Immigration and Ireland - MEGATHREAD *Mod Note Added 14/08/25*

Integration Minister Roderic O’Gorman said any attack on vulnerable people is ‘absolutely deplorable’.

This is the same guy that was minister for "equality" when he made a public statement that all ukranian women would be housed whilst the men (who literally escaped a war and conscription) get **** all.

Isn't Equality great

After 261 pages I asked GPT to summarise the policy reform.proposals

The "Immigration and Ireland – MEGATHREAD" on Boards.ie includes a wide range of proposals for immigration policy reform, mainly from users advocating for tighter controls. Here's a summary of the most commonly discussed and supported proposals:

🔐 Border Control & Entry Reform

1. Stricter Identity Checks at Entry Points
   • Require passport scanning before boarding (particularly for flights from the UK).
   • Proposals to block airline boarding if no valid ID is provided.
   • Some users suggest adopting French-style police checks upon arrival in Ireland.
2. Safe Country Rule Enforcement
   • Enforce inadmissibility of asylum applications from “safe third countries” (e.g., UK, France).
   • Proposals to deny asylum to anyone who passes through a safe country, unless special circumstances apply.

📤 Deportation & Asylum Processing

1. Increased Deportation Rates
   • Many suggest raising deportation from the current rate (~30/day) to hundreds per day.
   • Ideas include mass deportation charters (e.g., a ferry to Albania or planes to Georgia).
2. Faster Asylum Processing
   • Calls for streamlined application reviews with fixed deadlines.
   • Proposals for pre-screening before arrival, or processing offshore (similar to UK-Rwanda plan).
3. Automatic Deportation on Rejection
   • Suggested reforms to immediately deport rejected applicants, without appeal loops.
   • Also proposals to detain certain applicants pending review to prevent disappearance into the system.

💶 Welfare & Housing Access

1. Delayed Access to Benefits
   • Implement minimum residency periods before eligibility for housing or social welfare.
   • Use contribution-based systems for access to services, modeled on Nordic or German systems.
2. Limit Access to Emergency Housing
   • Restrict emergency housing (like Direct Provision or IPAS accommodations) to those with credible asylum cases only.
   • Some propose prioritizing Irish citizens and long-term residents in housing allocation.

🧾 Legal & Systemic Reform

1. Tighten Eligibility for Protection
   • Define clearer standards for what qualifies as a “real” asylum case.
   • Introduce a "points-based" immigration system for non-asylum migration, especially economic migrants.
2. Cap on Immigration Numbers
   • Proposals to set annual immigration quotas (especially for asylum seekers).
   • Some call for a moratorium on new arrivals until infrastructure catches up (e.g., housing, schools, hospitals).

📰 Policy Transparency & Public Input

1. Public Referendum or Consultation

• A minority of users suggest putting immigration levels to a public vote or establishing an independent immigration commission.

1. Immigration Impact Assessments

• Mandate impact reports before accepting large asylum groups, covering housing, education, and health services.

🟡 Counterpoints (Less Common but Present)

Some users push back on these reforms:

• Warn that mass deportations or "safe country" rejections could violate international law.
• Stress the need to balance humanitarian obligations with border enforcement.
• Highlight positive contributions of migrants to Irish economy and culture.

Not sure why we pay welfare to EU nationals who have never worked here and paid tax

Ireland is not automatically required to pay social welfare to EU nationals who move there without having worked or paid tax in the country. While EU citizens have the right to move freely and reside in other EU states, this does not grant them an unconditional right to access social benefits. To qualify for most Irish welfare payments, EU migrants must meet the Habitual Residence Condition (HRC), which assesses factors like length of stay, employment history, intention to remain, and ties to Ireland.

Generally, newly arrived EU nationals who have never worked in Ireland will not meet the HRC and are therefore not entitled to non-contributory benefits like Jobseeker’s Allowance or Rent Supplement. However, if an EU citizen is working or has recently worked in Ireland, they are considered a “worker” under EU law, giving them stronger access to certain benefits. Children of qualifying EU workers may also be eligible for Child Benefit even if the family is relatively new to the country.

Irish courts and social welfare authorities have consistently upheld the HRC as compatible with EU law, and it is regularly used to deny benefits to EU nationals without sufficient ties to Ireland. While freedom of movement must be respected, EU citizens must be self-sufficient when exercising that right—those who migrate without a job or means of support generally cannot claim welfare in Ireland.

You accuse a poster of something they didn’t do, and when asked to provide evidence for your claim, you couldn’t. Rather than leave it at that, you’re still trying to go after them for something they never said. I know ACD can speak for themselves, but between that and your asking me do I live in Ireland simply because I don’t share your point of view, I’m genuinely interested in why you think your lines of questioning are remotely relevant to this discussion?

Okay, so then in a housing crisis, why do we provide social housing to non-working EU citizens?

(e.g. the Puska families, and many others)

Surely there would be no opposition to removing social assistance and social housing from non-working EU citizens, in accordance with existing EU laws?

Why aren't we doing it?

"It was a silly attempt at a smear like the way you were asking me did I live in Ireland. It’s none of your business where I live"

I never asked you that. At all.

I think everyone else understood it.

Some may pretend not to understand it…. and again everyone will understand why those people are pretending not to understand it.

Those people may then pretend not to understand why people think they are pretending not to understand it.

I hope you understood that…

Oh and I totally agree that kicking dogs is utterly deplorable and cruel by the way.

But AS do as we are in the eu, is my understanding. But its nonsense…something has to give you would think?

Fwiw, I asked Google Gemini

Summarize meaning of far right from the discussion thread https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058387064/immigration-and-ireland-megathread.

Show thinking

Clarifying "Far Right"

I'm currently exploring the provided URL to understand the nuances of the term "far right" as discussed in the thread. My focus is on synthesizing the key arguments and definitions presented, aiming for a clear and concise summary. I'm actively filtering for the most relevant and insightful contributions.

Investigating "Far Right"

I'm now delving into the URL, applying the Browse tool to distill the core meaning of "far right" from the online discussion. My approach centers on identifying and synthesizing the various definitions and interpretations presented, aiming for a comprehensive understanding. I'm focusing on the distinctions and commonalities observed.

Re-evaluate Search Strategy

My initial search was unproductive; the definition of "far right" remained elusive in the provided URL. It seems the term might be used implicitly, or perhaps my search parameters were too restrictive. I will broaden my approach, focusing on context clues and related terms within the document.

Broadening Research Focus

The initial search proved fruitless, as anticipated. I'm now shifting gears, focusing on a broader Google search to define "far right" within the broader political context. Hoping to use a more general definition to help.

Defining "Far Right"

I've been gathering definitions of "far right" from Google....

Then we get the standard AI reaponse for far right.

The term "far right" in political discussion generally refers to ideologies characterized by:

• Ultraconservatism and Authoritarianism: A strong adherence to traditional values and a belief in a strictly ordered society.
• Ultranationalism and Nativism: An extreme form of nationalism that prioritizes the interests of native-born inhabitants over immigrants, often leading to xenophobia.
• Exclusionary and Hierarchical Views: Often manifesting as racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, and hostile towards LGBTQ+ communities, with claims that certain "superior" groups should have greater rights or rule over others.
• Opposition to Liberal Democratic Norms: A skepticism towards or outright rejection of established democratic institutions and practices.

Historically, far-right politics has encompassed movements like fascism and Nazism, and today it includes neo-fascism, neo-Nazism, and other groups with chauvinistic, xenophobic, or reactionary views.

For further reading, you can refer to:

• Far-right politics - Wikipedia
• How to Respond to the Far Right - Verfassungsblog
• Far or Extreme Right - ECPS

Sources

Geminis response does not align with Miriam Webster but rather points to Nazism and fascism as historical examples which is what I assumed far right to be.

It seems the entire country of Japan is far right. The USA which does not allow non native born to run for President is of course far right. I guess Wolfe tone, Robert Emmet, Daniel O'Connell are now far right too?

If you understand AI, you'll understand that Google is squashing all the crap written across the web into bullet points. I'm fine with taking the AI definition over Miriam Webster for the purposes of dialogue in this thread.

Who'd have guessed nelson Mandela and mahatma Gandhi were far right. Anyway, I guess far right is now defined by the pet hatreds of a certain subset of society that spend time writing what they think the far right represents.

But AS do as we are in the eu, is my understanding.

They don’t.

But its nonsense…something has to give you would think?

Certainly that’s what O’ Callaghan wants everyone to think, well, the general public in Ireland, and other EU countries, which he referred to in his speech, but no, that’s what’s nonsense, is the idea that there is some sort of conflict between the rights of Irish citizens, and the rights of international protection applicants. There isn’t, and if any conflict were to arise, it would be a matter for the Courts in Ireland to make an initial decision, not the Minister, and certainly not the general public.

As it stands, Government in 2024 spent €360 million on providing accommodation for people who are homeless, with most of that expenditure going to private accommodation providers-

The Focus on Homelessness report shows that nearly €361 million was spent on emergency accommodation in 2024 alone, accounting for 86 per cent of all homelessness-related expenditure.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/majority-of-spending-on-homelessness-directed-toward-emergency-accommodation-1744246.html

And also in 2024, Government spent over €1 billion on providing accommodation for international protection applicants, again with most of that going to private accommodation providers -

She said: "At the moment, over 90% of all IPAS accommodation is provided commercially. A small proportion of our accommodation is provided on State-owned sites, but the development of a sustainable accommodation system over the coming months and years will see less reliance on commercial providers over time.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2025/0214/1496809-ipas-spend/

Government are funding two entirely separate and distinct programs for two entirely separate and distinct sectors in Irish society. What do you imagine has to give exactly, seeing as neither system of accommodation provision has anything to do with the other. Irish citizens who are homeless aren’t fighting international protection applicants for who gets to sleep on the cool side of the last bed in the hotel. Completely different standards apply for the provision of accommodation for Irish citizens as opposed to the standards which apply to International Protection Applicants.

Quite why O’ Callaghan believes anyone is stupid enough to conflate the two distinct groups on the basis that they are regarded as homeless is anyone’s guess tbh, unless they’re part of this group -

As rebel ballads played over a speaker amid a sea of Tricolour flags, a young man with a megaphone said: “The youth have no future, the youth will never be able to live in this country and we will emigrate off.”

https://archive.ph/p5Cvn

I’d buy him a plane ticket if I thought he meant it.

I'm suggesting we define far right for purposes of communication on this thread. There's been special references to dog kicking as far right so maybe that should be included too, whatever.

I don't think it's useful to focus on the writings of cowardly nerds that think they've met the far right when they meet a 'terrifying' middle aged man called Philip Dwyer that nobody gives a **** about except nerds obsessed with the far right. Imagine people equating dog phobe incel Philip Dwyer with Hitler the Nazi, it's ridiculous.

I'll try and put a poll together because this is a waste of time.

Good post. I think the criminality aspect is there for all to see. I actually like the loutish factor as it is a complete turnoff and you couldn't really ask for a better way to ensure you won't get votes, the way some of them carry on. As an aside I can tell you that I'm in a few far right groups (my secret shame!) and they do talk about this thread in particular, pat themselves on the back for certain posts, remind each other to thank posts (lol) and so on and so forth. Denial of a far right is another thing that is discussed as a tactic.

As another aside, I can understand how the divide and conquer tactic benefits the higher ups as I recently inherited property which was already under a rental agreement. The more these far right types keep their focus on migrants and so on, the more money I'll make as a landlord. So I can really see how the property cartel in the country have a vested interest in this, to the point where I wouldn't be surprised if they help it along in order to divert attention on themselves, and continue to line their own pockets.

Main nationalities within IPAS accommodation as of 2023–2025 excluding Ukraine

• Nigeria
• Somalia
• Pakistan
• DRC, Syria,
• Georgia
• Algeria
• Somalia
• Zimbabwe

We also have 500 or more Afghans in IPAS who I would seriously question how they are validated and also how they are free to come and go. Lots of them ex Afghan army people. Have a look at the Ross Kemp doc from there to see what was normalised behaviour within that group.

Shouldnt take long to clear out the above specially anyone who.presented here directly and not through a formal resettlement program.

Why would people from the above countries present in Ireland for asylum

Ireland attracts people seeking international protection due to its generous welfare supports, including state-provided accommodation (IPAS), access to free healthcare, and education for children.

Other pull factors include family or community links formed through past refugee or reunification programs. Additionally, Ireland’s low deportation rates and limited use of immigration detention make it seem more humane and accessible than some other EU countries.

IIf you successfully progress to Irish citizenship you can of course return home to vacation in the said same place you fled from in fear of your life.

They don't care and the correspondence probably won't even make it past their pa.