The racism continues- more charted planes, 61 more deportations

by stablinski Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:48

Hi All,

I haven't read through all this statistics but i saw John qualified Luxembourg as insignificant in that respect. Well statistics is not the holy grale in this very sensitive issue.
About a third of Luxembourg's(tiny) population are foreigners or from foreign origin and this is a great thing! Otherwise the culture of this country would not evolve, it would turn into incest. Why not change perspective? Rather than seeing migrants as people who come to take, why not see them as people that have something to bring?Their culture, their laughs, their difference...

by pc Sun Apr 04, 2004 16:40

still no clearer
good dicussion though

by John Sun Apr 04, 2004 12:42

Hi Truly Blue,

I hope you are having a good weekend. I'm in great form after Man Utd stuffing Arsenal. I also have good news for you and Residents against Racism. Tired of plucking figures from various websites, I went straight to the horse's mouth to settle this matter once and for all,and bring this tedious debate to a conclusion. I'm sure you will welcome that. I contacted the CSO on Friday and asked to be sent their latest publications containing migration satistics for Ireland. I received them straight away. That's what I call efficiency. Sorry you were not so lucky with the CSO, but they dont have the manpower, or indeed womanpower, to discuss their statistics in detail over the phone with anyone who phones them up. They produce billions of statistics a year. What you do is ask for info on what are the latest publications they have produced pertaining to the subject you are interested in, and ask them to mail or email you a copy of that publication (usually for a small fee). That's what I did. I now have their latest publication which is:

CSO Statistical Release, published on 10 Dec 2003, - Population and Migration Estimates

If you contact CSO, they will be delighted to send you a copy. I'd even be happy to purchase a copy for you and indeed for Residents against Racism as well.

However, its also in the internet:

www.cso.ie/publications/demog/popmig

Here are the figures from it - they are to be found in Table 5:

Immigation to Ireland:
------------------------------

12 months to Apr 1996: 39,200
12 months to Apr 1997: 44,500
12 months to Apr 1998: 46,000
12 months to Apr 1999: 48,900
12 months to Apr 2000: 52,600
12 months to Apr 2001: 59,000
12 months to Apr 2002: 66,900
12 months to Apr 2003: 50,500

add them up: comes to 407,6000 for 8-year period from April 1995 to april 2003 - actually slightly higher than my original figures

Net migration in Ireland:
---------------------------------

12 months to Apr 1996: +6,000
12 months to Apr 1997: +19,200
12 months to Apr 1998: +17,400
12 months to Apr 1999: +17,300
12 months to Apr 2000: +26,000
12 months to Apr 2001: +32,800
12 months to Apr 2002: +41,300
12 months to Apr 2003: +29,800

add them up: comes to 189,8000 for 8-year period from April 1995 to april 2003

So, you see the CSO figures are almost identical to those I've been using all along.

I should have contacted the CSO a week ago and got the official figures then. It would have saved all this animosity. Sorry! But, at least the next time a new thread is opened on this issue, I'll be able to insert these figures in a comment early on, and not have the whole debate drag out like on this one.

As for the net migration RATE, its quite simple - you simply divide the net migration figure by the population (in 1000s) figure.
These population figures are also given in the same Statistical Release. This gives the net migration RATE for each year as follows:

12 months to Apr 1996: +1.6
12 months to Apr 1997: +4.9
12 months to Apr 1998: +4.6
12 months to Apr 1999: +4.6
12 months to Apr 2000: +6.5
12 months to Apr 2001: +8.2
12 months to Apr 2002: +10.4
12 months to Apr 2003: +7.4

the average net migration RATE for the 8-year-period is 6.4

But, if you dont want to trust my humble calculator, I have independent confirmation from the EU Statistics body, no less, called Eurosat.

Its in site: www.europa.eu.int

and publication is called:

Eurostat: First demographic estimates - published 9 January 2004

and I quote from it:

'In relative terms, the largest net migratory flows were to Ireland, Portugal and Spain with +7.0 per 1000 inhabitants, +6.1 and + 6.5 respectively. The Netherlands (+0.2) and France (+1.0) had the lowest migration rates.'

these are for the year 2003 only - you can see that the Eurostat estimate for the net migration rate in Ireland for that year is very close to the one I calculated from the CSO figures

Good luck with CIA. I should inform you that the CIA doesn't actually count migration flows in Ireland. It simply gets figures from the CSO, just the same as you and I. So, all you need to ask them is whether or not their figures are from the latest CSO publication I quoted earlied - that is:

CSO Statistical Release, published on 10 Dec 2003, - Population and Migration Estimates

if they are not, advise them to get latest publication from CSO and do their calculations again

In fact, I think I'll do that myself - I'll send them a copy of this latest CSO Statistical Release, so they can have more accurate figures in the next World Fact Book

So, all this is pretty conclusive, I think you'd agree. I have now given my sources as CSO, Eurostat and (in previous comment) Irish Centre for Migration Studies at UCC. These are pretty august bodies. Your only 'source' is CIA, which is not a statistics-gathering body, and which merely tabulates statistics it receives from national statistics bodies like the CSO and which always lags several years behind in so doing.

as for the other issues:

deportations:

surprised neither you nor Residents against Racism commented on these, given that it was this issue that started off this whole thread - truth is, deportations from Ireland under FF/PD government are far lower than in most European countries

work permits:

problems exist in relation to work permits in all countries - I have cousins 10 years in USA and still haven't got them - you say you are not an expert on work permits - fine, neither am I - neither is Residents against Racism

best thing to do in that situation is to turn to experts and see what they say - thats why I quoted www.workpermit.com - they are the experts, its their job, they advise people on work permits all over the world - and just to repeat what they say:

'the Irish Government has introduced one of the most LIBERAL work permit regimes in the world

I dont think either you or I are in a position to challenge that, as we are both agreed we're not experts

That's it for now. Enjoy your Sunday.

by Truly Blue Sat Apr 03, 2004 14:43

Thank you for your response, however your figures are misguided.
1. In 1996 marginally more people left the country than came. My point is that the 270-280,000 figure is more closer to the Residents spokesperson than your 400,000 which is incorrect. Please show where you got those figures from. Also Piaras MacEinri has never been attacked by the ICP, the ICP i have been watching with particular attention as i find their beliefs contrary to my vision of what sort of democracy i believe we should have.
2. When i contacted the CSO, a few days ago, me that figure for the immigration rate, they did not have one and were unable to direct me to where i could get it. The figure you have given is not the migration rate per year you have actually given a figure of migrants in the country and not the rate at which they have been coming/going to the country. Again i find the CIA figures closer to the real rate, i have emailed them looking for their calculations also which i expect to get on monday. Also i did not find the figures contradict the residents spokesperson as their figures of immigrants are closer to mine.
3 . As for work permits, while not claiming to be an expert it is widely acknowledged by legal experts that our system is appaling. Their has been plenty of high profile cases in the media, which you can find on Ireland.com which will detail unscrupulous employers.
Although i find your figures wrong. I think the residents spokespersons remarks on the manipulation of figures to suit a political argument as accurate. And can't help but think of Berties statement last year after 100,000 marched in Dublin saying that they were supporting his stance on the war

by Joxer Sat Apr 03, 2004 09:24

Is that racist, is it??

by John Fri Apr 02, 2004 16:47

Hi Truly Blue,

Thank you for your well-argued comment, makes a change from Residents against Racism. I agree figures are tedious, but you
have challenged mine, so I feel entitled to reply.

(1) You give figure of 270,000-280,000 for
total immigration - but its for 6-year period
1997-2003 (as you say yourself), so
annual average is 45,000 to 47,000 - very
close to my figure and that quoted in
Newsweek International. My estimate of
50,000 per year is based on an article:
Immigration into Ireland: Trends, Policy
Responses, Outlook by Piaras MacEinri,
who is director of Irish Centre of Migration
Studies at UCC (incidentally a liberal on
this issue and frequently attacked by the
Immigration Control Platform) - I quote
from his article which you can find on
internet:

'In the period 1995-2000, approximately
a quarter of a million persons migrated
to Ireland'

and

'There are no parallels to these figures
in other EU countries.'

A quarter of a million in 5-year period
works out at 50,000 per annum, slightly
higher than your estmate, but the
difference is not significant.

(2) Delighted CSO confirmed to you my
figure of 150,000 (actually just over) for
net immigration to Ireland between the
census of 1996 and the census of 2002.
This is the most reliable figure and the
most important figure in the whole
debate.

(3) If you accept the figure of 150,000 for
net immigration between 1996 and 2002
(which you acknowledge the CSO
confirmed to you), the derivation of a
figure of 6.5 for the annual net
immigration rate per 1000 capita is
simple arithmetic, nothing to do with
politics - its quite simple:

150,000 in 6-year-period = 25,000 per
annum (actually figure is a little over
150,000, but never mind)

population of Ireland during this period
was approx 3.9 million

divide 25,000 by 3,900 = approx 6.5

I'm sure if you contact CSO again, they
will confirm this figure for you.
Remember its the annual rate, not the
rate for the whole 6-year period -
probably where your arithmetic is
going wrong

(4) CIA figure you quote is undoubtedly out-
of-date - figures in international
reference books invariably lag behind
figures produced by national statistics
bodies by several years - the CIA
figure corresponds closely to what
was thought to be the level of net
immigration in Ireland prior to
publication of the results of the 2002
census.

Again, I'd be delighted if you take this
discrepancy up with the CSO. I'm sure
they will confirm what I just said. I know
that because I was in touch with them
myself some months ago.

However, Truly Blue, I think you'll
agree that the CIA figures completely
contradict the Residents against
Racism claim that most third world
countries have a higher rate of net
immigration than Ireland. If you
look down the list, you'll see only a
handful have a higher rate than Ireland.

(5) I accept your point about Luxembourg.
My first reference to immigration figures
was when I wrote in early comment 'over
the past decade Ireland has had the
highest level of net immigration per
capita in Europe'. I accept I should
have said 'with possible exception
of Luxembourg'. Sorry! I did say it
in next comment I think.

However its hardly significant.
Luxembourg is frequently omitted
from analyses of immigration
trends as its the size of a postage
stamp and tens of thousands go
to live there while still working in
France or Belgium.

You could make the same complaint
about the Mac Einri article I quoted
earlier.

(6) So, to repeat my central point in all
these comments:

'over the past decade Ireland has had
the highest level of net immigration per
capita in Europe, with possible
exception of Luxembourg'

note that in my initial comment I
specifically said 'net immigration'
and 'per capita'

Does True Blue and Residents
against Racism now accept this? If not,
why not? Supply figures and sources.

I agree debate should move on to how
immigrants are treated in Ireland by FF/PF
Government. But, this is difficult until
numbers are agreed on. But, here goes.
You can look at it under various headings.

(1) Availability of work permits.

The website www.workpermit.com
deals with the availability of work
permits in all major destinations for
migrants in the world. It is a completely
unbiased source. It states

'the Irish Government has introduced
one of the most liberal work permit
regimes in the world'

So, why do they say that if its not true.

(2) Deportations.

I refer you to article in Sunday Business
Post of April 9 2000.

'The number of asylum applications
in Ireland last year was proportionately
the second highest in the European
Union, yet the number of deportations
from the country was the lowest'

'The Belgian Government issued 34,000
deportation orders last year - while
Ireland issued 300, only 19 of which
have been implemented'.

I also refer you to the website
www.statewatch.org (which is a pro-
immigration website). It lists the
numbers of deportaions of asylum
seekers from EU and other countries
in 1999:

UK: 45,100
Germany 32,2333
Austria: 20,207
Netherlands: 12,204
Italy: 12,036
Denmark: 9,276
France: 8,300
Sweden: 6,735
Belgium: 6,487
Finland: 5,426
Spain: 5,020
Greece: 2,880
Portugal: 529
Norway: 440
Luxembourg: 30
Ireland: 6
Iceland: 0

The FF/PD government has nothing
to be ashamed of when it comes to
deportations

by Truly Blue Fri Apr 02, 2004 12:53

John, while certainly not a supporter of an open door policy (i do believe we should have a quota system) i am questioning your statistics. On further examination of your statistics you seem to have gotten them solely from a search on google and newsweek. The figures that i have for immigration in to the country is around 270 - 280,000 for the period 1997-2003 the figure is unqualified largely because no-one can truly tell how many returning emigrants there are accurately. This figure, while closer to the RAR figure, whom i believe are concentrating on foreign immigration, is not what i think they are arguing i think their point is more on the manipulation of statistics. On futher examination of your figure of 6.5 net immigration rate i would like to know how you worked it out because using the CSO's figures it is closer to the CIA's figures of around 3.4/3.5. I did a further bit of research and found that the CIA's website figures were calculated in 2003 AFTER the census. Also the CSO do not have the best statisticians in the country, as a capatilist you must surely know that the private sector is naturally where you will find the best of the best. Having contacted the CSO they gave me the figure of 150,000 but could not give me any other figures. The Department of Justice have claimed that immigration rates are falling, McDowell heralds this as a victory for his policies. Also originaly you claimed that Ireland had the highest immigration rate per capita before changing your opinion to say after Luxembourg in a later thread. You are both right in that i think no one is interested in the statistics. What the argument should be is whether the immigration policy of our country is fair and transparent. The only political argument i saw was briefly about migrant workers which seemed to be dropped after John was challenged on his beliefs, however the Residents spokesperson has not said anything about the immigration policy of this government, of which i (sad to admit it) voted for in the last two general elections.
Please gentlemen no more figures

by Mark grehan Fri Apr 02, 2004 11:32

Again here we go according to the CSO Ireland has a net migration of around 150,000 from 1996 -2003 according to your figures that we mean that 250,000 have emigrated or left over that same period. This is quite simply not true. If you take that 150,000 from the CSO roughly 50% of the figures is returning Emigrants after that over 30% of the 150,000 are from the EU than roughly 7% would be from the US leaving a much smaller number for immigrants from the rest of the world (which includes asylum seekers). The way that you throw large figures from the world factbook (that invaluable source on google) is designed to justify yhe right wing argument that Ireland is being overrun by refugees and foreigners it is not true. And as i have previously stated the media then uses words such as invasion, flood, overrun to try and build up hype for figures that on closer examination do not stand up to scrutiny. As for the CSO the figures do not reflect a trend, the way it is compiled is it is filled out by every household at a certain time on a certain date. It is not a perfect, or even the best way to try and judge immigration. My argument for the department of Justice is that they have the exact figures for work permit and asylum applications per year and this is a much more appropriate way to view a trend of immigrants coming to the country. I'll agree with you on one thing people are sick of statistics, and i'm sure we are the only people reading them. Thank you and good night.....

by John Fri Apr 02, 2004 03:03

The figures you give for immigration for the period 5-year period 1995-2000 add up to 248,1000. Thats almost exactly 50,000 per year - precisely the figure I have given all along for average annual immigration into Ireland - and the figure quoted in Newsweek International which I included in an earlier comment and which you ridiculed because of the source. So, they were right after all. Yesterday, you were claiming the figure for total immigration into Ireland since 1996 was 200,000 - i.e. 200,000 for an 8-year period. Now you are admitting it is 248,1000 for a 5-year-period, double the amount.

The composition of that 248,100 is irrelevant. What matters is the total figure. It matters not
whether they are from the EU, the USA, Eastern Europe or left Ireland decades ago.

The CSO figure for net immigration is undoubtedly the most accurate as it is based on the 2002 census, the most authoritative and accurate source of net immigration statistics. This clearly shows that net immigration in Ireland in the period 1996-2002 averaged 26,000 per annum and the net immigration rate per 100,000 capita in Ireland for the period 1996-2002 was over 6.5.

If you dispute this, simply phone the CSO today and ask them. Or anyone else reading this, I invite you to do the same.

Are you seriously suggesting the CIA has more accurate figures for the net immigration rate into Ireland than the CSO? The discrepancy is due to the fact that the CIA figures are out-of-date, having been superceded by the latest figures from the 2002 census. Prior to this census both the level of net immigration into and indeed the population of Ireland was under-estimated.
A number of papers have been produced by the CSO and the ESRI on this matter and I suggest you read them. The 2002 census is the definitive source for all statisics on this matter in the period concerned and can not be challenged.

Projecting the net immigration figures for 1996-2002 forward to 2004 actually under-estimates net immigration, because net immigration is estimated to have increased since 2002. The latest CSO estimate for net immigration in the year to April 2003 is 29,800.

Your claims that the CSO is not the best source for migration statistics is absurd, and simply indicative of the fact that the CSO figures contradict your own. The CSO employs the best statisticians in the country. How dare you question their ability to provide accurate statistics on this or any other matter. What statistical expertise do you have to question the methodology used by the CSO? Before you ask, I have an M.Sc in Statistics and Computing and a Ph.D. in Operational Research from Queens University, Belfast.
I'm more than happy with the methodology used by the CSO.

Equally ludicrous is the claim that the Dept. of Justice, rather than the CSO, should be
taken as the source of immigration statistics in Ireland. If you phone the Dept. of Justice and ask for their estimate of net immigration in Ireland in recent years, they will refer you to the CSO. The Dept. of Justice does not collect immigration statistics. It is only involved at all in this matter in the case of non-EU immigrants who require work permits, a small proportion of the total. The Dept. of Justice does not know from Adam what the levels of immigration and net immigration are between Ireland and other EU countries. But, the CSO does. That's their job.

I am sure other readers are bored by the statistics being bandied about by myself and the spokesman for Residents against Racism. So, I invite any so bored to bring this matter to a conclusion. It all boils down to this.

I have claimed that the level of net immigration per capita into Ireland since the 1996 census is the highest (by far the highest) of any country in Europe, with the sole exception of tiny and statistically-insignificant Luxembourg. The spokesman for Residents against Racism has disputed this claim and called me a right-wing tosser for making it.

Its very simple. Anyone who is unable to choose between us, I invite you to contact one of the following: CSO, ESRI, Eurostat, OECD Statistics Dept, UN Statistics Dept,
and simply ask them to investigate whether or not my claim is correct.

If they say it is not correct, I will shut up on the matter.

However, if they say it is correct, then I would ask the spokesman for Residents against Racism to shut up on the matter.

I rest my case.

by Mark Grehan - Residents Aganst Racism Thu Apr 01, 2004 20:23

Here are the figures for immigration in to Ireland from 1995 -2000 it is not net migration it is immigration only
Returned emigrants 123,100 50 %
rest of the world 29,400 12%
USA 16,600 7%
EU 33,400 13%
UK 45,600 18%

The CIA website with 2003 migration figures has migration at 3.57 migrant(s)/1000 population and not the over 6.00 that you have.
The CSO figures cannot be brought forward to 2004 as it is not a migration rate. Also the CSO figures are not a good source when talking about migration rates due to the way thay are compiled. It is the Dept of Justice who would be the best people with the figures.
Here we still have you trying to manipulate figures to try and justify your argument. I note with concern that you haven't mentioned anything about the plight of migrant workers since i rubbished your claims.

by Leon Thu Apr 01, 2004 16:12

Any chance of a link to those stats.

What is the world factbook?
I've googled for it but all can find is some CIA stuff with the same name.

by John Thu Apr 01, 2004 14:53

The Residents against Racism spokesman is simply wrong. Either he does not know the difference between total immigration and net immigration, or he is simply trying to deceive readers of these comments. Lets get the facts straight once and for all.

Total immigration is the total number of persons coming to live in Ireland from abroad. I readily admit (and have said so in earlier comments) that this includes both Irish people who may have emigrated in the 50s, 60s, 70s or 80s as well as people with no previous ties to Ireland, although the latter are an increasing proportion of the total.

Net immigration is total immigration minus the number of people emigrating from Ireland to foreign countries. By definition, the figure for net immigration is lower than for total immigration.

Now for some figures:

over the 8-year-period 1996 to 2004, total immigration into Ireland was approximately 400,000, or an average of approximately 50,000 per year

over the 8-year-period 1996 to 2004, net immigration into Ireland was approximately 210,000, or an average of approximately 26,000 per year

These facts are indisputable. The Residents against Racism spokesman is taking the figure for net immigration and claiming it as the figure for total immigration. Either he doesn't know the difference, or is attempting to mislead.

These figures are completely consistent with all those quoted in my earlier comments. In each of these it is quite clear whether it is total immigration or net immigration that is being referred to.

If anyone reading this is unable to decide between my figures and those of the Residents against Racism spokesman, there is a simple remedy. Phone, email, or write to the CSO in Cork or the ESRI in Dublin. They are very helpful and will confirm the figures I have given.

Some sources:

The figure for net emigration is derived from the 2002 census - this shows over the 6-year-period 1996-2002 net immigration of 155,000
- projecting this forward to 2004 gives the figure of 210,000 for the period 1996-2004 - in fact this may be underestimate as there are indications net immigration is increasing.
This figure can be easily checked on the CSO website, or by contacting the CSO.

The website www.irelandemb.org gives figures of (a) total immigration of 50,000 in year to April of 2003 and (b) net immigration of 29,800 in year to april of 2003 - again, completely consistent with all figures I have quoted earlier.

In the paper: Immigration into Ireland: Trends, Policy Responses, Outlook by Piaras MacEinri - it states;

'In the period 1995-2000, approximately a quarter of a million persons migrated to Ireland. There are no parallels to these figures in other EU countries'

again this works out at a figure of 50,000 per year for total immigration - consistent with the figures I gave earlier for total immigration

note: this paper was published by the EU Commission and written by responsible analysts - it is not the product of right-wing cranks

The World Factbook 2004 gives the following figures for net immigration per 100,000 capita - the higher the figure the higher the level of net immigration per capita - negative figures indicate net emigration. Note that the figure for Ireland is an under-estimate, as these were compiled before the results of the Ireland Census of 2002 were published, which showed that net immigration into Ireland was higher than previously thought. Even with this under-estimate the figure for Ireland is higher than for any European country except Luxembourg.

Ireland: +4.12
Austria: +2.45
Belgium: +0.97
Cyprus: +0.43
Czech Rep. +0.96
Denmark: +2.01
Estonia: -0.73
Finland: +0.62
France: +0.64
Germany: +3.99
Greece: +1.96
Hungary: +0.76
Italy: +1.73
Lithuania: +0.15
Latvia: -1.23
Luxembourg: +9.26
Netherlands: +2.35
Poland: -0.49
Portugal: +0.5
Slovakia: +0.53
Slovenia: +2.24
Spain: +0.87
Sweden: +0.95
UK: +1.06
Malta: +2.36
Norway: +2.1
Romania: -0.6
Russia: +0.94
Switzerland: +1.37
Ukraine: -0.42
Yugoslavia: -3.38
Bulgaria: -4.74

and for the USA it gives a figure of +3.5, again lower than Ireland

Based on latests results of 2002 Census in Ireland, the true figure for Ireland would now be about 6.5.

Contrary to the Residents against Racism spokesman's claim, the same publication
(World Factbook 2004) clearly indicates that the vast majority of third world countries experience net emigration, not net immigration.

Again, contrary to his claims, I have no sympathy with the Immigration Control Platform. As I said in an earlier comment, I welcome the fact that under the FF/PD government the Irish economy is now so strong that it can attract such a large number of immigrants. I look forward to this continuing. But, I certainly reject his claims that that government has anything to be ashamed of when it comes to immigration.

Perhaps he would now provide sources for his figures in the same detail as I have for mine.

by Mick Flint Thu Apr 01, 2004 12:42

Lot of problems there!

by Mark Grehan - Residents Against Racism Thu Apr 01, 2004 12:39

"Last year, the Department issued 47,500 work permits, including the 10,000 under the visa scheme. The majority of these were renewals. According to its figures, there are 100,000 non-nationals working here, 50,000 from outside the EU. Around 17,000 of these are from the 10 Eastern European states due to join the EU in May."
I hope this satisfies you

by Mark Grehan Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:49

Most countries in the third world have a higher rate than we do. I have shown again and again that your figures are wrong. The figure is 200,000 since 1996. This figure is undisputed by any Irish organization except the immigrant control platform or nsrus. Take a look at Belgium Its non national population is over 30% ours is not even 5% yet we have people like you running around screaming blue murder

by John Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:41

Typical of organisations like yours! Resort to infantile name-calling when confronted with facts. You haven't denied the figures for immigration or NET immigration (which means exactly the same thing as NET migration). You can't, because they are true
and indisputable. All figures I have quoted have been perfectly consistent and accurate.
I again ask you: name one country (apart from tiny and insignificant Luxembourg) which has had a higher-rate of per capita NET immigration (or migration, if you prefer) than Ireland over the past decade.
If you can't, then I suggest you DO disband. Hope I dont have to wait 16 hours this time.

by Mark Grehan - Residents Against Racism Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:37

Also note that the 200,000 i quote is immigration in to the country in total since 1996 as quoted by the Immigrant Council of Ireland. It is not net migration it is total immigration since 1996. This figure is more accurate than any newsweek stat or whatever John tries to spout to try and justify his right wing view

by Yossarian Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:33

Dungaree: "Ireland does most certainly have the highest per capita rate of net immigration in the world"
Me: As far as I know, African countries have the highest net immigration rates in the world, mostly asylum seekers running from war, genocide, famine and other colonial hangovers.

by Mark Grehan - Residents Against Racism Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:24

Yes its true we have dispanded. The onslaught of your right wing innaccuracies were to much for us. Net migration not Net immigration me thinks is the term you were looking for but mes no ready newsweek and yousy is right wing tosser. You have gone from figures of 50,000 a year down to the 28,000 i said. As for work permits, the employer holds the work permits not the employee this is a modern form of SLAVERY. We have cases of employers charging the migrant worker for the work permit, sometimes well over the cost of the permit. We also have hundreds of cases of employers paying under the minimum wage knowing that the migrant worker is afraid to bring the case to court because s/he is afraid of getting sacked and then deported. In other countries it is the employee who holds the work permit. The work permit system is not one of the most liberal it is one of the most abused (by employers).

by John Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:33

Has Residents against Racism disbanded? There has been no reply from them for 16 hours since I asked them some questions in my last comments. An uncharacteristic silence from such a loudmouth group. I guess they were unable to answer my points. Game, set and match to me then!

by John Wed Mar 31, 2004 18:19

I also refer you (Residents against Racism) to the site www.workpermit.com which looks at the situation regarding work permits in almost every country in the world - I quote:

'the Irish government has introduced one of the most liberal work permit regimes in the western world'

So there!

by John Wed Mar 31, 2004 18:06

The Newsweek figure refers to the number of immigrants. As some Irish still emigrate, the NET immigration figure is lower. The CSO estimates that in the year to April 2001, the level of immigration into Ireland was 46,200 (close to Newsweek figure) while the level of NET immigration was 26,300 - all this in one year. These are easily the highest per capita figures in Europe, with the possible exception of tiny and statistically-insignificant Luxembourg. If you dispute this, kindly name a country in Europe with higher figures, and give references for checking. Of course, asylum seekers are a minority of immigrants. I explained that several comments ago. For numbers of asylum seekers, I refer you to my earlier comment.

by Joe Wed Mar 31, 2004 17:35

According to the RTE news this morning of the 50,000 asylum seekers who arrived in Ireland in the last decade some 30,000 have now left. (Of these maybe 200 have been deported).

by Mark Grehan - Residents Against Racism Wed Mar 31, 2004 17:30 residentsagainstracism at eircom dot net 12a Brunswick place, Dublin 2 087 7974622 or 087 6662060

Newsweeks figures are wrong. According to the immigrant council since 1996 up to 200,000 immigrants have come, a minority of whom are asylum seekers. This figure is almost half the figure you have been quoting. You are completely wrong and should know better than to believe newsweek on Irish affairs (or any other).

by John Wed Mar 31, 2004 17:09

But, if you (residents against Racism) are referring only to asylum seekers (as distince from other immigrants) then Ireland, although not having the higest rate in Europe,
has one of the highest. Again I welcome that.

I refer you to the following paragraph from a pro-immigration UK website.

*************************************

In fact ... Indeed in 2000, the United Kingdom received the largest number of asylum applications (97,900 or 22% of the total number of applications lodged in Europe), followed by Germany (78,800 or 17%) and the Netherlands (43,900 or 10%) However, when compared to the size of the total national population, Slovenia received the largest number of asylum-seekers in Europe during 2000 (4.7 refugees per 1,000 inhabitants), followed by Belgium (4.2), Ireland (2.9) and Netherlands (2.8). Britain fell from 9th place in 1999 to 10th with 1.6 asylum seekers per 1,000 inhabitants. Provisional data provided by Governments to UNHCR indicate that asylum applications in 25 European countries in 2000, decreased by 4% compared to 1999. On a more global note, according to World Refugee Survey 2000, in 1999 nearly 27 million people in 24 countries were forced to flee wars, repression and other forms of persecution, making the world refugee population total rise for the first time in 7 years. At the beginning of the Millennium, 35 million people were uprooted.

by John Wed Mar 31, 2004 16:30

Residents against racism are totally wrong. I specifically said 'net immigration' - which includes both asylum seekers AND economic migrants AND returning Irish emigrants. Ireland does most certainly have the highest per capita rate of net immigration in the world. If you believe otherwise, please supply figures. I have no sympathy with the Immigration Control Platform. I welcome the massive net immigration Ireland is experiencing both for its own sake and as proof of the wonderful economic success Ireland has achieved under the FF/PD Government pursuing pro-capitalist economic policies.

I refer you to the following paragraph from a recent edition of Newsweek International.

******************

Ireland was until recently a nation of emigrants—and one of the most homogenous states in the European Union. As late as the 1980s, with the economy sagging, one sixth of the republic’s population emigrated, peaking in a 12-month period in 1988-1989, when 70,600 Irish, or 2 percent of the population, went abroad. Today the trend has reversed. The country of 4 million people is absorbing nearly 50,000 immigrants a year. Per capita, that’s four times the immigration rate in what we think of as the world’s greatest melting pot, the United States. One example: in 1997 one Dublin secondary school took in its first non-Irish student ever, a boy from Angola; today 25 percent of the student body is foreign-born. Says Piaras MacEinri, one of Ireland’s foremost immigration experts, “Ireland is changing so fast that it’s hard for the country to catch its breath.”

by Paddy Rua - WSM Wed Mar 31, 2004 15:45

We live in a world in which Capital flows with immeasurable speed from one extreme of the globe to the other; in which the soldiers of the US and the UK can invade anywhere in the planet in the wink of an eye; in which products manufactured in distant lands, by unknown toilers, flood our markets; in which food from across the oceans satisfies our appetites; in which hoards of tourists can safely cross the Atlantic Ocean, the Sahara or the Indian Sea in a few hours.

But the flip side to this world of freedom of movement for the wealthy and their commodities is that there are massive restrictions on the freedom of movement for those seeking to escape the poverty of the third world. They are left to rot in war zones or have to risk travelling illegally in precarious ships to reach the shores of "abundance", escaping their misery at risk of their own survival. Is this just? Certainly not. Then why does this happen?

There are many reasons for this, but a major one is that the much-vaunted "globalisation" is not something that benefits everyone equally. Big business investment in the third world doesn’t mean rivers of profit for the locals, but rather for the Transnational masters.

The globalisation of Capital and business generates inequalities in the distribution of wealth. And this causes migration. Immigrants don’t come because they are mean barbarians that want to steal our jobs. Immigrants come here because their countries (usually former colonies) have been ravaged by imperialist rule, have been drained of their wealth by multi-national companies, or have become ruins after war. In those countries they are facing difficult times: haunted by the ghosts of starvation, war and poverty and they live under brutal regimes.

Immigrants are people just like you and me, concerned about their future and about the future of their children. So many make the hard decision of leaving behind their home and the ones they love to go to an unknown county to realise their dream of a better future. Large parts of the world today are as devastated as Ireland was at the time of the famine. People fleeing these countries are like the millions who had to leave Ireland from the 1840s right up to the 1990s in order to seek a better life elsewhere

It’s also good to remember that there has never been an absolutely isolated human community, and that interaction between different cultures has always resulted in social progress and cultural development for everyone. Racist prejudices are born out of ignorance and nurtured by the rulers who benefit from divisions amongst working people everywhere.

Rulers, both of the political and business variety, oppose open borders for people for two main reasons. First, because they intend to keep the vast majority of the poorest people of the third world in the third world so they can always count on huge masses of unemployed who will be desperate enough to work for even the most pathetic of wages. This exerts a negative pressure on wages everywhere as bosses will threaten workers of one region that they will move production to wherever is cheapest at that moment.

Secondly, because they know that some people will always come to Europe to work, but that by keeping them illegal they can easily exploit them far more than is permissible under the law. An immigrant worker will always be wary of complaining of terrible working conditions. After all, the boss can blackmail them with the threat of deportation.

Our opposition to the immigration restrictions of Fortress Europe is based on the recognition that immigration is a phenomenon produced by Capitalist globalisation that makes life unbearable in many areas of the world. It is based on our recognition that every human being has the same right to happiness, to the opportunities and good things of life no matter what their skin colour or place of origin. It can’t be a fair world in which there are more travel rights for Capital, bank accounts and commodities than for people.

by Mark Grehan - Residents Against Racism Wed Mar 31, 2004 15:41 residentsagainstracism at eircom dot net 12a Brunswick place, Dublin 2 0877974622 or 0876662060

No Ireland does not have the highest rate. In fact no-one claims Ireland does apart from the immigration Control Platform and the now defunct NSRUS. Shows exactly where your politics are. Go read a book, broaden your mind.

by John Wed Mar 31, 2004 15:29

Au contraire, mon ami. I specifically said 'over the past 10 years' in relation to Ireland. Over the past decade Ireland has had the highest level of net immigration per capita in Europe. Go check the figures for yourself.

by Mark Grehan - Residents Against Racism Wed Mar 31, 2004 15:14 residentsagainstracism at eircom dot net 12a Brunswick place, Dublin 2 0877974622 or 0876662060

It is the State that causes racism, along with a compliant media. We are constantly told of the threat of immigration. The corporate media hype it up using terms such as invasion, flood, influx. The government benefits from a divided people blaming a portion of the population for economic woes instead of failed government policies. We are not in competition with immigrants, we should not view immigrants as our competitors as immigrants also demand goods/services thereby increasing production and as a result jobs. Our economy depends on immigrants and would collapse without them. The government should give asylum seekers the right to work if they genuinely worry about the so called economic burden.
Ireland does not have a good record of taking in asylum seekers/immigrants so whoever put in that thread should actually check his facts out before writing them

by Joe Wed Mar 31, 2004 14:54

1. Racism is a weird and irrational beast and is quite often expressed against people of a similar or the same skin colour. Long before we had immigration into Ireland we had deep rooted and vitrolic racism against Irish Travellers, see http://struggle.ws/rbr/travrbr2.html

2. Being anarchists the WSM won't be running in the local explanations so you'll have to look up some other trees in North Dublin for your explanation. See http://struggle.ws/election.html

3. To a limited extent I think the article is over simplistic. Their is also a broader anti-migrant/anti-worker thread to the deportations aimed at maintaining a low paid and vunerable labour force of insecure workers. This is going on all over Europe so its no surprise that the PD's want to introduce it here.

by Simon the pieman Wed Mar 31, 2004 14:46

Nice one John. I think thats the most intelligent reply Ive ever seen on threads such as these!

by John Wed Mar 31, 2004 14:41

It has nothing to do with racism! What colour do you think Romanians are? Capitalist countries, including Ireland over the past 10 years, have a magnificent record in allowing in immigrants from impoverished socialist countries. But, it needs to be controlled as resources dont allow unlimited immigration. All countries in the EU have controls, mostly stricter than Ireland. All very well for socialists
to talk. Socialist -run countries have never experienced mass immigation, as no one wants to live in them. How many applications for political asylum in Cuba or North Korea this year? Bloody few I can tell you. And stop trying to deceive yourselves that there are socialist votes to be found among East European immigrants. These people hate socialism and will vote en masse for FF at next election.

by WSM Wed Mar 31, 2004 14:21

On Wednesday the 11th of February, Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB) officers began a covert operation, arresting 65 failed asylum-seekers.

The 53 Romanians and 12 Moldovans were arrested in their homes in Dublin, Meath, Westmeath and Wicklow, before being brought to Mountjoy and Cloverhill prisons to await their deportations. At 7.30 the following morning they were flown on a chartered flight, which went first to Romania and then on to Moldova. 12 of the deportees were children; some of whom may have been Irish citizens, the GNIB refuses to release that information. We do know however that 34 of the Romanian deportees were men, 12 women and 7 children.

One of the Romanian deportees, Mr. Josif Fagoras (27), left behind his wife and three young children, all under seven. One of Mr. Fagoras’ children is an Irish citizen whose family is supposed to be protected under article 41 of the Irish Constitution. It seems that the Irish State is under no compulsion to obey its own laws. Instead the State has decided that ‘Irish Born Citizens’ are a different kind of citizen, these young Irish Citizens, who can’t stand up for themselves, are having their constitutional rights trampled on by the State, and by the Minister for Justice, Michael Mc-Dowell.

It is extremely difficult to understand why the State wants to deport so many immigrants. Even if we look at the immigrants as the State does, not as human beings but as economic units, the State’s immigration policy doesn’t make sense. Last year alone, Minister McDowell signed 2,428 deportation orders; for all of these deportation orders to be carried out it would have cost the Irish taxpayer in the region of 6.5 million euro. Clearly it is not the immigrants that are costing the economy but the State’s racist immigration policy.

Considering that the ruling class is terrified of a shrinking work force, the State’s immigration policy makes even less sense. The week after last month’s operation, Blair, Schroder and Chirac (Germany and France’s respective heads of State) called on Europeans to have more children. Kofi Annan, General Secretary of the UN, recently warned that ‘Without immigration, the population of the soon-to-be 25 Member States of the EU - 452 million in 2000 - would drop to under 400 million people by 2050...Were this to happen, jobs would go unfilled and services undelivered. Your economies would shrink and your societies could stagnate.’

There’s no reason for the State’s current draconian immigration policy except the age-old tactic off ‘Divide and Rule’. It suits the Irish elite to scapegoat refugees for all the problems that their mismanagement of society causes. The ruling class wants to set Irish workers against immigrant workers so as to prevent the workers from seeing that their interests are the same regardless of nationality. But libertarian socialists know; Immigrant and Irish workers: same bosses - same struggle.

by SM Wed Mar 31, 2004 13:12

What are you on about. People cmpign for a fair immigration policy and then want no immigration policy enforced at all. This is just stupidity ... please apart from the WSM tendency out their we all reliase there must be laws - what real Left wingers which to contest is the nature of these laws. Foolishness like allowing law breakers to do as they wish due to doing otherwise supposedly being racist will just give the far right a foothold.

by Angry Wed Mar 31, 2004 13:03

This story makes me so angry. The UK takes 1% of the world's refugees, and I imagine the figure for Ireland is far far less. The vast majority of asylum seekers and refugees can be found in the developing world.

It makes me angry that our government and its hypocritical Minister for Injustice can send people back to unknown fates. Funny, all the back-slapping and talk of reduced numbers of asylum applicants. As far as I am aware, conflict is still rife in scores of countries and 800 million people still go hungry every day.

Also angry that our immigration policy forces people who want a better life into the narrow constraints of "asylum".

No borders. I resent the fact that I can walk through Dublin airport without being asked for a passport, because I am white.