tolerant from cork wrote: » Every single approach to implement any of the rules (i.e. no smoking in the rooms) is always met with abuse accusations and a racist card pulled out.
Pixie Elf wrote: » its an improvement for sure.... not everyone is in them yet...bit of a stretch to call them apartments... the situation remains that even if families are slowly being transfered to interconnected rooms they may have already been in one room for the past 5/6/7 years.......... the key issue is the length of time people have been in the system
alastair wrote: » No doubt you've evidence for these 'wild' accusations, eh?
Pixie Elf wrote: » I have personally been shouted and asked to leave on a number of occasions... the most recent is when i was asking parents to get their children involved in a project... that was management... Prior to that there is one security guard in particular that took a dislike to me visiting the centre and everytime i attended would be like a hawk, one foot into the canteen (visitors not allowed inside) to wave at someone and call them out and he would be on me.... Intimacy between parents is briefly dicussed in unesco report - parenting in direct provision (not allowed to post links)
I dont share this conversation to try and change others opinions but to give an insight into the lives of the children living in the centres now....Pixie Elf: #84 She was born in Ireland and knows no other life than that of direct provision. I am supporting because I want her to have the stability of a home where her parents are allowed to be role models and choose her nutritional intake.
Gatling wrote: » A 7 year old draft document for submission on house rules and proceedures ,
Gatling wrote: » As i stated earlier hundreds of asylum cases through the courts and yet not one mention of the accusation/s
Gatling wrote: » No leaked press stories
Gatling wrote: » No human rights groups screaming about this
tolerant from cork wrote: » Yes I do
alastair wrote: » By an independent and well-regarded body with expertise in the area? Yes. You're certain of this? Yes i am It's not exactly front page news material, is it?( why wouldn't it be ) Other than the ones raising it as a concern?
tolerant from cork wrote: » Room checks are explained in the rule book. Every room has to be checked once a week for maintenance purposes. In a regular hotel it's done when guests move out but here obviously it couldn't be done that way.
alastair wrote: » Let's see it then.
Gatling wrote: » havent heard other than the usual DP is bad
Daisy Dasi wrote: » IAnother lady who rang Red Fm from the Kinsale Road (Cecilia was the name she used) told a very shocked Neil Prenderville she was fleeing an abusive husband.... Is there something wrong with this pucture? The system (as in all systems) is open to abuse... as previously stated I would far prefer tax payers money to go directly to rescuing programme refugees from refugee camps from war zones...
tolerant from cork wrote: » You didn't ask the person accusing the staff for any evidence but you request it from me. I must be special.
tolerant from cork wrote: » Still ... sorry can't do it here, as it contains personal details of some people.
tolerant from cork wrote: » SAt the same time don't worry appropriate bodies were notified.
walshb wrote: » To some people here fleeing an abusive husband is more than enough reason to be granted asylum in a far away country. We're open for business for all the troubles and ills of the world.
Pixie Elf wrote: » residents have to sign everyday to show they are in attendance.... they are not allowed to spend the night outside the centre - some do stay out sometimes at risk of this information being passed to reception and integration agency I also know that at times security burst into rooms as early as 11pm and mark residents absent if they are not there.....
alastair wrote: » Sorry. Who was granted asylum for that reason?
alastair wrote: » I didn't notice anything about dumped prams in the report, so once you can produce an NGO researched report that makes such claims, I'll grant you that it's on a par. Until then...
alastair wrote: » Asylum seeker issues tend not to be big news stories, until dramatic **** hits the fan. The truth is that few care a whole lot about their situation.
AlekSmart wrote: » Earlier in the thread you brought up a conversation between you and a 4 year old resident..... Assuming both parents are in DP,how long have they been in DP,and at what stage in the process are they now ? You see,I'm leaning towards this child being used as a lever to further dislodge the blocks from the Asylum System wall,in the hope of a collapse. I was originally of the impression that you were a resident of a DP centre. However,it now appears you are not,but instead an activist who supports the protesting elements of the DP residents. Thus when I read your remarks regarding an individual Security Guard who incurred your wrath for actually doing his job,I feel compelled to review other elements of your posts in this added light. You are obviously up to speed on the various rules & regulations surrounding the operation of this DP centre,yet you feel that Security Staff should "Blind Eye" your transgressing of those rules. If however,residents were to experience harassment or have their property stolen,would I be correct in thinking you would be equally demanding that security be tightened up ? So,what we have is a significant package of complaints,or at least the reissuance of complaints already in the public domain,by a person NOT directly involved,but who deems themselves of sufficient importance to criticise Security Staff for their diligence. To some observers it could entirely be possible that you could be seen to be inflaming the situation or otherwise inciting DP residents to protest. What is your personal attitude towards those DP residents who choose NOT to participate in such protests? You have very clearly and honestly declared your bias in this thread topic,but I also feel that you hold considerable bias against anything the State may implement in regard to Asylum Seekers or Refugee Provision.
alastair wrote: » You are - you've proven yourself dishonest in this thread. That's handy. I wasn't worried. It didn't seem a particularly convincing claim.
walshb wrote: » Nobody I know.
Pixie Elf wrote: » i meant that just because your not in bed by 11 doesnt mean you arent coming home........
alastair wrote: » Given that you claim to know the specifics of every asylum seeker's testimony in court over the years, I have to admit doubts about the veracity of your insights.
tolerant from cork wrote: » Again. Please point me to the post in which I said a lie. And yes it is handy. Unauthorised people shouldn't be viewing reports about others.
Originally Posted by Daisy Dasi: Another lady who rang Red Fm from the Kinsale Road (Cecilia was the name she used) told a very shocked Neil Prenderville she was fleeing an abusive husband.... Is there something wrong with this picture? The system (as in all systems) is open to abuse... as previously stated I would far prefer tax payers money to go directly to rescuing programme refugees from refugee camps from war zones...
AlekSmart wrote: » It has to be pointed out that walshb was referring to a Radio Phone-In contribution described here..... Whether Red Fm were able to verify "Cecilia's" credentials is debatable,however until proven otherwise we must take the Lady was at face value.
alastair wrote: » Why did you post it up then?
alastair wrote: » Right so.
reprise wrote: » Is that your definition of a professionally researched report? Did you actually read it? I must have missed the bit that explained how it was compiled and where the information was obtained. You see anything there yourself?
reprise wrote: » The truth is there is a massive amount of money being spent on asylum seekers. In real life, this is as much loving as you get.
reprise wrote: » It would be a real bonus if there was a little gratitude in return or if it was going to more people that really needed it.
reprise wrote: » Oddly, you seem to have missed the last few months where there has been massive publicity on the issue of direct provision and asylum seekers.
alastair wrote: » You tried to defame a poster with false aspersions. That's dishonest. And so far I'm just seeing unsupported accusations without any evidence. The other poster's claims are at least substantiated by concerns from experts in the field. I know which I place greater weight in.
Daisy Dasi wrote: » *it was a reference to an interview between Neil Prenderville, Red Fm and a resident of the Kinsale Road Ac Centre. Neil asked her her grounds for claiming asylum and she said she was fleeing an abusive husband....
