Time for a zero refugee policy? - *Read OP for mod warnings - updated 11/5/24*

I would be probably the first person in the queue to moan and complain about this party and lets face they don't exactly make it easy to like them e.g the referendum debacle and stupidity of their immigration policy BUT I've gone to this stage I cannot stand seeing FG/FF in power any longer and seeing our country burn anymore.

Posters might fear SF will make immigration worse, how could they make this **** show anymore worse unless they get a ferry over to France and asked all the illegals to jump in…..

It's a pity my local SF candidate is Martin Browne but through my greeted teeth ill have to put him in my top 3

Something has to change in this country

A huge population growth and our elderly and youngest will suffer due to lack of healthcare services. I don't understand the governments horn for increasing the population so drastically.

1,000,000 bigger population won't have a significant impact on basic services?

Cloud cuckoo land.

8 out of 10 school got zero applications to ads for positions and schools are back in 2 week with 550 unfilled positions.

Who’s saying that though? Because that’s not what you were claiming originally. Of course an increase in the population will require an increase in public spending on public services, and the current impact due to the lack of funding has always been there. If nothing changes, then I’d be in agreement with you that an increase of 100,000 in the local population would significantly impact upon services as they are currently being provided. The plan contains proposals to support the increase in the population. That’s the key part you keep leaving out.

8 out of 10 school got zero applications to ads for positions and schools are back in 2 week with 550 unfilled positions.

So what? That’s always been the case. It has nothing to do with immigration, though one of the means to address the shortage would be to increase immigration to try and attract teachers from abroad who are qualified to teach in Ireland (that too takes time), but it is also supported by Government initiatives to increase places in Ireland for teacher training and more provisions for teaching assistants in schools:

All contained in this report:

https://assets.gov.ie/246552/96fc2eb5-b7c9-4a17-afbc-de288a471b3f.pdf

And given our inability so far to keep pace with the infrastructure needs, the plan is rubbish. The only part of the plan they will succeed in is the 1000000 extra people.

On Paper v reality in this country are a million miles apart

They won’t even succeed in that much, it simply isn’t feasible. The most helpful thing anyone can do is take both claims with a pinch of salt rather than getting their knickers in a bunch over nothing.

One of our more prominent posters swore it was all far right lies. All their Swedish friends think they did a great job and love all the new arrivals.

Also Denmark, Sweden and Finland are joining forces to help deal with the problems Sweden has resulting from unchecked mass migration the exact way we are currently doing it:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nordic-countries-join-forces-combat-spread-swedish-gang-crime-2024-08-14/

Paying chancers to voluntary leave, Christ above the west is rapidly falling apart kowtowing to these frauds, just feck them out like any sensible country would do, I know for a fact they would not stand for this in middle eastern countries. So why the heck should we sit back and take it while our own natives suffer, none of this make any sense.

It's kinda too late for Sweden though. They had too many years like we're having now where Denmark nipped it in the bud. Us Europeans have really become a soft touch. We get walked all over by our governments.

Our only hope is Europe becomes right wing. It will too long for Ireland. We're cornered. Our right wing parties are in power and leading this madness. The opposition are left wing and would double down.

I agree that the extent of the issue in Sweden is significant, I mention it because Sweden was one of the primary destinations for asylum seekers and the introduction of policies of deterrence has altered that considerably - it is evidence of the effectiveness of policies of deterrence. The problem is in implementing them in a timely manner, considering the political response to the asylum crisis, I’d be inclined to agree that European politics (or an economic crisis) will have an impact before any domestic policies.

Too much money to be made for a small few and NGO hacks.

As regards EU asylum claims, the discrepancy between the increase in asylum claims in the EU and the increase in asylum claims in Ireland is considerable. Asylum applications in the EU increased 50% from 2021 to 2022, in Ireland they increased 400% from 2021 to 2022. Compared with pre-COVID figures, there was a 34% increase in asylum applications in the EU between 2019 and 2022, there was a 186% increase in Ireland. 

That comparison doesn't make any sense? You're comparing a single country which has had years of relatively small numbers of asylum claims compared to other countries in the EU, with the EU as a whole, in a single year post-travel restrictions when there was a war going on in Eastern Europe and everyone and their mother was trying to get to safety. The more relevant figures then in that case are the total number of asylum seekers across the EU in 2022, and what percentage of that figure applied for asylum in Ireland:

A total of 13,651 applications for international protection were made in 2022. This marked a significant increase from previous years (a 415% increase from 2021 and a 186% increase from 2019, the last comparable year before COVID-19 travel restrictions), and the highest number of asylum applications on record in Ireland. The top three countries of origin were Georgia, Algeria and Somalia. Applications for international protection in Ireland accounted for 1.3% of the EU total.

Annual Report on Migration and Asylum 2022: Ireland - The European Migration Network (emn.ie)

(bold emphasis my own)

As regards the Danish model of asylum, Denmark remains an EU Member State and is involved in EU cooperation as regards asylum. The Danish model is consistent with EU and international law. Policies of deterrence are being adopted by multiple EU Member States including Sweden which reported the lowest level of asylum applications in decades. Policies of deterrence would be particularly effective in Ireland, considering Ireland’s geography and the fact that the majority - between 50% to 70% - of asylum applications in the State are a consequence of secondary movement.

Of the 27 Member States in the EU, or the 46 Member States in the Council of Europe, how many is 'multiple', that are adopting deterrence policies similar to that of Denmark and the UK? You could have put the Swedish claim in it's proper context, but that would have shown that there are good reasons for the year-on-year decline - the Swedish economy, much like the UK, is in bits. It's why for the first time they have net emigration, and that's not a good thing:

The data shows a 15 percent year-on-year decrease in immigration in Sweden during the early part of 2024, while emigration rose by 60 percent over the same period. Asylum applications have continued to fall, reaching their lowest level since 1997.

The trend is particularly evident among people born in countries like Iraq, Somalia, and Syria, where net immigration figures were negative in 2023. According to preliminary statistics from Statistics Sweden, the country has experienced negative net immigration up to May of this year.

Sweden transforms from welcoming haven to net emigration (economymiddleeast.com)

Economic forecast for Sweden - European Commission (europa.eu)

Policies of deterrence would be effective in doing what, exactly? Because apart from tanking a country's economy, which they are highly effective in doing, they don't do much else, well, they're not particularly cost effective either as the asylum seekers, even if Sweden, Denmark or indeed Italy ever DO ever manage to send an asylum seeker to a third country - they'll just leave that country and apply for asylum in the same country again! There's nothing to suggest that similar policies which haven't worked anywhere else, would fare any better in Ireland, even considering the idea that between 50 - 70% of applications for asylum in Ireland are a consequence of secondary movement. That's really not any different to anywhere else, when you consider what is meant by the term secondary movement:

The total number of applications (gross number) in Europe is higher than the actual number, as many are registered in more than one country. Around one quarter of all asylum seekers in Denmark are returned to other countries or accepted back to Denmark from other countries because of fingerprints or visa (Dublin procedure), and some have their case dismissed for other reasons.

Number of refugees in Denmark compared to rest of Europe

Quality of life in Denmark is one of the highest in the EU, higher than in Ireland.

So what? They're also one of the world's leading producers of sperm for the export market:

The Brexit crisis nobody is talking about? Our need for Danish sperm | WIRED (archive.ph)

I guess it depends on how you quantify quality of life and measure it and compare it, but I wouldn't want to live there, so perhaps that's why I'm not seeing your point.

Your very good at putting your own hypothesis on data and manipulating it to suit your own agenda.

Would you have any supporting evidence to support the hypothesis that deterring asylum seekers "tanks" an economy.

You might not want to live in Denmark but Scandinavian countries overwhelmingly rank top countries for quality of life.

When you also have these same countries Sweden, Denmark and Finland tightening emigration policy when traditionally it's the most progressive region on the planet, there is obviously a reason. The reason been, the have discovered that this mass migration does not bring a overall positive contribution.

Norway outside of three EU doesn't have the same issues to deal with.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/rankings/quality-of-life

Would you have any supporting evidence to support the hypothesis that deterring asylum seekers "tanks" an economy.

I do:

https://www.bruegel.org/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/RefugeeReturnOCPPC-1.pdf

Purely from an economic standpoint, attempts to deter asylum seekers has the opposite effect on an economy than any perceived benefit. It’s nothing more than a costly and futile political exercise that appeals to short-term types only thinking of their own wants.

When I see countries like the Nordic countries topping quality of life lists, and Ireland is up there too btw, I don’t pay much heed to them, they’re often nothing more than clickbait lists. When I see countries that were once perceived internationally as being beacons of liberal ideology and democracy and so on, it doesn’t take much to scratch beneath the surface to realise that they have historically failed to integrate immigrants and asylum seekers into the host nation. Historically they’ve done exactly the opposite, which is why social integration fails. Immigrants are traditionally perceived as being cheap labour, and when a country begins to experience economic recession, that’s when a handful of the natives start pointing fingers at those people who they believe are responsible.

(That isn’t typically limited to immigrants either, more often it’s just aimed at anyone who doesn’t share their perspective)