What is the Ideal Immigration and Asylum Policy?
I hear many saying "their taking over the country"
and many others calling McDowell "fascist" and "extreme" for deporting peoplle who'd asylum applications have failed.
What would you rather in:
1. Immigration
2. Asylum
(please don't confuse the two)
A limit per year should be put in place, based on the likely forecast needs of the economy. We need immigrants to do the jobs Irish people don't want to do any more, frankly.
People who can prove a substantial risk of persecution in their home countries should be allowed in even if the limit is breached.
Also the whole process should be speeded up, with asylum seekers being allowed to work, pending a decision on their cases.
Easy as pie!!
We can turn the world around
We can turn the earth's revolution
We have the power
People have the power ...
1. Immigration is important for us in an economic sense. We need a certain amount of immigrants as we don't have the workforce needed. The questions is what figure would we put on it, how many do we need. It came up on Q&A last night and McWilliams? had some good ideas about it.
2. Asylum - we are legally and morally obliged to provide refuge to people fleeing persecution, war, famine e.t.c. Again and for obvious reasons, we need to put a limit on what we can handle. When you hear "they're taking over the place" its usually down to ignorance, but occasionally it can be excused when small towns are overloaded with asylum seekers. I would call for a common sense approach. Oh and I would most certainly let them work. That would put an end to the myth that all asylum seekers are spongers, it would also weed out the actual spongers.
Hows that?
We need a green card system to bring in the workers we need.
We need to take our share of asylum seekers. A figure should be worked out with the U.N.
Everyone who reaches this country should be allowed to work until a decision is made as to wheither they can stay or not. This would put an end to the spongers tag.
But we definatley need some kind of policy, it's all over the place at the moment.
I'd like to know what some consider "safe" and unsafe countries, for example Romania is poor, but your hardly in enough trouble to need asylum, espechally since they are 5 min from EU membership?
Immigration - we need this to ensure the economic and I would argue cultural growth of the country. A policy is needed much like a green card system but this has to be issued to the person and not to a company otherwise we are creating a 'serf' system of bonded labour. This system has to allow for migrants to bring their families with them to ensure they contribute meaningfully to our societyOriginally Posted by Liberty-101
On asylum - again we have to be clearer but compassionate. At this stage all asylum seekers should have the right to work - in fact if they are not working they should be on ce schemes etc.
With regards to Romania - have a look at the Roma Rights Centre website - the main reasons that they are still not in the EU is to do with these abuses.
Romania is supposed to be on the "white list" -(safe countries). I don't agree with a notion of a white list - because there can be very serious human rights abuses in countries regarded as generally ok. I've heard of issues like forced sterilisation of Roma women being a problem in some eastern euro countries - (not sure about Romania).
Hmmm... nearly everyone here thinks that asylum-seekers should be given the right to work.
Am I alone in wanting a decision process so swift that there wouldn't be much time to get into work, i.e. six months maximum.
Isn't it reasonably compassionate not to allow people to put down roots if you know that the vast majority of them will have to be refused?
Of course that raises questions about presuming the worst of applicants, and could be used as a rationale for detention centres - not something I want to see.
Our current system is the worst of both worlds: extraordinary delays, applicants putting down those metaphorical roots and no right to work.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
No, I'd agree with you there.
That's the problem with arguing for the right to work, or for individual families to be allowed to remain. The real problem is that the entire system of asylum processing needs to be massively overhauled, so that you have both swiftness in decision-making (although the desire for speed shouldn't overwhelm the right to due process, and to appeal), and some level of confidence in the system. A big problem at the moment is that there's very little consistency in the way decisions are made, there's a lack of transparency, and the level of rejections that are overturned on appeal suggests that there's a serious problem at the initial application stage.
On top of that, the whole system of direct provision of services is massively expensive, and it's hard to see in whose benefit its continuation is.
Of course, dealing with these isn't just a matter of resources. It really requires political leadership and vision, which doesn't seem to be present at the moment, despite all the hard-man swaggering.
Failed liberal traitors:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Immigration:
With 60,000 Immigrants entering the State last year and the natural increase in population being around 30,000 you don't have to be Albert Einstein to work out that the Irish will end up a minority in Ireland unless we do something.
The fact is there is no reason why the Economic growth rate has to be so high.
You may ask why it is so?
Mainly because Immigration is allowing business to expand by providing a ready pool of cheap Labour.
This lessens Wage demands and thus Inflation. This in turn allows for economic expansion which leads to demands by business for more low wage workers.
So the whole 'The Economy needs more workers' is a vicious circle.
The merits of the optimum rate of Economic expansion should be based on whether it serves the interests of the Irish people.
As it obvioulsy not in our interests to end up a minority in our own country then it follows for that not to happen we need to bring the numbers of Immigrants arriving here annually down drastically.
A quota system needs to be enforced that ensures that never again does the growth in the numbers of Immigrants exceed the natural growth in population.
Otherwise we might be the 21st Century's Manhattan Indians!
Europa Conventus Delenda Est
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote