally will try to avail of whatever opportunities are out there. Ireland is widely seen as being a "soft-touch", where people have more money than they have sense. There have been several infamous incidences of advertisements to this end along with tips on how to get here widely published in otherwise reputable newspapers- and I'm not talking solely about those published in Lagos. To be honest- with the obvious exclusion of two interviewees in the BBC piece- it was and is quite a balanced piece of journalism. You're not racist to want to try to take care of the less-well-off in your own country, over and above those blow-ins (I would also include those who left this country years ago and didn't experience this country in the 1980s but now want to come back here with rose-tinted lenses in the blow-ins category). I am not racist. I am appalled at the poverty I see every single day of the week- not even 100 yards from Dail Eireann. Its the likes of you who are trying to say that I must be racist, because I endorse some manner of controls on immigration into this country. Go to hell.

johnathan woss

To those talking about irony, etc etc

The Irish that emigrated went mostly to either
a) large, relatively young countries that were largely composed of immigrants, and that had large amounts of untapped land and resources and a need for labour (think the US, Canada, Australia)

b) Britain, which for most of the period was the same country anyway, which has an unique historical link with Ireland, which has always required Irish labour and birth rates, which was crying out for Irish soldiers(at times the British army has been 50% Irish), which was crying out for Irish labour to help rebuild cities after WW2, etc etc etc


Ireland is a small country that by the most extremely conservative estimates has taken in over 10% of it's population in immigrants in a very short period of time.
Most of these immigrants are from countries with no historical or cultural link to Ireland whatsoever.

If you can show how the two situations are similar, and hence show how Irish people worrying about the current immigration is "ironic" or "hypocritical" or whatever, I am all ears.....

Wertz

OPENROAD wrote: »

Yup and most immigrants here like when the Irish went abroad, do so to work and better themseles. Are you suggesting that we Irish are unique or something. The Irish are the only hardworking people, next you will be telling me that all Catholics are Irish. Come on !! You are going to get immigrants who will be here who will milk the system, just like some Irish who went to the UK did the same. They got social payments, free housing etc,. and then would go down the pub and slag off the English. You know times were tough in the UK, what would your reaction had been if the English had decided, we are not going to take any more Irish.

Most yes, all no. I don't have figures to hand but I'd be of the opinion (however unpopular that opnion might be) that we and the UK have more than our fair share of welfare tourists, given our genorosity on that front.
Since neither we nor the UK have bothered to keep accurate tally on recent immigration figures, I'd be hard pressed to back that up with stats. Commonsense though that if your own country's average wage is bettered by the sum you get for sitting on your backside on these islands, you're invariably going to get a lot of people taking advantage of that fact (and who could really blame them?)...

...and in the event of economic downturn, a 'run' on our social welfare resources could be the result. We're already facing a crisis in non-contributory pensions in coming years....pile more demand on top of that and we're maybe left with people who worked and paid taxes through times of hardship for decades being shortchanged both economically and in terms of healthcare to meet the needs of those who only landed here because times were good and have decided to remain because the nation's coffers bankroll them.

WRT to your point on the UK doing it to us; had they done, could we really have blamed them? After all this was all at the same time as our countrymen were waging guerilla warfare on them on a few fronts (the economic front being one). The difference is with the UK is that their economy was/is a fair bit larger than ours, even per capita (I'm only going on recent GDP figures here mind), so they could absorb it. We can...for now. I'd hope that would remain the case. The maths don't add up to me, (only a layman's viewpoint though).

Anyway the argument is moot. It's too late to do a damn thing about it no matter whther you're for or against doing anything about it.

OPENROAD

Wertz wrote: »

Most yes, all no. I don't have figures to hand but I'd be of the opinion (however unpopular that opnion might be) that we and the UK have more than our fair share of welfare tourists, given our genorosity on that front.
Since neither we nor the UK have bothered to keep accurate tally on recent immigration figures, I'd be hard pressed to back that up with stats. Commonsense though that if your own country's average wage is bettered by the sum you get for sitting on your backside on these islands, you're invariably going to get a lot of people taking advantage of that fact (and who could really blame them?)...

...and in the event of economic downturn, a 'run' on our social welfare resources could be the result. We're already facing a crisis in non-contributory pensions in coming years....pile more demand on top of that and we're maybe left with people who worked and paid taxes through times of hardship for decades being shortchanged both economically and in terms of healthcare to meet the needs of those who only landed here because times were good and have decided to remain because the nation's coffers bankroll them.

WRT to your point on the UK doing it to us; had they done, could we really have blamed them? After all this was all at the same time as our countrymen were waging guerilla warfare on them on a few fronts (the economic front being one). The difference is with the UK is that their economy was/is a fair bit larger than ours, even per capita (I'm only going on recent GDP figures here mind), so they could absorb it. We can...for now. I'd hope that would remain the case. The maths don't add up to me, (only a layman's viewpoint though).

Anyway the argument is moot. It's too late to do a damn thing about it no matter whther you're for or against doing anything about it.

A well put across argument imo, and I agree with many if not all of your points. It is clear in particular with the UK that they have no indication of the real numbers. As to whether the UK could absorb the numbers, while I agree to a large extent with you, immigration and Irish are included in this would put pressure on services in the UK. My problem is that some Irish are all in favour of say allowing the illegal Irish in US to stay but will have zero tolerance on illegals here which I would agree with, zero tolerance for all illegals in US and here unless a valid argument can be put across by individuals. Their are some people that don't realise that many of our roads have been financed by British,French,German taxpayers and those that do know don't mind taking the money but don't want immigration from EU countries here. That's what really bugs me.

HollyB

OPENROAD wrote: »

My problem is that some Irish are all in favour of say allowing the illegal Irish in US to stay but will have zero tolerance on illegals here which I would agree with, zero tolerance for all illegals in US and here unless a valid argument can be put across by individuals.

I think it should be up to the US to decide what to do regarding illegal Irish immigrants over there. Irish politicians are free to ask for amnesty if they so choose - just as those of other countries may ask for amnesty for their citizens - but it should be the choice of each country how they will deal with illegal immigrants.

If the US chooses to allow Irish illegals to stay, that's their choice.

Wertz

OPENROAD wrote: »

A well put across argument imo, and I agree with many if not all of your points. It is clear in particular with the UK that they have no indication of the real numbers. As to whether the UK could absorb the numbers, while I agree to a large extent with you, immigration and Irish are included in this would put pressure on services in the UK. My problem is that some Irish are all in favour of say allowing the illegal Irish in US to stay but will have zero tolerance on illegals here which I would agree with, zero tolerance for all illegals in US and here unless a valid argument can be put across by individuals. Their are some people that don't realise that many of our roads have been financed by British,French,German taxpayers and those that do know don't mind taking the money but don't want immigration from EU countries here. That's what really bugs me.

Although I know a few illegals in the US (most of them came home when the tide turned here) I'd be in agreement that our expats shouldn't be singled out for special treatment just because they're Irish.
The problem with the States (and it's a problem I had to contend and compete with when I was an illegal) is the large number of hispanic illegals (mainly but not exclusively Mexican) who flooded into the US through a somewhat porous land border, their use in the black economy (ironically by middle class people who would politically call for all illegals to be ejected) taking up of low skilled jobs, creating a burden on schooling and other services.
It's easy to see (especially now that we have our own comparable perspective) why people are up in arms and that politicians are being called to act....but you can't simply single out Mexicans or Hondurans or whatever and tell them to GTFO but leave illegals of other race be. Similar to how we couldn't decide to just deport all Nigerians for instance (I'm not singling anyone out here).


On your point about roads, it's one I've heard before. We've no doubt done very well on the back of the EEC/EC/EU (that said, it wasn't everyone's wish that we join eurpoe in the first place but that's neither here nor there) and now that their investment has borne fruit, it's payback time...but why should we ever have been expected to deal with the huge influx we ended up getting and more importantly what bunch of muppets left an open door policy with absolutely no checks and balances. Why did only ourselves, the Swedes an the Brits decide to carry the can?
We're currently a very enviable place to live, primarily because of all the infrastructure money that was pumped into the State by Europe and it's knock on effects. That infrastructure and some coy financial policies are the only real reasons the almighty dollar came here the way it did and pushed us to the boom levels.
As a result of all those factors, we were always going to be inundated....the failure to anticipate that and to police it is the crux of our problem...
But you can't put the sh*t back in the horse.

OPENROAD

HollyB wrote: »

If the US chooses to allow Irish illegals to stay, that's their choice.

It looks like that this is unlikely to happen, and rightly so, they should be sent home back to Ireland.

OPENROAD

Wertz wrote: »

The problem with the States (and it's a problem I had to contend and compete with when I was an illegal) is the large number of hispanic illegals (mainly but not exclusively Mexican) who flooded into the US through a somewhat porous land border, their use in the black economy (ironically by middle class people who would politically call for all illegals to be ejected) taking up of low skilled jobs, creating a burden on schooling and other services.
It's easy to see (especially now that we have our own comparable perspective) why people are up in arms and that politicians are being called to act....but you can't simply single out Mexicans or Hondurans or whatever and tell them to GTFO but leave illegals of other race be. Similar to how we couldn't decide to just deport all Nigerians for instance (I'm not singling anyone out here).


Exactly and we should not expect special treatment.

OPENROAD

Wertz wrote: »

On your point about roads, it's one I've heard before. We've no doubt done very well on the back of the EEC/EC/EU (that said, it wasn't everyone's wish that we join eurpoe in the first place but that's neither here nor there) and now that their investment has borne fruit, it's payback time..




But you have a situation where people are moaning that we now have to make a financial contribution rather than taking all the time.

Just to point out I am not advocating an open door policy.

Wertz

Yeah, somewhat laughable when you consider how well a lot of those self same people have probably done on the back of the boom.
But to be fair there are still parts of our native populace who the boom all but bypassed, mainly lower-working class or the underclass and in a lot of cases, it's those people that first feel the pinch from the current situation created by unchecked immigration, in terms of decreased jobs prospects (for those that bother to work), less likelihood of affording to own a home, increased pressure on finite resources; ie social housing, social welfare, public health system leading to higher means test levels to qualify for those resources.

stakey

Wertz wrote: »

Also to anyone harping on about the irony of us giving out about immigration; the major difference about when we all had to emigrate was that we went to work and to work only...most countries except the UK did not hand us social welfare/housing if things turned rough...you either worked, wenmt home or starved and went homeless. It's not the same as the cakewalk immigrants and asylum seekers face upon arrival to this island.

LMFAO!!! Typical Irish outlook of "Oh, we built the world and everyone screwed us over", seriously mate, get the head out. The Irish were treated with the same racism we lamp out on other ethnicities coming to Ireland today in the early days of the US, what did the Irish do there? They made there money through racketeering, murdering, robbery and other associated crimes. The Irish only got off the ground in the US nearly one hundred years after they started coming in there droves. Our activities in crime in the US lasts up to the present day. You can look at all the other places we went to as well and find the exact same thing. The Irish did what they could to make money and be accepted into the societies they came into, they certainly didn't arrive off the boats and started working!

So you can leave that idea at the door!

Wertz

Might sound like vicious backpeddling but I'm harking back to our bad old days circa 1950's-80's, ie, recent memory, with that comment rather than back to Ellis Island and famine ships. AFAIK no country had a social welfare system barring poorhouses back then.
Your point is a fair one and duly noted.
My point still stands for those willing to take me at my word...

SimpleSam06

OPENROAD wrote: »

But you have a situation where people are moaning that we now have to make a financial contribution rather than taking all the time.

Wertz wrote: »

On your point about roads, it's one I've heard before. We've no doubt done very well on the back of the EEC/EC/EU (that said, it wasn't everyone's wish that we join eurpoe in the first place but that's neither here nor there) and now that their investment has borne fruit, it's payback time...

Where does this idea come from that we owe anyone anything? Ireland among other things gave up most of its fishing grounds when it joined the EC, not to mention the EU wanted a poster child. Once again, we don't owe economic migrants of any flavour any favours.

Wertz wrote: »

Similar to how we couldn't decide to just deport all Nigerians for instance (I'm not singling anyone out here).

Er, actually we could. It might not be very popular, but there is no doubt that sanction could be applied.

purple'n'gold

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wertz
Similar to how we couldn't decide to just deport all Nigerians for instance (I'm not singling anyone out here).
Er, actually we could. It might not be very popular, but there is no doubt that sanction could be applied.
It might not be very popular? With who? I can’t imagine mass demonstrations on the streets if we decided to deport all Nigerians. As a matter of fact I cant imagine any demonstrations at all.

Mr.Micro

I may be mistaken but perhaps people forget its the economic migrants who also have been keeping the economy going, they are not just here to take. It is a two way thing and without them there would be a massive labour and skill shortage. We still need their help and skills allied to our own home grown talent to keep our economy going and these migrants should have the same rights as us all under any EU law or directive.

HollyB

Wertz wrote: »

Similar to how we couldn't decide to just deport all Nigerians for instance (I'm not singling anyone out here).

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Er, actually we could. It might not be very popular, but there is no doubt that sanction could be applied.

What would the legalities on that one be? All EU citizens must be treated equally, but what about non-EU citizens? If the Stare was to deport all illegal Nigerians, wouldn't they be leaving themselves open to discrimination suits because other non-EU citizens were not being treated as unfavourably?

What about the opposite - could we, for example, declare an amnesty for all illegal immigrants from Country X but not extend the same amnesty to illegal immigrants from Country Y?

Wertz

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Where does this idea come from that we owe anyone anything? Ireland among other things gave up most of its fishing grounds when it joined the EC, not to mention the EU wanted a poster child. Once again, we don't owe economic migrants of any flavour any favours.

Perhaps a subconscious desire on our behalfs not to look as if we're all take and no give? Maybe to make it look as if we're suddenly a mature and well off economy willing to "pay it forward"? I'm not sure. It certainly comes from a political and business level more than an individual citizen level.
We don't "owe" in the sense of any contract or loan agreements signed AFAIK...I think it's more a sense of honour.
Your comment on the fishing is a good one....often heard the bitterness of my uncles (ex-trawlermen) talking about that; our national waters divvied up and given to those dirty Iberians*....doesn't matter now, since there's no bloody fish left.

*Their insinuation, not mine.

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Er, actually we could. It might not be very popular, but there is no doubt that sanction could be applied.

So why Nigerians and not all non-EU nationals (barring genuine asylum seekers, if any actually exist here), since by rights none of them are entitled to live or work here unless they're naturalised citizens or here on valid work permits...?
My point in saying that was just to reiterate the problem faced by the US WRT illegal Irish and double standards...it was semi-off the cuff remark.

SimpleSam06

purplengold wrote: »

It might not be very popular? With who? I can’t imagine mass demonstrations on the streets if we decided to deport all Nigerians. As a matter of fact I cant imagine any demonstrations at all.

In Australia a year or two ago, there were what were described as "race riots", complete with lurid images of red faced Aussies wielding beer bottles. The international press had a field day.

What actually happened was groups of Muslim youths of middle eastern extraction had been hassling bikini-clad young women on the beach, cursing at them and occasionally attacking them physically. In this particular situation the rest of the people on the beach got fed up with them, and dealt with them appropriately.

You could expect a similar but much more severe backlash from the international community at any attempt to deport Nigerians en masse. These aren't drunken troublemakers, they are families with children (indeed it was by using these children that the majority of them got in). However good the reasons for doing it, it would go down in Irish history as a day of infamy, a permanent black mark on the country.

Whether or not the majority of Irish people care about that is a different story.

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I may be mistaken but perhaps people forget its the economic migrants who also have been keeping the economy going,

You are mistaken. The economic boom came about because of historically low international interest rates, flooding the country with "free" cash and easy credit. Then came the economic migrants.

HollyB wrote:

What would the legalities on that one be? All EU citizens must be treated equally, but what about non-EU citizens? If the Stare was to deport all illegal Nigerians, wouldn't they be leaving themselves open to discrimination suits because other non-EU citizens were not being treated as unfavourably?

What about the opposite - could we, for example, declare an amnesty for all illegal immigrants from Country X but not extend the same amnesty to illegal immigrants from Country Y?

Lets be absoloutely clear on this - in our own country, we make the laws, regardless of membership in the EU or any other groups. The legalities are exactly what we make them. The international backlash would doubtless be severe, however.

Wertz wrote:

So why Nigerians and not all non-EU nationals (barring genuine asylum seekers, if any actually exist here), since by rights none of them are entitled to live or work here unless they're naturalised citizens or here on valid work permits...?

Eh you were saying that we couldn't; I was simply making the point that we could, very easily. This isn't the US, we don't have a large porous land border with any third world nations.

HollyB

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Lets be absoloutely clear on this - in our own country, we make the laws, regardless of membership in the EU or any other groups. The legalities are exactly what we make them. The international backlash would doubtless be severe, however.

Doesn't a decision in the EU courts trump one in our own courts? If the State decided that they were going to have a crackdown on all illegal Nigerian immigrants and deport them from the country ASAP, but the European courts declared that it was illegal for Nigerians to be singled out, would we still be able to do it?

Wertz

Like I said it was a semi- off the cuff remark...
By "couldn't" I meant more on a moral basis than on a legal one and as you alluded to yourself, we can't, in reality...at least not with the world looking on.
Land of a 1,000 welcomes and all that...wouldn't look good for Bórd Failte really, would it...

Mr.Micro

SimpleSam06 how do you think a booming economy can boom with labour and skill shortages? The Government sent delegations of civil servants abroad to encourage people to come to Ireland to fill the vacancies. Many took up this offer. So without these migrants and our small population we would have not had our boom for so long. We cannot just kick them out now.

HollyB

Wertz wrote: »

So why Nigerians and not all non-EU nationals (barring genuine asylum seekers, if any actually exist here), since by rights none of them are entitled to live or work here unless they're naturalised citizens or here on valid work permits...?

Probably because Ireland isn't doing too well on actually carrying out deportations of illegal immigrants.

Look at the situation with a deportation scheduled this month. 348 people were due to be deported to Nigeria. Nine people were actually deported.

http://www.tribune.ie/article.tvt?_scope=TribuneFTF&id=108221&SUBCAT=&SUBCATNAME=&DT=09/12/2007%2000%3A00%3A00&keywords=asylum&FC

A good start would be to actually deport those who are scheduled for deportation.

HollyB

Mr.Micro wrote: »

SimpleSam06 how do you think a booming economy can boom with labour and skill shortages? The Government sent delegations of civil servants abroad to encourage people to come to Ireland to fill the vacancies. Many took up this offer. So without these migrants and our small population we would have not had our boom for so long. We cannot just kick them out now.

If they have valid work permits, or have been granted citizenship, of course not.

Instead of targeting those who are legitimately here, the State should begin by deporting those who are illegally here and by minimizing the numbers of new arrivals.

Mr.Micro

HollyB wrote: »

If they have valid work permits, or have been granted citizenship, of course not.

Instead of targeting those who are legitimately here, the State should begin by deporting those who are illegally here and by minimizing the numbers of new arrivals.

If the migrant workers are from EU countries then I cannot see what the Government could do? Other countries outside the EU permits can be limited or refused. As long as Ireland is seen as prosperous then we will be a magnet. If the current sales madness is anything to go by then we are still in the money.