Nine companies in were paid more than 10m each for providing direct provision

Ilovemybricks

SOME NINE COMPANIES were paid more than €10 million each to operate direct provision centres in the five-year period between 2010 and 2015.

That is according to a report carried out by the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) – a government spending watchdog – which found that commercial providers of centres were paid a total of €251 million over the five years to 2015.

The organisation said that as of December 2015, there were 35 direct provision centres with capacity to accommodate over 5,400 people.
Seven are state-owned with two companies contracted to provide services. The other 28 centres are owned and operated by 22 commercial suppliers.
The majority of the centres were found to be premises that were originally designed and used for other purposes, such as former hotels or boarding schools. Three centres were purpose-built.

Roscommon-based Bridgestock was found to have received the most during the five-year period, receiving about €40 million from the state.

http://www.thejournal.ie/direct-provision-centres-ireland-2-3005119-Oct2016/

Immigration and asylum seems to be a growing industry. A lot of people are getting very wealthy on the back of it.

ORAC stated in 2013 that the median processing time for general asylum applications was 12 weeks. In 2014 the average processing time for general asylum applications was 15.3 weeks.

The median processing time for appeals of subsidiary protection status decisions was 28 weeks.

http://www.nascireland.org/parliamentary-questions/pq-asylum-applications-processing-times/

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/similarities-between-refugee-centres-and-direct-provision-1.2362902

So I don't understand why so many are still living in direct provision if they get an answer on their asylum applications so quickly.

b_mac2

Any idea of the legal bills?

Ilovemybricks

b_mac2 wrote: »

Any idea of the legal bills?

Can't seem to find them but here's an example of what some are earning through the asylum industry.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/state-asylum-cases-earned-exministers-wife-1m-29908349.html

Richard Hillman

This is a major problem is Norway and there have been conflicts of interest been found. The media won't touch it because they are in fear of their lives of being called racists or even worse.....right wing.

Gatling

b_mac2 wrote: »

Any idea of the legal bills?

For asylum seekers it was around €25 million a few years back

conorhal

b_mac2 wrote: »

Any idea of the legal bills?

I remember a couple of years ago former FF TD Barry Andrews' (currently a very well paid director at Goal) wife made over a million on one year representing asylum seekers cases in the courts.
The lawyers are doing pretty well out of all this too.

Ilovemybricks

conorhal wrote: »

I remember a couple of years ago former FF TD Barry Andrews' (currently a very well paid director at Goal) wife made over a million on one year representing asylum seekers cases in the courts.
The lawyers are doing pretty well out of all this too.

Yup. I linked to that story above. Nice money if you can get it. No wonder some people are so probably immigration and want us to take in more asylum seekers.

riffmongous

I'd be very interested to see the accounts of some of these companies, I've seen in the refugee centres over here a lot of the work is organised and done by the people living there, all cleaning, cooking, a lot of repairs etc

Kivaro

Over a quarter of a billion euros over five years for direct provision paid by Irish tax payers?

Sounds like the country can afford it; no wonder that public sector workers want to strike for more money.

Del2005

Ilovemybricks wrote: »

So I don't understand why so many are still living in direct provision if they get an answer on their asylum applications so quickly.

Appeal after appeal and even if the person was found to be a total fraud our well paid legal professionals will appeal again to keep their snout in the trough, all funded from our taxes.

PirateShampoo

Refugees means Jobs.

They are big business.

You need places built to house them, companies to supply Food, Clothes and everything else that falls under that category from Electric to Broadband. You have children who need schooling and the adults who need teaching and training. Then you need staff to look after them, more staff to look after thier legal needs. Then more staff are needed down the Social Welfare to look after them there.

The EU gives funding towards all this so of course country's are going to take them.

JL2106

Let them work and access the same entitlements as all other residents. It will save the state money. It makes sense.

homerjay2005

b_mac2 wrote: »

Any idea of the legal bills?

is it about €156m a year in total all in for this?

Kivaro wrote: »

Over a quarter of a billion euros over five years for direct provision paid by Irish tax payers?

Sounds like the country can afford it; no wonder that public sector workers want to strike for more money.

i think you will find its actually closer to 3/4 of a billion.

add in the €600m a year on foreign aid, thats €3.75b that we are forking out every 5 years on the problems of other countries.

Cee-Jay-Cee

If the law was applied as it should be then the vast majority of regufees landing here shouldn't make it past the airport. They should be returned to the country where the flight originated from but as usual the laws are ignored and these people are pampered and pandered to and allowed stay.

I have no problem with people who are legitimate cases and who have a right to land here but the majority have no right to be here and can then get free representation at a huge cost despite their watery weak and often fraudulent case.

homerjay2005

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

If the law was applied as it should be then the vast majority of regufees landing here shouldn't make it past the airport. They should be returned to the country where the flight originated from but as usual the laws are ignored and these people are pampered and pandered to and allowed stay.

I have no problem with people who are legitimate cases and who have a right to land here but the majority have no right to be here and can then get free representation at a huge cost despite their watery weak and often fraudulent case.

its not as easy as that - if they could be deported, they would be. our previous justice minister didnt want to deport anybody.

look at the problems in deporting that Pamela one. it also costs €120,000 to deport somebody, so taking this into account, the difficulties in doing so and the legal loopholes these people keep exploiting, its better off just to leave them here.

the gardai really are fighting a battle they cant win, as they are not supported by law to remove them.

JL2106

It is a lot cheaper to let them stay and work. Deportations are inhumane and costly.

Del2005

JL2106 wrote: »

Let them work and access the same entitlements as all other residents. It will save the state money. It makes sense.

What entitlements? An EU citizen isn't entitled to anything when they move to Ireland so any refugee arriving in Ireland would be entitled to nothing also. At least an EU citizen can work without a permit the majority of refugees are from countries that require a permit so they aren't entitled to work.

not yet

JL2106 wrote: »

It is a lot cheaper to let them stay and work. Deportations are inhumane and costly.

And if the figure happened to be 500,000 would you say the same..?

The world is a big place, how are we as a country of 4.8 million meant to cope with the amount of people ''wanting'' to come here if we let people stay and work with no checks and balances...

Geuze

JL2106 wrote: »

It is a lot cheaper to let them stay and work. Deportations are inhumane and costly.

I would not allow illegal immigrants out of the airport campus.

House them there, process them within a week.

That could not cost that much, could it?


90% of asylum-seekers in Ireland were bogus.

Geuze

JL2106 wrote: »

It is a lot cheaper to let them stay and work. Deportations are inhumane and costly.

Illegal AS attempting to abuse our system, which leads to huge costs onto the taxpayer, should be promptly dealt with deported.

Instead of that we are too soft, and let them appeal and appeal.

It's costs us tens of millions.

JL2106

"90% of asylum-seekers in Ireland were bogus."

Source?

Geuze

JL2106 wrote: »

"90% of asylum-seekers in Ireland were bogus."

Source?

Over and over again the truth is questioned.

The source is direct from INIS and the Ministry of Justice, Ireland.

http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/Pages/PR07000171

Geuze

JL2106 wrote: »

"90% of asylum-seekers in Ireland were bogus."

Source?

Statement by the Minister regarding the Real Facts about the Asylum and Deportation Systems

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael Mc Dowell T.D., in response to recent commentary from various sources on the issues of asylum and deportations, much of which has portrayed a grossly inaccurate picture of developments in this area, has today issued the following briefing which provides the real facts about developments in this area.

The Minister stated:
"A small but well placed minority of commentators have sought to create the impression that Ireland's treatment of asylum seekers is harsh and unfair. They have consistently concealed the real facts from the Irish people. Moreover, they have sought to create the impression that anyone who points out the true situation is engaging in political racism. They hint at international comparisons which do not exist.
They refuse to address the very large abuse of asylum protection in Ireland. They claim to believe that it is wrong to point out what is happening lest it create prejudice against genuine asylum seekers. They are engaging in a form of verbal intimidation of those who would tell the truth."

The Minister continued
"In issuing this briefing today my aim is to set out certain key facts about the operation of our asylum and deportation systems which are based on very clear legal principles which stand up very well to comparison with those in other comparable jurisdictions such as the European Union.
Our approach to the issue of protection is based on achieving a balance between fairness and firmness - fairness in ensuring that those genuinely in need of protection receive that protection quickly; firmness in dealing rigorously with abuses in our system which tie up resources which could be better utilised elsewhere. Ireland's asylum strategy is based on a number of key principles;
Meeting our obligations under international law such as the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees
Dealing fairly but efficiently with the large number of unfounded asylum claims which are being received which represent over 90% of the total asylum applications being processed annually
Ensuring that persons who are found, after a fair and efficient determination process, not in need of protection are returned to their countries of origin as quickly as this can be arranged
Ensuring that we have robust systems in place to root out and prevent abuse in our protection system by persons who are really entering the State for purposes other than seeking protection from persecution."

Recognition Rates

Ireland's recognition rate for refugee status at first instance compares favourably to other European countries as follows:

Denmark 4.9%; Ireland 6.2%; Spain 2.6%; Norway 3.6%; Germany 3.3%; UK 3%.

Nigerian Asylum Seekers

A good deal of media comment has concentrated on the cases of individual Nigerian applicants and families.
In the case of asylum applications from Nigerian nationals, which represent the highest source country in terms of asylum applications (some 37% of applications in 2004 and 41% in 2005), comparative statistics also indicate that our recognition rate at first instance is very much in line with other European States which receive high volumes of applications from nationals of Nigeria.
Ireland received the second highest number of asylum applications in main industrialised countries from nationals of Nigeria in 2004. The recognition rate at first instance for 2004 is as follows:
Ireland 0.6%; Netherlands 0.6%; Austria 0.3%; Spain 0.1%
Less than 1%, therefore, of all Nigerian national asylum seekers succeed at first instance in the European Union member states that receive most Nigerian applications.


Prioritised Applications

Under the State's refugee laws, the Minister can designate particular countries and particular categories of asylum applications for prioritised treatment.
Grounds for doing so include the nationality of the applicant and the likelihood that the applications are well founded and considerations of public policy.
In the case of Nigeria which has a very high failure rate and a very high application rate, these grounds justify prioritising examination of asylum claims. Contrary to ill-informed commentary, Nigeria has not been designated a "safe country". It is a country with a proven record internationally of unjustified applications for asylum status, as is evidenced by the enormous international rejection rate.
Other countries have been designated as safe countries in accordance with the statutory criteria.
Most asylum applications (more than 90%) are found not to meet the criteria for refugee protection.
By way of illustration, since January 2005, prioritised asylum claims from nationals of Nigeria, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia and South Africa (representing 46% of all applications) have been processed in accelerated procedures by the independent determination bodies (Refugee Applications Commissioner and Refugee Appeals Tribunal).
Detailed analysis of the accelerated process has shown that:
Of the 365 decisions issued so far by ORAC, some 359 have been refused.
Of the 136 decisions issued by the RAT, some 134 have upheld the earlier decision of the ORAC that the applicant is NOT a refugee.
Asylum applications from Nigeria, although not designated as a safe country of origin, are prioritised since December 2003 on the basis that Nigeria has for a number of years been the highest source country for asylum applications representing some 37 % of our caseload in 2004 and some 41% in 2005 to date. Giving priority to the largest part of the asylum caseload makes sense while at the same time ensuring that other cases are also processed as expeditiously as possible.

Geuze

I have italicised the reference to the 90% figure.

This is well known.

homerjay2005

Other reasons for seeking asylum which were cited include:

1. Fear of local tribal customs as the first born son of a royal family;
2. Fear of village elders arising from requirement to replace grandmother as head of the village;
3. Successor to be king after father's death;
4. Heir to father's throne;
5. Treated as a domestic servant by his mother's friends;
6. Sacrifice of first born child;
7. Fears persecution as he lost money which belonged to his boss
8. Fear that a former employer may kill her and place body parts around his house;
9. Fear of persecution for failing to bring home the bodies of deceased family members killed in a fire;
10. Male members of tribe carry out ritual sacrifices of children

.

some mad stuff there.

Geuze

It's fairly obvious to any reasonable person that the vast majority of asylum-seekers have been bogus - this is simply the truth.

I'm sure they are lovely people, but it is simply the truth that they are illegal immigrants.

By the way, it continues to this day.

Look at the recent stats, 2015 applications:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Five_main_citizenships_of_(non-EU)_asylum_applicants,_2015_(number_of_first_time_applicants,_rounded_figures)_YB16.png

not yet

Geuze wrote: »

It's fairly obvious to any reasonable person that the vast majority of asylum-seekers have been bogus - this is simply the truth.

I'm sure they are lovely people, but it is simply the truth that they are illegal immigrants.

By the way, it continues to this day.

Look at the recent stats, 2015 applications:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Five_main_citizenships_of_(non-EU)_asylum_applicants,_2015_(number_of_first_time_applicants,_rounded_figures)_YB16.png

I find it incredibly strange that when AS from Nigeria are granted legal status here having stated they are in fear of their life can within 12 months go back to Nigeria on Business-Funerals-weddings etc.

Think about that for one moment...

Dr Jakub

Once again look at Sweden to see our future. The 'refugee' business is a big one and there are millions to be made.

dav3

Dr Jakub wrote: »

Once again look at Sweden to see our future. The 'refugee' business is a big one and there are millions to be made.

We should be looking at who has been given the contracts to run such centres and what connections they have to certain political parties rather than getting worked up over a few asylum seekers. It is in certain people's interest to keep as many people in these centres for as long as possible.

We all know what's going on, this is Ireland after all. 'Follow the money' as a balding oompa loompa once said.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/how-direct-provision-became-a-profitable-business-1.2030519

Many of the companies providing food and shelter are large firms involved in the property, hospitality or catering business.
In all, there are 17 firms which receive about €50 million a year to run 34 accommodation centres across the State, providing for about 4,000 asylum seekers.
A glimpse inside their accounts show that many are highly profitable and have recorded six or even seven-figure pre-tax profits.
Some larger companies have moved to shield their accounts from public scrutiny by creating unlimited companies, often with parent firms in off-shore jurisdictions. This means it is impossible to calculate how much money they are making from the system.

The biggest recipient of public funding is Mosney Holidays plc, which has been paid more than €100 million for accommodating up to 800 asylum seekers at the former Butlin’s holiday resort in Co Meath.
Its last published accounts, in 2009, show accumulated profits at the end of the year of €5.4 million. The following year it became an unlimited company and so does not publish its accounts. It is owned by an Isle of Man company called Sonning Unlimited.
During 2009, Mosney made a €4,050 contribution to Fianna Fáil, according to the accounts.

JL2106

Sweden is one of the safest countries in the world and has one of the highest standards of living on the planet.

Seems immigration is working fine and benefiting Sweden.

not yet

I, along with almost every decent person in this country have never had and will never have a problem with genuine asylum seekers or refugees, you only have to look at the Vietnamese boat people or the refugees from Bosnia in the early 90s...

What people have a problem with is economic migrants who pass over and go around a dozen countries before landing here.

not yet

JL2106 wrote: »

Sweden is one of the safest countries in the world and has one of the highest standards of living on the planet.

Seems immigration is working fine and benefiting Sweden.

Yeah, sure is..

Why has it become known as the rape capital of the world in very recent years, taking the place of South Africa...

JL2106

Right wing racist xenophobic fearmongers spread that myth but the Swedes laws are different to the rest of the world.

seamus

not yet wrote: »

Why has it become known as the rape capital of the world in very recent years, taking the place of South Africa...

Sweden has a far wider definition of rape and sexual assault than most other countries, different ways of recording the crime, and a social attitude far more disposed to reporting rape and sexual assault within relationships.

Calling it the "rape capital of the world" is just hysterical hyperbole.

How many random sexual assaults are carried out in Sweden by immigrants? Because that's what you're aiming at.

Provide us that figure and I might give your hysteria some credence.

not yet

seamus wrote: »

Sweden has a far wider definition of rape and sexual assault than most other countries, different ways of recording the crime, and a social attitude far more disposed to reporting rape and sexual assault within relationships.

Calling it the "rape capital of the world" is just hysterical hyperbole.

How many random sexual assaults are carried out in Sweden by immigrants? Because that's what you're aiming at.

Provide us that figure and I might give your hysteria some credence.

Sorry, who's us..?..

If as you say Sweden has different ways of recording rape and sexual assault ask yourself this question..

Why, regardless of how they record sexual assault and rape have the figures for both gone through the roof in the past 6 years, No actually don't answer that question I already know the wishy washy answer..

seamus

not yet wrote: »

Why, regardless of how they record sexual assault and rape have the figures for both gone through the roof in the past 6 years, No actually don't answer that question I already know the wishy washy answer..

Go on so, provide us with the "real" answer, which I'm absolutely sure will be backed by real facts and real data.

not yet

seamus wrote: »

Go on so, provide us with the "real" answer, which I'm absolutely sure will be backed by real facts and real data.

The real answer can be accessed on most sites throughout the internet, but alas, unless these answers meet your left wing, liberal agenda they will be deemed hysterical or my favourite...hyperbole..

Knock your self out.

not yet

Dr Jakub wrote: »

Once again look at Sweden to see our future. The 'refugee' business is a big one and there are millions to be made.

Tis Grand there, sure it's all hyperbole and will sort itself out soon enough..

seamus

not yet wrote: »

The real answer can be accessed on most sites throughout the internet, but alas, unless these answers meet your left wing, liberal agenda they will be deemed hysterical or my favourite...hyperbole..

Knock your self out.

So you don't have any facts then.

Talking out your hole.

Good man.

AnGaelach

JL2106 wrote:

Let them work and access the same entitlements as all other residents. It will save the state money. It makes sense.

They won't be able to find work though, their skills are sorely lacking - the State would either have to spend money to up-skill them as a work force (a cost we likely won't recuperate over their employment career), or leave them to be stuck in a poverty trap for the next few generations.

AnGaelach

JL2106 wrote:

Right wing racist xenophobic fearmongers spread that myth but the Swedes laws are different to the rest of the world.

Ah yes, the right-wing racist xenophobic boogeyman. Was it the right-wing that told the police to cover up attacks by grown migrants on Swedish teenage girls during music festivals? If the right was responsible for stoking these fears, how come they weren't important issues to voters consistently over the last couple decades? Or is the right-wing rising because of fears already held by voters, and the right is the only group talking about those issues?

not yet

seamus wrote: »

So you don't have any facts then.

Talking out your hole.

Good man.

Unlike yourself who knows everything..

Dr Jakub

seamus wrote: »

So you don't have any facts then.

Talking out your hole.

Good man.

Why are Swedish police not allowed give racial descriptions of suspects?

Why is the ethnicity of criminals not recorded?

Why did the police and media cover up sex attacks against young Swedish girls by migrants at a music festival in 2014?

Why is the Swedish police protecting 5 migrants who gang raped a wheelchair bound woman in Gotland recently?

not yet

Dr Jakub wrote: »

Why are Swedish police not allowed give racial descriptions of suspects?

Why is the ethnicity of criminals not recorded?

Why did the police and media cover up sex attacks against young Swedish girls by migrants at a music festival in 2014?

Why is the Swedish police protecting 5 migrants who gang raped a wheelchair bound woman in Gotland recently?

Jesus you can't be saying stuff like that, have you facts, can you back that up, where are the stats blah fcuking blah. some people will not believe this sh1t is happening until it smacks them in the face, and if you speak openly about this subject your considered a right wing nut..

Galwayguy35

JL2106 wrote: »

It is a lot cheaper to let them stay and work. Deportations are inhumane and costly.

So let everyone stay and get benefits even if they had no right to be here in the first place?

Another crazy leftie.