Labour want to bring back auto-birthright citizenship

ohnonotgmail

Wibbs wrote: »

People voted on the fundamental issue after weighing up their personal opinions on it. Just like any vote.

I'm sure they did. None of that makes the bill introduced by Labour in any way undemocratic.

Wibbs

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you're just repeating yourself now.

You might do a search on your own posts on this thread. You'll find most of it reads like a copy paste of previous posts. Self awareness FTW.

Where you don't repeat yourself, you come out with utter howlers like this:

You. Earlier. Regarding the EU on this wrote: »

none of their business.

Clearly shows you have a great understanding of how all this works. And you accuse others of stupidity?

ted1

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Follow that logic.

I'm born in Ireland to an English mother, so I am English but....

My mother was born in England to a Jamaican mother so is Jamaican

Were only at my grandmother and I'm already an Irish Jamaican!

we have grand parent rules here already. if your grandparent was born in Ireland you are eligible for citzenship

ohnonotgmail

Wibbs wrote: »

You might do a search on your own posts on this thread. You'll find most of it reads like a copy paste of previous posts. Self awareness FTW.

Where you don't repeat yourself, you come out with utter howlers like this:


Clearly shows you have a great understanding of how all this works. And you accuse others of stupidity?

it is none of the EUs business. who we give citizenship to is entirely in our control . They might have a view on it but they have no say in it. who's stupid now, eh?

Donald Trump

If someone is here under genuine circumstances then their kids will get citizenship fairly handily and straightforward. It will not be a significant benefit to them.

All the proposals do is open up a loophole for easy exploitation. I can't for the life of me, fathom how or why people are so braindead as to be in favour of bringing it back

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Do you think the vote would have gone a different way if that legislation wasn't part of it? Do you think those voting for divorce, SSM etc read they fine print of legislation attached. Of course they didn't. They voted in favour of divorce and SSM.

The Irish people were given a choice on the pretty fundamental matter of what constitutes being Irish. They made that choice and it was a clear one and for reasons that haven't gone away and are likely to be even more in play with Brexit. Never mind the rest of the EU members, not one of which have birthright citizenship, will not be best pleased by one state going rogue and opening them up to abuses of the process. That a small group of politicians and their friends in NGOs and other vested interests are trying to negate that choice is at best concerning. Answer them better to streamline DP and cut the purse strings of the vested interests in that.

If they were so cocksure with their polls of such a massive sea change in public opinion among Irish voters on this, and it would be about the biggest swing in the history of this state, why are they afraid of putting it to the same Irish people in a democratic vote? Add it as a box to tick on the next round of local elections, or the next general election. They're not pushing for that. I wonder why? Well the answer is simple, they know damned well it would be democratically rejected. Again.

Okay, so your logic is they didn't read the fine print? If there's an appetite to make the constitution stricter on it, people are free to campaign for that.

Eric Cartman

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what we voted on what right there on the ballot form in big letters. you think people are stupid to understand what they voted for. though having read some of the replies here you might be on to something.

We all get that the basis for the legislation is built in to these referendums, the point is that building legislation that effectively reverts the law to the point you were at before the referendum is while legal, an incredibly awful thing to do in Ireland

ohnonotgmail

Donald Trump wrote: »

If someone is here under genuine circumstances then their kids will get citizenship fairly handily and straightforward. It will not be a significant benefit to them.

All the proposals do is open up a loophole for easy exploitation. I can't for the life of me, fathom how or why people are so braindead as to be in favour of bringing it back

there doesn't appear to be anybody who is. about the same number as support labour

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

We all get that the basis for the legislation is built in to these referendums, the point is that building legislation that effectively reverts the law to the point you were at before the referendum is while legal, an incredibly awful thing to do in Ireland

"Incredibly awful"... In the event of this occurring, people are free to voice outrage via Elections etc. However according to all recent polling, it doesn't look likely to concern public.

November Golf

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm not quite old enough to remember fully but I do recall reading about so-called "boat babies" in the late 90's being a serious issue for the asylum system in this country. Not only people arriving pregnant but apparently some literally giving birth on ferries in Irish waters.

Also just looking at the replies and seen this...



The law was changed by referendum in 2004 (in fact looks like the big decline arrivals started actually in 2003).

I think Irish people might have questions about going back to such a regime.

Anyhow Labour want to do just that.

I'm not saying it's good or bad, I don't know but i'd have concerns because I think we are lax enough to be perfectly honest.

Firstly the mass decline looks like it started 2002,

Secondly, this graph is about International Protection applications (i.e. refugee status), assuming its official, I'm not sure its accurate to conclude this decline is due to removing Birth Right citizenship.

If a child was born in Ireland and had an automatic right to citizenship, the parent would likely be applying for leave to remain on the ground of family rather than for refugee status.

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

"Incredibly awful"... In the event of this occurring, people are free to voice outrage via Elections etc. However according to all recent polling, it doesn't look likely to concern public.

Then put it to a vote. Funny how there's zero support for that option from those who want to change things back. Given these recent polls that we're told show a complete volte face from the 2004 result and would give a mandate for change to the Labour party and hand what is now becoming an also ran six seat party a win. So again why the reticence?

iebamm2580

Exactly put it to a vote, if as bacik says over 70% want it changed put it to a vote and nobody can complain then, everybody's happy no?

biko

iebamm2580 wrote: »

Exactly put it to a vote, if as bacik says over 70% want it changed

That's news to me, 70%?
Do you have a link?
I doubt it's even 70% of her own party.

iebamm2580

biko wrote: »

That's news to me, 70%?
Do you have a link?
I doubt it's even 70% of her own party.

read it somewhere, think was irish times, had it at 72%, if you ask question correct way in a poll you get the answer you are looking for.

biko

https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/immigrant-children-born-in-ireland-5276579-Nov2020/

Polling conducted by Behaviour and Attitudes for the Sunday Times in 2018 found that 71 per cent of Irish voters believe that anyone born in Ireland should be entitled to citizenship.

The actual research, based on 905 adult Irish citizens

Do you feel that anyone born on the island of Ireland should be automatically entitled to Irish citizenship?

https://banda.ie/wp-content/uploads/Sunday-Times-November-2018-Report.pdf

TomTomTim

biko wrote: »

https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/immigrant-children-born-in-ireland-5276579-Nov2020/


The actual research, based on 905 adult Irish citizens
https://banda.ie/wp-content/uploads/Sunday-Times-November-2018-Report.pdf

Peter Hitchens said it best:
"Opinion polls are a device for influencing public opinion, not a device for measuring it. Crack that, and it all makes sense"

biko

Maybe if the question would have been

Do you feel that children born in Ireland to non-Irish parents should be automatically entitled to Irish citizenship?

the answers would have been different.

Richard Hillman

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The thing is, they don't even want to go for a vote again. Bacik was on the journal the other day saying it doesn't need a referendum, you can change it in the Dail. They want to do it without a vote (most because they know they won't win one).

So Bacik, one of the most unelectable people involved in irish politics, herself rejected by voters many times. Wants to ignore an 80% majority vote by the irish people. That woman is not a democrat.

Richard Hillman

Have a "citizens assembly" absolutely load it with NGOs and other activists and say "The people have spoken". That's what they'll want.

November Golf

biko wrote: »

Maybe if the question would have been

Do you feel that children born in Ireland to non-Irish parents should be automatically entitled to Irish citizenship?

the answers would have been different.

If you were to ask the question

Do you feel that children born in American to Irish parents, that have never been to Ireland and who parent-parents have never been to Ireland, should be entitled to Irish citizenship?

which way to you think people would answer?

a_squirrelman

Mike Foxtrot wrote: »

If you were to ask the question



which way to you think people would answer?

Well if those people were going through so much effort to keep the Irish connection going, grandparent applying, parent applying, and now the child applying they must feel pretty darn Irish. I wouldn't begrudge them it, the rules for applying are fairly clear: https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

Wibbs

Mike Foxtrot wrote: »

If you were to ask the question



which way to you think people would answer?

That would be jus sanguinis, a different approach and one that the rest of Europe follows to one degree or other. The number of states that go the jus solis route are a tiny minority.

Wibbs

biko wrote: »

Maybe if the question would have been

the answers would have been different.

Look at how the question was framed:

You may be aware of the recent high profile case of nine year old Eric Zhi Ying Xue, who was born in Ireland to a Chinese mother and was subsequently faced with deportation from Ireland.
Q.8 In your opinion, do you feel that anyone born on the island of Ireland should be automatically entitled to Irish citizenship, or not?

In a court that would be described as leading to say the least. Ask the exact same question minus the heartstrings stuff about kids and run the same poll. Kids are always the go to for such things.

Me. Reading the tea leaves earlier wrote: »

But they'll keep pushing it, with soft "polls" and stories pushed in the media of sad eyed children and calling racism on anyone who dares to ask the obvious bloody questions.

It's Spin 101.

The original vote was a classic case of politicians cosying up to the public. It was a time when we were seeing a marked increase in immigrants from all over and there was a lot of scaremongering about how Ireland was never going to be the same and was heading for the grave.

Twenty years later and we're still functioning all right and our gravest problems aren't the result of Johnny Foreigner.

It should obviously be put to a vote as trying to muscle it through without one would be ridiculous. I think it would pass for what little it's worth.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The original vote was a classic case of politicians cosying up to the public. It was a time when we were seeing a marked increase in immigrants from all over and there was a lot of scaremongering about how Ireland was never going to be the same and was heading for the grave.

Twenty years later and we're still functioning all right and our gravest problems aren't the result of Johnny Foreigner.

It should obviously be put to a vote as trying to muscle it through without one would be ridiculous. I think it would pass for what little it's worth.

I swear people pay no attention to what's happening throughout Europe with regards to immigration, and the problems arising from it.

MontgomeryClift

Deleted User wrote: »

The original vote was a classic case of politicians cosying up to the public. It was a time when we were seeing a marked increase in immigrants from all over and there was a lot of scaremongering about how Ireland was never going to be the same and was heading for the grave.

Twenty years later and we're still functioning all right and our gravest problems aren't the result of Johnny Foreigner.

It should obviously be put to a vote as trying to muscle it through without one would be ridiculous. I think it would pass for what little it's worth.

Maybe that has something to do with a certain referendum in 2004 and a subsequent change to the constitution.

November Golf

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Well if those people were going through so much effort to keep the Irish connection going, grandparent applying, parent applying, and now the child applying they must feel pretty darn Irish. I wouldn't begrudge them it, the rules for applying are fairly clear: https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

There is no doubt, there is effort in keeping the connection at least on paper. But if a child is born in Ireland its difficult understand why their connection should not be recognised. Getting citizenship through naturalisation isn't the same thing and, at least in theory, it can be revoked at any time.

Also, any child born on the island of Ireland after 2005 must claim Irish citizenship in accordance with law. So the children of children born after 2005 will find it more difficult to obtain a passport, for example, if their parent didn't hold one.

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

I swear people pay no attention to what's happening throughout Europe with regards to immigration, and the problems arising from it.

It really is a major blind spot alright. We've all been exposed to the "diversity is good" and "multiculturalism is better" and have just accepted it with little or no critique. I certainly did to a large extent. However as we've seen on the multiculturalism thread the list of advantages is scarily small and at odds with the negatives of the lived experiences of those countries going back many decades who are more multicultural, not least for those who are not from the native stock and even within that we see clear and consistent differences in how different demographics fare. We're seeing that here already even after only two decades of it. EG 40% of Africans(mostly Nigerians) are unemployed. Far above background levels and way higher than East Asians.

suicide_circus

Deleted User wrote: »

The original vote was a classic case of politicians cosying up to the public. It was a time when we were seeing a marked increase in immigrants from all over and there was a lot of scaremongering about how Ireland was never going to be the same and was heading for the grave.

Twenty years later and we're still functioning all right and our gravest problems aren't the result of Johnny Foreigner.

It should obviously be put to a vote as trying to muscle it through without one would be ridiculous. I think it would pass for what little it's worth.

What advantages would Ireland accrue in overturning this referendum? The vast majority of countries do not have this rule.

HerrKuehn

For those who would like to see the change rolled back, what do you think the benefits would be?
It seems to me like the current rule where the parents have been here legally 3 of the last 4 years, strikes a good balance. The minister also has discretion to waive a deportation in hard cases like the young lad in Bray.
In cases where a woman has a baby shortly after arriving, then claims citizenship for the baby and leave to remain for the parents, there is little real connection to Ireland here. It seems like a loophole to be exploited with no real benefit to the country. There is of course a huge benefit to the parents in this case. I am not sure if the jus soli is really appropriate in a country with a welfare system like we have. The United States has jus soli but no real welfare system, or at least nothing like the one we have, so it may make more sense there.