Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Govt to replace Direct Provision with protection system

Options
12467…77

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    RandRuns
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭RandRuns


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    Do you not think the money currently spent on DP is large, and very wasteful? - its going to become available for the building of assets, rather than the renting of other peoples assets.

    (i know many would like to see it entirely abolished, but this IS a positive step compared to how our public money is being spent right now)

    You are gone off on a tangent. My point, based on expertise and experience within the construction and social housing fields, is this can't be done without seriously affecting the provision of social and affordable housing.

    I made no comment on money spent on DP, as it has no bearing on this fact.


  • Options
    #93
    RandRuns
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭RandRuns


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    Why?

    I explained this to you - why are you pretending not to know?


  • Options
    #94
    Tacitus Kilgore
    Registered Users Posts: 2,128 ✭✭✭Tacitus Kilgore


    ELM327 wrote: »
    Because the free "foreva house" brigade now have additional competition.
    Jacintha from Dublin will now have to compete with Hassan the economic migrant.


    Very disengenuous to pretend to care about Jacintha in the first place, you don't want either of them to 'get' a house, so don't be pretending you give a care about them in order to throw more mud at the darkies.


  • Options
    #95
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    Why?

    Ask the Dept of Housing


  • Options
    #96
    Tacitus Kilgore
    Registered Users Posts: 2,128 ✭✭✭Tacitus Kilgore


    RandRuns wrote: »
    You are gone off on a tangent. My point, based on expertise and experience within the construction and social housing fields, is this can't be done without seriously affecting the provision of social and affordable housing.

    I made no comment on money spent on DP, as it has no bearing on this fact.

    Your point was that it will cost more, i told you there will be a lot more money available - and now you say that's irrelevant and on a different tangent?

    I disagree....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Tacitus Kilgore
    Registered Users Posts: 2,128 ✭✭✭Tacitus Kilgore


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Ask the Dept of Housing

    They didn't say that though - you did, i'm asking what you are basing it on


  • Options
    #98
    DelaneyIn
    Registered Users Posts: 524 ✭✭✭DelaneyIn


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    your solution is "stick them in hotels for enormous rates" instead so..

    Process them and deport them if their asylum claim is not genuine. There would be no need for direct provision if we actually deported those whose claims don’t meet the criteria. Instead we let them appeal and appeal each refusal, then lie to the media and claim that they’re in direct provision for years waiting on a decision.


  • Options
    #99
    RandRuns
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭RandRuns


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    Your point was that it will cost more, i told you there will be a lot more money available - and now you say that's irrelevant and on a different tangent?

    I disagree....

    Your wrong.

    I explained why you are wrong.

    Finance isn't the problem. Even if it were, how many houses would be built with what is spent on DP every year? Very few is the answer.


  • Options
    #100
    Compo82
    Registered Users Posts: 71 ✭✭Compo82


    This was some populist nonsense pushed at the last election. I'm sure the majority of people are against providing such generous accommodation, but of course there appeared to be some majority in favour of this, when there is clearly was not. This was pushed by Sinn Fein, PBP and other left parties, maybe the Greens as well. I wonder how their actual voters were in favour of this, probably some do gooder Greens were. Of course it will be the squeezed middle who will probably end up paying for all this. Like why bother working and getting a mortgage anymore. It will also open the floodgates, just wait and watch.


  • Options
    #101
    TomTomTim
    Registered Users Posts: 2,835 ✭✭✭TomTomTim


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    Very disengenuous to pretend to care about Jacintha in the first place, you don't want either of them to 'get' a house, so don't be pretending you give a care about them in order to throw more mud at the darkies.

    It's almost like people shouldn't be getting houses for nothing, whether immigrant or native. You seem more concerned here about petty political point scoring, than the ridiculous policy.

    “The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”- ― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov




  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Tacitus Kilgore
    Registered Users Posts: 2,128 ✭✭✭Tacitus Kilgore


    RandRuns wrote: »
    Your wrong.

    I explained why you are wrong.

    Finance isn't the problem. Even if it were, how many houses would be built with what is spent on DP every year? Very few is the answer.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/in-20-years-direct-provision-has-cost-ireland-1-3bn-is-there-a-better-alternative-1.4089971

    I reckon ya could have built a few houses for that figure - as of 2019.


  • Options
    #103
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,932 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    ELM327 wrote: »
    Because the free "foreva house" brigade now have additional competition.
    Jacintha from Dublin will now have to compete with Hassan the economic migrant.

    And the people who work for a living but can't afford a house get even more fcuked.


  • Options
    #104
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    They didn't say that though - you did, i'm asking what you are basing it on
    I pulled this from the other thread;
    the Department of Housing states that ‘untenable’ own-door proposal would drive up rents and lead to legal challenges. The department also stated that this new plan would result in greater levels of homelessness in Ireland and would exasperate rental inflation.

    I agree with you that DP is crap from every angle but introducing this without speeding up deportations of failed applicants will be an unmitigated disaster.


  • Options
    #105
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    It's been discussed on Niall Boylan show this hour.


  • Options
    #106
    Tacitus Kilgore
    Registered Users Posts: 2,128 ✭✭✭Tacitus Kilgore


    suicide_circus wrote: »

    I agree with you that DP is crap from every angle but introducing this without speeding up deportations of failed applicants will be an unmitigated disaster.


    I don't disagree with a word of this tbh. Isn't that the plan?


  • Options
    #107
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,647 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Maybe if people didn't want to get beaten to social housing by asylum seekers, they could get a..... job.:confused::confused::confused:


  • Options
    #108
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    I don't disagree with a word of this tbh. Isn't that the plan?
    Why dont you gather the information form me and post it because i'm not arsed


  • Options
    #109
    RandRuns
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭RandRuns


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/in-20-years-direct-provision-has-cost-ireland-1-3bn-is-there-a-better-alternative-1.4089971

    I reckon ya could have built a few houses for that figure - as of 2019.

    Again, you are going off on a tangent. It's almost as if you don't really want to discuss the problem, but just want to score points.....

    The average from the above is around €65 million a year.

    Last year the government spent €3.3 BILLION on housing, and still went backwards. €65 million is a drop in the ocean.

    But like I've now said numerous times, it's not about the financing.

    But you know that already.


  • Options
    #110
    Patrick2010
    Registered Users Posts: 2,983 ✭✭✭Patrick2010


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/in-20-years-direct-provision-has-cost-ireland-1-3bn-is-there-a-better-alternative-1.4089971

    I reckon ya could have built a few houses for that figure - as of 2019.
    120 million divided by say house build for 300k would build 400 houses yet we're expected to provide housing for 3500 EVERY year!


  • Options
    #111
    RandRuns
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭RandRuns


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Maybe if people didn't want to get beaten to social housing by asylum seekers, they could get a..... job.:confused::confused::confused:

    So everyone with a job can afford a house, can they?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Maybe if people didn't want to get beaten to social housing by asylum seekers, they could get a..... job.:confused::confused::confused:

    What?


  • Options
    #113
    Tacitus Kilgore
    Registered Users Posts: 2,128 ✭✭✭Tacitus Kilgore


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Why dont you gather the information form me and post it because i'm not arsed

    I agreed with you, there's nothing left to gather :confused:


  • Options
    #114
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,932 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Maybe if people didn't want to get beaten to social housing by asylum seekers, they could get a..... job.:confused::confused::confused:

    At current house prices, you need a combined income of about 80k a year to afford even a house with the 3.5 times limit, and that combined income needed is higher if you want to live in Dublin.

    If you're a single buyer, do you know any job paying that much? Never mind the people renting who can't save cos of the rent costs.

    I earn about 45k a year and I can't buy a house anywhere in effect.


  • Options
    #115
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    I agreed with you, there's nothing left to gather :confused:
    Are you in favour of swift deportations for those whose application for asylum is rejected?


  • Options
    #116
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,647 ✭ [Deleted User]


    RandRuns wrote: »
    So everyone with a job can afford a house, can they?

    They can if they saved properly.

    I had a lean four years studying pharmacy, whilst also working in a phone shop 30+ hours a week to pay tuition, accomodation and expenses. I got through it, people shouldn't be dependent on the government to be liable for their inability to save. Also, when i bought my house, there was certain areas I was priced out of. If people need social housing, they should take what is offered to them, if they refused, to the back of the queue again.


  • Options
    #117
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,932 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Deleted User wrote: »
    They can if they saved properly.

    I had a lean four years studying pharmacy, whilst also working in a phone shop 30+ hours a week to pay tuition, accomodation and expenses. I got through it, people shouldn't be dependent on the government to be liable for their inability to save. Also, when i bought my house, there was certain areas I was priced out of. If people need social housing, they should take what is offered to them, if they refused, to the back of the queue again.

    Not everyone working earns pharmacist wages.


  • Options
    #118
    RandRuns
    Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭RandRuns


    Deleted User wrote: »
    They can if they saved properly.

    I had a lean four years studying pharmacy, whilst also working in a phone shop 30+ hours a week to pay tuition, accomodation and expenses. I got through it, people shouldn't be dependent on the government to be liable for their inability to save. Also, when i bought my house, there was certain areas I was priced out of. If people need social housing, they should take what is offered to them, if they refused, to the back of the queue again.

    You seem to be mixed up there.

    People in social housing aren't buying their houses, they are being provided them under a social housing scheme.

    I won't even get into the "why can't everyone's daddy send them to college to be a pharmacist" bit.


  • Options
    #119
    Tacitus Kilgore
    Registered Users Posts: 2,128 ✭✭✭Tacitus Kilgore


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Are you in favour of swift deportations for those whose application for asylum is rejected?

    Yes.


    which is something that is also a part of this new system, my thoughts roughly align with this statement from the office of UNHCR Ireland
    The White Paper on Direct Provision is a welcome, ambitious plan that has the potential to radically transform the integration outcomes of refugees in Ireland,” Enda O’Neill, Head of Office with UNHCR Ireland, said.

    “In moving away from accommodating people in centres, some of which are in isolated locations, the new system promises a model which integrates access to services into existing community settings that will promote positive links between refugees and their communities.”

    However, the UNHCR cautioned that the effective operation of the accommodation system for asylum seekers could only be achieved by providing fair and fast procedures for deciding on their cases.

    “Fair and efficient procedures benefit refugees by ensuring swift access to safety and reducing uncertainty. They benefit governments by reducing procedural costs while respecting human rights principles, and decrease the overall demands on the reception system,” O’Neill said.


  • Options
    #120
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,358 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    titan18 wrote: »
    And the people who work for a living but can't afford a house get even more fcuked.
    This is another point, as now they are bidding against the councils and the DP replacements too, both funded off their taxes


    Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »
    Very disengenuous to pretend to care about Jacintha in the first place, you don't want either of them to 'get' a house, so don't be pretending you give a care about them in order to throw more mud at the darkies.


    I don't care about either, neither and no one should be entitled to a free house. No one brought racism into it so statements like this from you "throw more mud at the darkies" although typical of leftists are not helpful. This is not a race issue.

    TomTomTim wrote: »
    It's almost like people shouldn't be getting houses for nothing, whether immigrant or native. You seem more concerned here about petty political point scoring, than the ridiculous policy.

    +1


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Tacitus Kilgore
    Registered Users Posts: 2,128 ✭✭✭Tacitus Kilgore


    ELM327 wrote: »


    I don't care about either, neither and no one should be entitled to a free house. No one brought racism into it so statements like this from you "throw more mud at the darkies" although typical of leftists are not helpful. This is not a race issue.




    Never is though, right? :pac:


Advertisement