Head over to our T
FG-Labour: Let asylum-seekers work
Read more about: Economy, Enterprise, Equality, Europe, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Immigration, Labour Party, Law, Social Policy 
In a week when the use of forged documentation in the asylum-system was highlighted with the rejection by the Supreme Court of the appeal of Nigerian asylum-seeker Pamela Izevbekhai against her deportation, FG and Labour are proposing the allow asylum-seekers to work. Despite 13% unemployment and mass-emigration – Alan Shatter and Pat Rabbitte are now arguing for the right of asylum-seekers to employment to be restored.
Mr Shatter said in circumstances where there are 450,000 unemployed people in Ireland providing access to employment for asylum seekers was a difficult issue. But he said condemning people to a situation where they cannot work for four or five years was wrong. He said access to the jobs market should be considered in a way that would be appropriate in the current economic climate. Labour justice spokesman Pat Rabbitte said that incarcerating people in direct provision with nothing to do for years was a disgrace. He said the correct thing to do was to enable quicker decisions to be taken on people’s asylum cases and change the situation with regard to the right to work for asylum seekers.
However, Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern has already cited a tripling in average monthly asylum-claims in 1999 as justification for rejecting such measures.
Extending the right to work to asylum seekers would almost certainly have a profoundly negative impact on application numbers, as was experienced in the aftermath of the July 1999 decision to do so. The immediate effect of that measure was a threefold increase in the average number of applications per month leading to a figure of 1,217 applications in December 1999 compared with an average of 364 per month for the period January to July 1999.
Fine Gael and Labour would do well in the current economic environment to reconsider such an ill-considered proposal, coming as it does when 60,000 people have been forced to emigrate in search of work due to the incapacity of the Irish economy to provide them with employment. That is especially so given that granting asylum-seekers the right to work would also entitle them to job-seekers’ allowance. The experience from 1999 is instructive in that regard. Not so according to the Irish Times:
Recognising that reality by legalising their right to work after a year would hardly act as an incentive to travel to Ireland, and could save money by reducing dependence on State aid.
This stance flies in the face of what transpired when that policy was provided for in before 2000. There exists in the Left-Liberal Irish media an unfortunate tendency to regard asylum-seekers as victims, in spite of the failure rate of 90% in their applications. This reflects what I regard as a tendency by the Left-Liberals towards Cultural-Marxism and the equation of minority-status with victimhood. That theme feeds into the rest of the editorial on themes including direct-provision, reception-centres and especially the high rates of refusal of asylum-applications. For example:
The Department of Justice makes the remarkable claim that “the Irish asylum determination system compares with the best in the world in terms of fairness, decision-making, determination structures and support services for asylum seekers including access to legal advice.” Would any of its clients concur? But this State certainly excels in one notable regard, its remarkable rate of asylum rejections. Of 6,560 decisions last year only 395 or 6 per cent were positive, less than a quarter of both the EU average or that of the UK.
What is conveniently left out of the editorial is that a mere 25% of deportation-orders are implemented (2008).
Another option would be to guarantee (and therefore allocate whatever necessary resources) the resolution of the asylum request and the approval or deportation in a period of say… 2 or 3 years, and allow the person to work if it hasn’t been resolved after that period.
It’s easy to see the call effect in allowing them to work, but it’s hard to see the point in expending money for years to later approve people to stay that have lost all the abilities to work and that probably will stay as welfare recipients forever.
Also, a country based policy on that regards could help, based on the approval rate in previous cases for people from the same country, or at allow them to work in voluntary kind of jobs…
the Left-Liberal Irish media
Which one would that be, then? The Irish Times, where Madam Editor has shifted the tone sharply to the right?
I don’t think anyone is or has suggested that all of those seeking asylum would be able to work from the moment they arrive merely that if the state fails in its duty to deal with cases expeditiously that they would not be forced to live in suspended animation for years unending. Allowing people to legally look for work after 18 months to 2 years seems very sensible to me.
Perhaps today’s Gospel might provide a more sensible approach to the asylum issue.
In today’s Gospel the Good Samaritan did NOT bring the victim home where I presume he would be a burden on his family. Rather he paid for him to be looked after therby preventing the victim from being a burden on those who have no say in the matter.
So if someone is looking for the Christian approach to the matter they should study the parable of the Good Samaritan and stop trying to place a burden on others they are clearly unable to bear as is clear from our present economic and social circumstances as outlined above.
EWI to clarify: I mean Left-Liberal on social-issues.
Migration is always a sensitive issue, since there are always ‘natives’ aplenty to complain about ‘foreigners’ coming in to take their jobs and their women, mainly because they just don’t like anyone slightly different to themselves. Much the same kind of ‘natives’ who forty odd years ago opposed equality and equal pay legislation, grumbling that ‘wimmen’, especially married ones, would be out there taking the jobs that properly belonged to men, or their influx into the workforce must inevitably result in a general depreciation of pay and conditions. Well, guess what, the sky didn’t fall in!
The problems with our asylum system are that (a) it takes far too long to process claims for asylum, (b) the corrollary to an efficient processing system, an exclusion system, is a bit of a joke with, as FT rightly points out, only 25% of exclusion orders followed through. I have sympathy with the FG and Labour proposals to allow asylum seekers work after one year if their claims haven’t been processed: far better than having them stuck in limbo for several years awaiting a decision on their application. Either the Dept. of Justice , and its political head, Dermot Ahern, get their act together and deliver an efficient and cost-effective system for processing applications with immediate deportation of those whose applications fail, or else the asylum seekers might as well be allowed to work and make some sort of economic contribution whilst they wait.
“……or else the asylum seekers might as well be allowed to work and make some sort of economic contribution whilst they wait.”
Maybe the 450,000 to 500,000 who not only do not make “make some sort of economic contribution” but are a burden on the state should also “be allowed to work and make some sort of economic contribution whilst they wait” for the modern equivalent of the mailboat.
Ireland today reminds me of the local drunk who buys drinks all round while his wife and children perish at home from cold and starvation.
Maybe the notion that we are the most generous country in the world has gone to our heads. Is it not time we realised that we living on borrowed money?
EddieL, The key message of the parable of the Good Samaritan is love for ones neighbours. If you read your gospels a little more closely next time, you’ll also notice who JC considered neighbours deserving of our love.
That the Good Samaritan did not bring the traveller home to Samaria with him is incidental.
coc: “That the Good Samaritan did not bring the traveller home to Samaria with him is incidental.”
I find nothing in Scripture “incidental”. In Scripture I find the Law. As any lawyer will tell you the law is precisely what is written. As outlined in the parable of the Good Samaritan it is specifically written that victim was paid for to be looked after.
Please note that to place impossible burdens on others or burdens which you would not be willing to bear yourself is strictly forbidden in Scripture and to imply that love demands more than what is written in the Law does exactly this.
Your interpretation of the parable is so absurdly literal as would make a fundie blush. You do know what a parable is don’t you?
The victim was paid to be looked after because the road from Jerusalem to Jericho does not run next to or near Samaria and therefore for the Samaritan to bring the traveler home with him would have involved an absurd detour, which might have distracted listeners somewhat from the core message – love your fellow man. All of them, even the black ones.
Luckily for us, we are not finding victims on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, but they are turning up in our home. Any christian knows what to do next.
Coc: Does Scripture mean what it says or does it mean what you would like us to believe it says. Scripture is clear that the Good Samaritan did not bring the victim home but paid for him to be looked after and Scripture even makes clear that if the Good Samaritan was married his wife would take precedence not only over strangers but even over his father and mother.
Yet you tell me that Scripture says that the Good Samaritan did not bring the victim home “because the road from Jerusalem to Jericho does not run next to or near Samaria and therefore for the Samaritan to bring the traveler home with him would have involved an absurd detour…” even though Scipture does not even hint at this. So who is interpreting Scripture?
“You do know what a parable is don’t you?” A parable is a story which explains the Law. Yet you say in this case that this parable does not explain the law and we have to rely on you to make up for this oversight.
Is it any wonder that “Christianity” is in the state it’s in with “Tradition” and “Interpretion” taking precedence over Scripture.
A child reading Scipture would be able to tell you that most of what is passing for Christianity these days it simply not true.
Is it any wonder that “Christianity” is in the state it’s in …
After reading your posts, no.
coc: “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.” — G.K. Chesterton
May I add that it has been made difficult by those who are only interested in power and control. True Christianity contains far more rights and privileges than we are led to believe.
i really dnt read much about politics cause i dnt know about it in any way i just came by to read this an here is my opinion i as asylum seeker living in ireland for almost 5 years though my application as a refugee have been refused 2 years ago an now im waiting form humanitarian i made many friends here in ireland from my country and many more from other countries and continents we are not allowed to work, study or practice a profession .
i have experienced life in ireland as asylum seeker which is very tough life, living with 5 different people different languages in the same room in many hostels over 200 to 300 people lie together in the same hostel 24/7 eat, drink and sleep share the same bathrooms, toilets and a kitchen where we all eat breakfast, lunch and dinner might sound funny but the reality i will let u decide how it feels there lots to tell but i will leav it here i come to the point if we were allowed to work after our first 2 or 3 years stay here in ireland every one would have welcomed and appreciated to work and get out of these filty places provided by government integrations accommodations or these hostels provided by integration agency. every once would loved to find a job work and live in freedom i don’t needed 19.10 a week i don’t need to live in a place like this though its better than a place where i came from i appreciate that but i have never lived with 5 people from different backgrounds some drink some smoke some 1 is gay i never been in my entire life but still compare to a living standards in ireland these places are disgusting we are not allowed to work, study integrate with local communities for instance we can’t go to cinema we cant go pubs we cant go to a football or rugby matches or celebrities concerts cause we cant afford it we cat eat out side we cant do those stuff which every free men/women want to do.
i don’t know how much the government spend i heard its about 500m to 600 a year in our accommodation centres, our foods, electricity bills, medical cards, and lest not forget weekly cash in our local post office 19.10 i mean this amount is for asylum seekers only refugee gets more
i know most of my friends work they have a good jobs i worked with chines 4 days a week i don’t lie i don’t need to we earn a lot form our works and we don’t pay the bills, rent and neither for food and we still get 19.10 a week as i know about 20% asylum seekers work and they have good cars they make a lot of money i know people support their family back home from this all those government spending half of it could have been saved if they let those asylum seekers i mean allow them to work the government say each year they spend about 500 to 600m on refugee and asylum . i’m not saying every one come to ireland as asylum seeker should b entitled to work at least those who spend 3, 4 or 5 year they should allowed them to work those who can find work they should support themselves their own place their own paying bills etc. those who want to work they shouldn’t be allowed to stay in accommodation centres they shouldn’t b given free medical cards they have to support their self but for those who cant find job for some reasons like language or skill they can stay in accommodation centres they have to be given every thing like we have it right now.
this is just my opinion and i apologies if have offended any 1 by this comment my english is not very good but i try lol .
15 comments on this tosh!
The country is being raped by “bankers” who are foisting debts of 100,000,000,000 Euro onto the backs of the Irish peasantry.
Wedge politics will merely divert attention from this.
Perhaps that is the intention?
Pat: “The country is being raped by “bankers” ……… Wedge politics will merely divert attention from this.”
The country is being pillaged by more than the bankers. It is even being done by those who insist on having an open door policy to cheap foreign labour while at the same time expecting the Irish State to provide housing, education, health services etc free to these “economic migrants” while they walk away with the profits. Just like the banks?
“Wedge politics”?
IT IS CRAZY TO EVEN THINK ABOUT LETTING ASYLUM SEEKERS WORK AS THE COUNTRY WOULD ONCE AGAIN BE FLOODED WITH BOGUS ASYLUM SEEKERS EVEN IF THEY ARE HERE FIVE YEARS . ASYLUM PROCESS IS SLOW BECAUSE A LOT OF THESE PEOPLE TRAVEL ON BOGUS ID PAPERS OR HAVE NONE AT ALL SO TRYING TO CHECK UP ON THEM IS NOT EASY IT TAKES TIME PLUS YOU HAVE THE LAWYERS APPEALING TO EVERY COURT IN THE LAND WHICH ALSO TAKES YEARS .WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS PAY MORE ATTENTION TO OUR BORDERS AT POINTS OF ENTRY AND FOCUS MORE ON DEPORTING FAILED BOGUS ASYLUM SEEKERS . THE FACT THAT WE HAVE NO DIRECT FLIGHTS TO THIS COUNTRY FROM WHERE MOST ASYLUM SEEKERS COME FROM SHOWS IRELAND IS SEEN AS A SOFT TOUCH.
Tony,
You have a rational point to make. dont sabotage it by writing in blocks.