Following on from
this thread
Please remain civil or posting privileges will be removed
Quote where I said Ireland can't implement the same policies as Denmark. But instead, why don't you inform us as to all these policies that Denmark implemented. Denmark don't ignore their EU obligations. You are claiming they do.
As for the EU laws, have a read of this. And no, I'm not going to read it for you.
You claimed there are no obligations for member States. You are wrong.
She didn't light it so I'd imagine.
Why aren't the Gardai standing in the factory itself to prevent these fires.
Does she drive a fire engine?
Your posts have repeatedly said our government can't restrict the number of asylum seekers we take in because of "obligations". When I've pointed out to you Denmark have successfully reduced the number of asylum seekers they take in by 90% by making asylum policy changes you've stated Ireland can't do so, but have been unable to cite a single EU law that would explicitly apply in this area.
The Common European Asylum System is not a law with "obligations". Good work trying to copy paste in the first result from Google you found, though.
I haven't said there are "no obligations for member states". I've said there are no obligations that prevent us from doing the exact same as Denmark and reducing our intake of asylum seekers by 90%.
Denmark has done multiple things that we can and should easily copy:
Again, constantly repeating the incorrect things you've repeatedly stated doesn't make them any more correct. They are still wrong and your claims that EU member states have no obligations to asylum seekers are wrong.
Denmark are legally obliged to accepted an request for asylum, they always have been and they have always honoured that commitment.
This is what you said;
We have no actual binding obligation to do anything with asylum policy. As, again, can be seen with Denmark
We do have binding obligations to do with asylum policy, just like Denmark does.
As for me claiming Ireland cant do what Denamrk did, please quote me where I said that. My understanding is the Government are trying to do that but people like you and the Cookock protesters are actively trying to stop them doing that.
While Tusla / O'Gorman are still floundering losing children and putting those they do have into unvetted care homes, this comes out:
https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/tusla-at-crisis-point-after-concern-raised-over-systemic-shortcomings-1503093.html
https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2024/07/20/judges-say-corporate-faceless-tusla-is-failing-children/
Even back when Haughey ruled this kind of thing would bring down a government.
From my very first post on the topic I said "Ireland needs to copy Denmark's recent policies which have successfully reduced their intake of asylum seekers by 90%".
You were the one who came into the thread claiming this was impossible because of "obligations".
Obligations which when asked to list the relevant laws for you've repeatedly failed to do so. Because you're clearly just parroting a line you have no actual fact based knowledge of.
Our government are very much not trying to follow Denmark's lead here, they've announced none of the above easily enacted, effective, policies for Ireland. But they could do so tomorrow if they were even a little bit more competent, and it would do wonders.
Theres nobody stopping them from doing so other than misinformed types like yourself claiming we can't reduce the number of asylum seekers we take in because of "obligations".
From your very first post you claimed
We have no actual binding obligation to do anything with asylum policy. As, again, can be seen with Denmark.
You are wrong. We do have binding obligations with asylum policy, as do Denmark.
The government have announced reception centres for asylum seekers? What exactly do you think the protest in Coolock is about? As for the other suggestions. Imagine the government shouting from the rooftops that we will give asylum seekers €20,000. Jesus christ, talk about opening the flood gates.
We don't have any binding obligations to let in the current level of asylum seekers, exactly as I claimed. You're the one who claimed we did, but failed to provide any facts to back this claim up when asked.
Building "reception centres for asylum seekers" is not the Danish policy. Did you even read the bullet points related to asylum centers in that post?
None of the key, punitive, measures in that apply to the proposed Irish asylum centers.
As to "Imagine the government shouting from the rooftops that we will give asylum seekers €20,000. Jesus christ, talk about opening the flood gates" I'd ask - do you perhaps have reading difficulties? I don't want to be too harsh here if you do, but the bullet point relating to that very clearly stated: "Asylum seekers who voluntarily return to their country of origin or the country where their family currently resides receive a return compensation of up to DKK 150,598 (approximately EUR 20,000)." Its not "giving asylum seekers €20,000" as a gift.
Given the state is spending at the least €40k per year for every asylum seeker in our system I can guarantee very few people in the country would have a problem with a policy that offered half of that single year cost for an asylum seeker to leave and never come back instead.
We do have legal obligations to let in asylum seekers. I already posted a link to what happened to Hungary and you just decided to ignore it. I'm not going to constantly post links to what the obligations are just you can ignore them and pretend they don't exist.
Free accommodation and free meals? Yes, that sounds real punitive alright.
No I don't have reading difficulties, i just thoihht youd be able to grasp the pooint i was getting at without me needing to simplify it. I was wrong. What do you think people who have no interest in claiming asylum in Ireland will do when they learn they cabb get €20k for claiming asylum in Ireland and then leaving?
We don't have any legal obligations to let in 30,000 (and increasing rapidly) asylum seekers a year. You've posted no specific legal obligations to defend this claim, despite declaring they existed repeatedly.
You posted a link to Hungary getting fined for requiring asylum seekers to register in a specific location. Thats not a policy I suggested, or one that Denmark has implemented. It was a rather obvious attempt to move the goal posts.
The Danish system is far more punitive than our current Irish system, which is why it has worked to drastically reduce numbers. "Free accomodation and free meals" is not the punitive part of those two bullet points.
You having multiple grammatical errors in your response to the reading difficulties question doesn't exactly back up your denial. So again I will say apologies for being harsh here if you're apparently differently abled. But the idea that paying asylum seekers to leave and never return increases number in the system just isn't backed up by the real world data. Its particularly stupid as a theory when you consider the costs involved for an asylum seeker to get from Africa (or elsewhere) to Ireland. Do note again Danish numbers dropping by 90% after implementing this and similar policies.
Thats in direct contrast to our numbers arriving in Ireland increasing rapidly every year, while our current government flails around failing to implement any policies to reduce numbers.
We have a legal obligation to accept any person who claims asylum at any of our borders and who wants to claim asylum in Ireland. Just like Denmark does and always have and have always upheld. Can you point me to any link where Denmark have refused to accept someone claiming asylum? Ive posted multiple links to show that every EU member states has a legal obligation to accept an asylum request. You've decided to ignore them and pretend they don't exist. I can't spoon feed you anymore.
When did Denmark implement that policy of paying €20,000 and in what year did they implement their other policies?
I don't have time to find old links I posted previously in the refugee thread but Denmark treatment of IPAs has been found to be in breach of EU law.
Further it's been reported thousand of IPAs have gone missing from their detention centres, presumed now seeking asylum elsewhere or living undocumented elsewhere in Europe.
They haven't reduced the numbers seeking asylum so much as push them elsewhere in Europe.
To quote Malcolm Tucker "Useless as a Marzipan Dildo"
Nothing brings down a government anymore. There is no shame or accountability.
Why are you persisently lying about this topic? You've posted one link, not multiple links. And the one link you posted was to a EU multi-country agreement, not a specific law relevant to the topic. It showed no legal obligation.
We have no legal obligation to accept any person who claims asylum at our border. Again, please show the specific law that you think applies here. You haven't "spoon fed" anything because you've been unable to link to a single, specific, law to back up your repeated claims.
Denmark refused 56% of asylum applications who presented in 2020. It refused 41% of asylum applications in 2021[1]. They have no legal obligation to accept "any person who claims asylum", just the same as Ireland.
Denmark brought in the €20,000 payment in 2019[2]. The rest of their policies were brought in at varous stages between 2015 and 2020. You can Google each individual one for yourself.
[1]http://refugees.dk/en/facts/numbers-and-statistics/what-are-the-chances-of-being-granted-asylum/ [2]https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/denmark-firm-returning-refugees-war-torn-syria-2021-04-27/
[citation needed]
In reality Denmark hasn't been fined a cent by the EU.
They've reduced the number of asylum seekers in Denmark by 90%. The facts speak for themselves. If the rest of Europe wants to reduce its number of asylum seekers it can follow the same policies.
Ireland could copy the policies I posted on the last page tomorrow and see our numbers of asylum seekers drop dramatically. All it would take is a competent government.
Well actually, they are trying to build an asylum centre in Coolock at the Crown Paints location.
That is what Denmark have done, but you object to that?
Given that people simply leave Danish centres and head elsewhere in Europe, I don't think copying that policy across the region would be as straightforward as you think.
I came on this thread to ask government party supporters what they think will be the approach to dealing with violent protests and arson?
They'll stay the course. Refuse to deal with concerns, react after the fact, talk about the far right. McEntee might say it's terrible.
I thought you supported "peaceful" protests?
I think you might be mixing me up with another poster.
I'm disgusted by recent events.
I genuinely came on the thread to get a sense of what the feelings are from FF and FG supporters especially.
They are firmly in do-nothing mode until the election in November. In fact they have done nothing for a long time. Remember they announced 6 immigration processing centres across the country? No follow through.
Yes. When McEntee should be out condemning it and putting forward solutions, she's nowhere.
If there was a sniff of a PR win, herself and Harris would be in all the papers.
Dont blame me for your inability to read. We'll try again though.
In 2019, Denmark had 2,700 applications and in 2022 they had 4,565. So tell me again how giving €20,000 to asylum seekers is a good idea?
In the next GE. People need to vote for any party or independent that isn't any of the main parties. The outcome cant be much worse.
Doesn't help that "peaceful" protesters continue to try to burn down Coolock. Why would the government announce where the processing centres are going?
Woah there horsey. I find arson and thuggery utterly abhorrent so cool your jets.
So these new immigration processing centres that the government announced back in January - the locations won't ever be announced because of Coolock? Great plan.
