Labour want to bring back auto-birthright citizenship

Wibbs

Blazer wrote: »

excellent...Trump will be delighted to hear that. Lets kick all those dreamer kids back to Ireland.
Works both ways yes?

If Irish people are illegally entering/living in the US or anywhere else for that matter, yes deport them. I have no issue with that. If you want to go somewhere legally and are accepted then brilliant and fair play, if not, nope.

Now I voted no back in the day but not so sure this time around.

Again B, why should we bring back a sloppy piece of legislation that was clearly exploited back then, so will be exploited again(which has resulted in increasing our already generous and hard stretched social welfare bill) and why bring in legislation that would make us completely out of step with the rest of the EU and the vast majority of nations in the world? It makes absolutely zero sense.

But if the political PR is anything to go by in the past and there is enough support among the more mainstream parties, the usual MO will be the release of a load of appeals to feels sob stories featuring kids and with slanted polls over the next while. To get people used to the notion of a repeal of this and make them think it was their idea. No conspiracy required either. I've personally dealt with a fair few advertising and marketing agencies in my time, including ones who deal with politicians and parties. it's a tried and tested method and not just for politics, other business interests do similar. EG the motor industry will get stories out like "Older cars are deathtraps" to boost sales. Not sponsored by SIMI I swear. It works on the fact that people's memories are generally short, they generally don't think too deeply about stuff that doesn't directly affect them today and they respond more emotionally than logically most of the time and emotional memories are more dug in and rarely questioned.

Galwayguy35

WhenPigsCry wrote: »

It's so hard to access and the chances of deportation are so high, that they have an estimated 10 million undocumented migrants alone.

And they also have a population of over 300 million and a massive land border with Mexico to police.

I'd say overall they do a reasonable job of keeping illegals out and have a task force who's sole job is to find illegals and deport them.

I can only imagine the whining from the left if such a department was set up here.

TomTomTim

Blazer wrote: »

excellent...Trump will be delighted to hear that. Lets kick all those dreamer kids back to Ireland.
Works both ways yes?

Now I voted no back in the day but not so sure this time around.

Do you lads dream of Trump in your sleep too? It's pathetic how people like you can't have a discussion without bringing him up. We're Irish, not Americans.

ThunbergsAreGo

DelaneyIn wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/family-forced-to-split-due-to-overcrowded-accommodation-1.4409945?mode=amp

The timeline makes it likely that this family got leave to remain after having an Irish born child here during their asylum application.

Now we will not only provide the father with welfare and his own apartment, we shall have to provide the mother and her kids with their own home and welfare too.

All due to our citizenship laws at the time. Anyone who wants more of this is either soft in the head or on the payroll of one of the hundreds of migrant quangos and NGOs operating on this island.

Don't really care what nationality but headline should be

"Family living beyonds means (and bringing children into the world they can't provide for) housed by Government"

A quote from the article
"In July they presented for an “assessment” with the council. “They were asking, ‘Why did you leave England?’ and saying, ‘You shouldn’t have come back. You have made yourself homeless’."

The entitlement, idiocy and audacity of some people (mostly Kitty Holland)

Donald Trump

WhenPigsCry wrote: »

It's so hard to access and the chances of deportation are so high, that they have an estimated 10 million undocumented migrants alone.

Imagine getting status in the US because you landed off a plane and pushed out a kid there. Then being housed and looked after for years because you "can't find work". Not being housed in "da projects" mind - but being housed in areas where regular working people struggle to afford the price houses.



Then leaving the US, leaving your spouse there to continue sucking at the teat of the generous welfare. Finally, returning 6 years later and the US government housing you in a hotel. And you could get a sob story in the paper about the inhumanity of housing you in that hotel rather than having a nice free house waiting for you in the area of your choosing just in case you decided to return at any given moment.



Would the above play out in the US? It would in me bollix.

kildare lad

Donald Trump wrote: »

Imagine getting status in the US because you landed off a plane and pushed out a kid there. Then being housed and looked after for years because you "can't find work". Not being housed in "da projects" mind - but being housed in areas where regular working people struggle to afford the price houses.



Then leaving the US, leaving your spouse there to continue sucking at the teat of the generous welfare. Finally, returning 6 years later and the US government housing you in a hotel. And you could get a sob story in the paper about the inhumanity of housing you in that hotel rather than having a nice free house waiting for you in the area of your choosing just in case you decided to return at any given moment.



Would the above play out in the US? It would in me bollix.

Don't forget , they'll be paying our pensions ina few years.

fly_agaric

Donald Trump wrote: »

"Granny loophole" is a completely different thing and I wouldn't mix it in here at all.


I have no issues with children and grandchildren of people who like *had* to emigrate, being entitled to get Irish citizenship. Given the historical necessity for people born here to emigrate, then it would be wholly unfair to remove the rights of their children and grandchildren to obtain citizenship


The "loophole" is somewhat tighter these days as it now has to be an unbroken chain of citizenship at the time of birth. I think that that is good enough.

It's a bit of a joke/soft touch in fairness, so it is related as a relatively handy path to picking up an Irish/EU passport (you don't have to come & live + work here, just get the paperwork & send off for it in the post like something off a cornflake box).

Very few countries offer anything like it. It's petty of me I admit but seeing it really take off (as regards numbers availing of it) since 2016 as a handy flag of convenience boils my piss somewhat!

UK citizens (what % of them voted for Brexit and royally f-cked us over) just taking the mick (!) out of it to retain their EU passport related privileges.

Donald Trump

fly_agaric wrote: »

It's a bit of a joke/soft touch in fairness, so it is related as a relatively handy path to picking up an Irish/EU passport (you don't have to come & live + work here, just get the paperwork & send off for it in the post like something off a cornflake box).

Very few countries offer anything like it. It's petty of me I admit but seeing it really take off (as regards numbers availing of it) since 2016 as a handy flag of convenience boils my piss somewhat!

UK citizens (what % of them voted for Brexit and royally f-cked us over) just taking the mick (!) out of it to retain their EU passport related privileges.

Hundreds of thousands had to leave this country out of necessity in the 90's and the decades before then. There was no other practical option. The least that the country can do is to accept their family members.

suicide_circus

timmyntc wrote: »

"dreamer kids" - what a load of marketing ****e.

Their parents shouldn't have overstayed their visas in the first place - granted its not that fair on the kids since they were born into it, but that's their parents fault, not the states.

If you let all those "dreamer kids" stay, then its unfair on all those other children born in other countries whose parents were responsible and didnt overstay their visa, or give birth in a foreign country in an attempt to get a visa.

Dreamer kids? I prefer the term "cutsie fluffy bunny schnuckums" kids.

Gervais08

suicide_circus wrote: »

Dreamer kids? I prefer the term "cutsie fluffy bunny schnuckums" kids.

If Elizabeth Warren has somehow got it - with her Educational Secretary “chosen by a transgender kid” - that would their actual legal name.

fly_agaric

Donald Trump wrote: »

Hundreds of thousands had to leave this country out of necessity in the 90's and the decades before then. There was no other practical option. The least that the country can do is to accept their family members.

90s is a bit recent for grandparents. That is a good argument but I still think people should have a more concrete link to the country before being given citizenship. For example they should come and live here for a few years to exercise these "grandfather" rights.
Would weed out people collecting it as a club loyalty card that offers certain advantages.
Although given the numbers involved if too many actually took the government up on it, that could create another problem!

iebamm2580

People in North Tipp who vote for that self obsessed kelly really need to have a think in the next election, he's just a smug self obsessed git, thats the nicest thing i have to day about him.

Donald Trump

fly_agaric wrote: »

90s is a bit recent for grandparents. That is a good argument but I still think people should have a more concrete link to the country before being given citizenship. For example they should come and live here for a few years to exercise these "grandfather" rights.
Would weed out people collecting it as a club loyalty card that offers certain advantages.
Although given the numbers involved if too many actually took the government up on it, that could create another problem!

I'd say that there are plenty of people who left the country in the 90's who are grandparents now!


1990 is 30 years ago and 1999 is 21 years ago. In either of those extremes wouldn't be that extreme that a person could have had a kid after emigrating and that kid being a parent by now.

timmyntc

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'd say that there are plenty of people who left the country in the 90's who are grandparents now!


1990 is 30 years ago and 1999 is 21 years ago. In either of those extremes wouldn't be that extreme that a person could have had a kid after emigrating and that kid being a parent by now.

Even if they had a kid in 1990, and that kid had a child when they were 20 - the 10 year old grandchild is hardly going to try and invoke the grandparent rule and move to Ireland themself?

Achebe

TomTomTim wrote: »

Can you try and be a bit more creative? This line has been used by people like you on boards for about 10 years. There's no point in even asking you for evidence of these Nazis, as you won't have any. It's a joke that you can call users Nazis or white supremacists without evidence, yet I can't call you a hysterical idiot.

Boards these days has more dog whistles than a sheep herding competition.

Donald Trump

timmyntc wrote: »

Even if they had a kid in 1990, and that kid had a child when they were 20 - the 10 year old grandchild is hardly going to try and invoke the grandparent rule and move to Ireland themself?

What has moving here got to do with it? The point is whether that child is entitled to it or not. It is not a "grandparent rule". It is the citizenship law.



For the (grand)child to be eligible for citizenship, its parent has to have claimed their citizenship at the time of the (grand) child's birth. In fact, it actually can go to the great grandparent not just the grandparent but there now has to be an unbroken chain. You can't just discover an Irish grandparent and decide that you now want citizenship (if you were born after a certain date that is). Your parent will have had to claim their own before your birth. Plenty don't know or don't bother.

fly_agaric

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'd say that there are plenty of people who left the country in the 90's who are grandparents now!


1990 is 30 years ago and 1999 is 21 years ago. In either of those extremes wouldn't be that extreme that a person could have had a kid after emigrating and that kid being a parent by now.

Fair enough. I was thinking of people claiming citizenship for themselves who would be adults (18+) in 2020. I think (as per example in above post) that would need very tight generations/people having kids very young to fit in in your timeframe.

Donald Trump

fly_agaric wrote: »

Fair enough. I was thinking of people claiming citizenship for themselves who would be adults (18+) in 2020. I think (as per example in above post) that would need very tight generations/people having kids very young to fit in in your timeframe.

Well the point about the 90's only came about because I said that plenty of people had to emigrate in the 90's and the decades before that. So then someone picked on me saying the 90's and saying those wouldn't be grandparents. In any case, I'd have assumed people would understand it as being pre-celtic tiger anyway because I'm talking about people having to emigrate out of necessity.


I have one 28 year old cousin who was born in the UK. Her parents left for the UK around 1990 and came back in the late 90's. But both of them were Irish. Had one of the parents been English then it would be easy to have stayed there. My cousin has no kids but she'd hardly be described as having to have kids "very young" to fit into the simple point I made. I wasn't saying that every single person who left in 99 would now be a grandparent - just that some who left in the 90's might well have grandchildren.

Patrick2010

See Labour leader Alan Kelly is all in favour of changing this by legislation not by referendum

Arthur Daley

How does this guy get elected down in Tipp. And then threathen the sovereignty of European Union countries, not least Ireland, with open border lunacy like this. Are there swathes of social justice warriors roaming the Golden Vale that vote him in.

iebamm2580

Arthur Daley wrote: »

How does this guy get elected down in Tipp. And then threathen the sovereignty of European Union countries, not least Ireland, with open border lunacy like this. Are there swathes of social justice warriors roaming the Golden Vale that vote him in.

North tipp gets him in, doubt they realize what heis really like, he just scrapes in usually.

Eric Cartman

Patrick2010 wrote: »

See Labour leader Alan Kelly is all in favour of changing this by legislation not by referendum

Hes not the only one thats been trying to subvert this by undemocratic means. Theyre scared of a vote because Ireland would still roundly say no

ohnonotgmail

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Hes not the only one thats been trying to subvert this by undemocratic means. Theyre scared of a vote because Ireland would still roundly say no

I am happy with things as they are but describing any change via legislation enacted by elected representatives as undemocratic is just wrong.

1º Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, a person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, who does not have, at the time of the birth of that person, at least one parent who is an Irish citizen or entitled to be an Irish citizen is not entitled to Irish citizenship or nationality, unless provided for by law.

Eric Cartman

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I am happy with things as they are but describing any change via legislation enacted by elected representatives as undemocratic is just wrong.

The labour party who are not in government trying to undermine a constitutional amendment with a legal loophole specifically because they know the will of The people would retain that amendment sounds pretty undemocratic to me

ohnonotgmail

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The labour party who are not in government trying to undermine a constitutional amendment with a legal loophole specifically because they know the will of The people would retain that amendment sounds pretty undemocratic to me

it is not a legal loophole. it is explicitly provided for. there is no undermining. If labour introduce such legislation and the Dail votes to enact it then what is undemocratic about that?

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it is not a legal loophole. it is explicitly provided for. there is no undermining. If labour introduce such legislation and the Dail votes to enact it then what is undemocratic about that?

Because it bypasses the will of the people?

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

Because it bypasses the will of the people?

what we voted for was very explicit. what part of

unless provided for by law

do you not understand?

suicide_circus

What is the impetus behind this drive to overturn the referendum result?

BIG GUNZ

suicide_circus wrote: »

What is the impetus behind this drive to overturn the referendum result?

Change the demographics of Ireland and create more labour voters in the process.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what we voted for was very explicit. what part of

Plenty. but l'll stand by what I said. Just because politicians are in power doesn't mean that they can, or should do whatever they want. The referendum showed them where the interests of the people are...