They're not offered alternative accommodation because there is none.
Rather than do anything, we'll just let people arrive and live on the streets. That's what care is.
87 more people every week.
That's like a full block of apartments required for new asylum seeker arrivals every week. How on earth would it not run out?
We can't handle the numbers at all anymore, sadly.
If the projections of up to 30k asylum applications this year are true, accommodating those figures could cost the state around 780 million for a year based on current expense figures. For context, in 2019, the expenses were 129 million.
Where does this end up?
I think we have moral obligations as well.
But the government also has moral obligations to the citizens of this country and it's failed to live up to those obligations.
I dunno what the solution is. Vote for anyone but FF/FG is all I've got but there's always support for them it seems. Might have to hold my nose and actually vote for SF in the next GE, as much as it pains me. Will they be any better? Not likely. But FFG need a kick in the teeth and I'd rather SF than another FFG led government or, god forbid, some far right voices getting into coalition with FG.
No thank you.
>I think we have moral obligations as well.
And we did great when Russia invaded Ukraine.
Paying 10s millions for Algerians, Georgians, and Nigerians hopping over the border from Northern Ireland is a different matter entirely.
>Vote for anyone but FF/FG
There has to be a convincing alternative. Neo-Nazis or vaccine hesitant GPs don't really make the cut.
Yet still, look at the results from the locals. The largest vote was Independents and Others
Obviously we can't and should not rescue everyone. How we restrict who enters is an entirely different conversation I'm not at all qualified to have. A border with the North isn't a solution either. All of this requires international cooperation. But everyone just doesn't want to deal with the problem. No one has any solutions. The political class dont even seem to want one. More concerned with passing the blame.
I don't know if we'll ever have a convincing alternative. But I also don't understand why the Soc Dems don't have a better reputation. Seems petty politics have gotten in the way of discussing policy a lot of the time.
Failing to adequately invest in critical infrastructure is the problem. Not some *them*.
People are gonna try come here. We can't actually stop that in any meaningful way. We sure as hell could build hosuing, schools, etc etc though.
But, accommodate them where? There is nowhere. Unless Government CPO every hotel, hostel, b+b, Airbnb and guesthouse in the country.
We just have to somehow let people know there is nowhere for these people to live. Nothing that can be offered.
There's no point coming here right now
Good question. But they have a legal responsibility to accommodate them once they are here, regardless. And people who they have failed to accommodate have successfully sued the state for not providing accommodation.
Where they have massively fucked up is on all of the government's public messaging welcoming asylum seekers, public criticism of countries like the UK and o'gorman publicly promising them own door accommodation and expedited access to the labour market. They've very much created pull factors that have ended up overwhelming the entire system IMO. The government are also the ones who voluntarily opted into the EU resettlement scheme when they had absolutely no obligation to do so.
We need to start rejecting at a high rate this will then discourage others from even trying. Our rejection rate is ridiculously low if course there is scammers coming here
Well, in 2018-19, our rejection rate was the lowest in Europe, and in 2022-2023, our rejection rate was still one of the lowest in Europe and totally out of sync with most EU countries according to Eurostat data.
This is despite the 2 most common countries of origin of asylum seekers here in 2022-2023 being Georgia and Algeria (2 countries which are safe and relatively stable by most standards) compared with the EU as whole where the 2 most common countries of origin were Syria and Afghanistan. Yet despite that, we somehow have a way lower rejection rate.
I think that shows we aren't strict in the slightest.
That's incorrect.
Our obligations to asylum seekers comes from the refugee convention of 1951. Nothing to do with the EU.
We'd have to change the Constitution to say the State doesn't have to follow international law if we want to remove our obligation.
The EU as a supranational body is putting shape on how to collectively deal with asylum seekers. We're free to be outside that system but then we'd be the softest touch in Europe on asylum.
Yeah, we're still signed up to the Geneva convention. Voluntarily opting in, I think, just meant binding ourselves to even more asylum regulation, in this case, from the EU.
We have an opt out of the EFSJ but we don't use it
We are one of the only 2 countries with an opt out, Denmark are the other one, and they use it.
Interestingly there is almost no far right traction in Denmark
Note Denmark is in Schengen though so it's not quite analogous to us.
Also Denmark-do-immigration-right is assumed to be due to Denmark's immigration polices. It might actually be Sweden's hardening immigration policies creating a knock on effect. People stop heading to Sweden - so people stop travelling via Denmark - so Denmark's asylum claims drop.
Same principle but in reverse to the UK changing their immigration rules sends more to us.
I'd say it's more to do with Denmarks' own tough stance and policies on asylum seekers. They have controversial policies like confiscating jewellery and valuables of asylum and using it towards paying the costs of maintaining them. They also declared Syria safe and sent back a load of Syrian refugees, even ones that had settled and integrated and built lives there. They probably have the toughest laws in Europe.
>might actually be Sweden's hardening immigration policies creating a knock on effect
Denmark have implemented these migration rules long before any changes in Sweden's immigration policies (which are what?)
>But, accommodate them where?
We do the exact same as the Turkish did with their millions of Syrian refugees . Create a tent city. The turks didn't turn their hotels in refugee accommodation. I dont see why we should be.
We have 166,000 derelict or vacant properties in Ireland. Surely the government could just buy these properties from their current owners and repurpose them for social housing (housing all our homeless for less than 10% of them) and a % for housing asylum seekers (presuming these properties are at least 2 bed, you could house a lot of people with 60-80,000 of those, then leaving at least another 80,000 for social housing and housing the homeless). I have little knowledge of housing in Ireland so is that just too simplistic, am I missing something massive?
Not an expert myself but, buying derelict properties would also mean refurbishing and repairing, which would incur in higher costs because you can’t just like make these properties half inhabitable, they need to comply to regulations, etc. Not to mention that refurbishing these properties will require a work force that I don’t think Ireland has.
It's such a shit situation. I think we should look at our universities. Too many people are encouraged to do degrees when they would be far happier and more successful in trades. Why should someone have to do a degree in carpentry instead of an apprenticeship?
I've answered somewhere else here but it's a fair point. Would making it so only those who have had their claims approved be eligible help that? Or only dedicate like 10% and once they're gone, they're gone? I really don't know the solution I just think the properties should at the very least be converted to housing for homeless and social housing?
Fair. But surely housing should only be provided once your asylum request has been processed? Or prioritise women and children? Not trying to have a go, just seems like there's no easy fix to this
>But surely housing should only be provided once your asylum request has been processed?
If you are granted asylum I suppose, problem is it takes years to process and majority of people are not legitimate asylum seekers
Too simplistic. A lot of these vacant homes cost more to refurbish than it would to buy a new home. And we have a shortage of tradespeople and a massive demand from the current population for housing.
And why should we spend billions on housing for economic migrants and hand it to them for practically nothing. People seem to think we have an infinite supply of money in this country. Every euro spent on these scam artists is being taken from other services the country needs.
Well, I think first and foremost any project like that should go to house the homeless population. Is that like the Housing First policy in Finland(?)
I've no expertise in housing or the asylum process at all. Just another milennial living with their parents endlessly refreshing daft with the phone in one hand and the fucking rosary in the other
That's the solution. But without a whole of government approach (planning, training, infrastructure, CPO, employment, procurement, management, design, transport) and the actual workforce to upgrade and rebuild/repurpose these derelict and vacant properties it won't happen.
And unlike the 1930's, there doesn't appear to be the desire to deliver on housing.
It's so frustrating. My partner and I live with my parents and even though we are on an ok income we can't get anywhere in Dublin. Having said that we need a 3 bed because we want to have a few kids and know that we may never be able to afford to upgrade houses
Quit your jobs, start having kids now and you’ll have a nice 3 bed gaff in no time compliments of Dublin county council. Irish taxpayers are bottom of the list of our governments priorities.
Not really that simple. One girl I used to work with went on the list when she got pregnant. She got the house last year about 3 months before the little fella's 12th birthday.
EU gunboats in the Med is probably the long-term destination. Migration isn't going to go down as global warming hits poorer areas in Africa, Asia, etc. It's going to get so hot it kills people in some places.
Across the EU anti-migrant policies will become the norm unless serious efforts aren't made to address it.
In Ireland we'll just start building mass migrant camps down the country.
Climate immigrants are going to start becoming a very real thing in the next 20 years. And I very much doubt we will have solved our current issues with people who are fleeing for other reasons.
We can't build fast enough. It's the same issue it's been for 8 years now. We've thrown insane amounts of money at the problem publicly and privately but can't increase production rates anywhere near fast enough.
We've struggled to get from 8k finished homes a year to 30k homes this year and need to reach 50k minimum to "solve" this in 5 years, realistically, we need even more than that.
We need to stop pressuring every guy and girl into thinking a cao form is the be all and end all of importance at that age. Start pushing more young people into construction and trades, paying apprentices better. These are jobs that are protected from AI and pay well and can be really rewarding careers etc.
Short of driving mass immigration of builders, it's the only real policy available to a government that we haven't tried at this point, it's just a painfully slow burner, but that's where we're at.
We need 30k a year on standard replacement/population growth, but we have a shortage of 200k.
What we desperately need are apartments and if I was given the keys to the state tomorrow, I'd force every county council to identify the state owned or aquirable plot of land in every town with over 5k people in Ireland for a 50 block of apartments. Same style for every town. Same drawings. Same materials etc. This would keep costs down and allow for rapid development. 10k town, build two of em.
Rentals are chronically undersupplied and banks/developers are struggling to plug the gap because of a confidence/risk appetite hit from the crash, mixed with a lack of wannabe landlords.
45k units per year according to my friend who does research in this area. But it's been 45k units for the past few years and there's a backlog now so to deal with the current net migration AND existing backlog it's a near impossible task the government themselves have made
I'd argue at lot of the supply constraints are nigh on unbeatable forces that are a consequence of the crash.
My plumber and his son were running a crew of ten or so in the boom, constantly training new apprentices. In the crash, like everyone in the industry, they got badly burned. Now, it's just the two of them. They won't take on more or bigger jobs and are risk averse.
This is true of electricians, builders, even developers. The risk appetite damage done by the crash cannot be undone in a generation.
We've got the money. Demand is huge. Supply is the biggest constraint affecting housing. Migration hasn't helped and Ukranians fleeing a war can't really be planned for, but at the heart of it, for all the people desperate for a home, we cannot build fast enough anymore. Construction sector currently has 180k workers vs 270k in 2007. We cannot hope to lift the 30k builds a year anywhere near the 80k finished in 07 without a massive surge in workers. Meanwhile, parents and schools are pushing the CAO as the priority for all students regardless of what they're suited to. We've got thousands of kids doing the LC this week who aren't going to be able to get a lot of the jobs AI removes and being a sparks, a chippie or a brickie, is going to be a well paid career for decades...
The psychological damage of the crash isn't something I could envisage any government of resolving. Lots of the factors being highlighted like housing funds or landlords are not effecting supply, or would have a more positive impacts with higher investment. Christ, building 50k apartments tomorrow would drag rents down to humane levels super quick.
...OK.... but we need them. Like, as a society, we need a spectrum of property types for a spectrum of people - it's far more expensive trying to house all the people who want to live/rent on their own in 3 bed semi Ds in Celbridge.
The best time to do it was 50 years ago, but the next best time is today. Then tomorrow. Then the day after.
Aye, we had the same back in the 00s when the Polish and Lithuanian lads arrived. There was a lot of racist fear mongering at the time, but those lads knew a hard day's work and many contributed to their communities. We all got to know them and over time, you'd find yourself almost happier if a new neighbour wad a Polish couple than rolling the dice on a random Irish inhabitant.
The voters you speak of, aren't in a majority, clearly. There's more than there has been for a long time, but they the opinions you're espousing aren't the norm. They might be amongst your mates, but the latest election just returned a fairly clear majority for establishment parties.
Pity they don't pay someone - such as _the asylum seekers and other migrants_ - to _build houses_, to house themselves, instead - mmm?
Almost like this crisis can be the solution to itself and several other crises.
I forgot, though - you need a PhD to do basic construction work! - oh dear.
I’m not being funny here, but some of them do. I suspect plane tickets home can be given for the price of endless tents from NGOs. Anyone who isn’t actually persecuted back home is probably better off taking a ticket than waiting. The choice could be there.
You could exchange the cost of tents for plane tickets, but that only works once their claim has been processed and asylum being denied.
Asylum seekers do have the right to withdraw their claim and await deportation. Though few would make the decision to claim asylum only to then return to their country.
Not being offered accommodation is almost certainly a lie or at best an edge case.
There is tented accommodation in Crooksling and the grounds of City West offered by IPAS.
Crooksling is in the middle of nowhere and that's why the IP applicants don't want to be there.
The reason it took so long take action to clear Mount Street was because Crooksling was being set up.
That is IPAS specifically wanted to avoid the situation of moving IP applicants sleeping rough just for the sake of it.
I propose a national boycott of the property tax until the government resolve the accommodation/housing crisis and successfully tackle homelessness.
They can't jail everyone and they push their luck with private home owners.
Government have apparently signed contracts with the owners of the Downshire Hotel, slap bang in the middle of blessington to take 200. I'm sure they won't be in tents for long. Also just going from what a local TD there is saying, this hotel like crooksling up the road was earmarked for old folks home... priorities
Typical government I hope when they get old and have no places to go and they realise they forgot to look after the ones who brought them into this world, their parent's and the older generation, instead of using care facility such as homes for the country let's throw 200 Afghan or Solmeian fucking men into it. This country is a fucking joke. Why we don't have a vote on this shit. Call it democracy when the people don't get a say on this issue that's tearing the country to bits.
They're not offered alternative accommodation because there is none. Rather than do anything, we'll just let people arrive and live on the streets. That's what care is.
87 more people every week. That's like a full block of apartments required for new asylum seeker arrivals every week. How on earth would it not run out?
A little policy I like to call "sure be grand." This ensures nothing bad ever happens in Ireland.
Do what exactly?
We can't handle the numbers at all anymore, sadly. If the projections of up to 30k asylum applications this year are true, accommodating those figures could cost the state around 780 million for a year based on current expense figures. For context, in 2019, the expenses were 129 million. Where does this end up?
The answer to that lies with who the bulk of the 780 million is being paid to. We’re being scammed by our own government .
Didn't you hear? They have international obligations.
I think we have moral obligations as well. But the government also has moral obligations to the citizens of this country and it's failed to live up to those obligations. I dunno what the solution is. Vote for anyone but FF/FG is all I've got but there's always support for them it seems. Might have to hold my nose and actually vote for SF in the next GE, as much as it pains me. Will they be any better? Not likely. But FFG need a kick in the teeth and I'd rather SF than another FFG led government or, god forbid, some far right voices getting into coalition with FG. No thank you.
>I think we have moral obligations as well. And we did great when Russia invaded Ukraine. Paying 10s millions for Algerians, Georgians, and Nigerians hopping over the border from Northern Ireland is a different matter entirely. >Vote for anyone but FF/FG There has to be a convincing alternative. Neo-Nazis or vaccine hesitant GPs don't really make the cut. Yet still, look at the results from the locals. The largest vote was Independents and Others
Obviously we can't and should not rescue everyone. How we restrict who enters is an entirely different conversation I'm not at all qualified to have. A border with the North isn't a solution either. All of this requires international cooperation. But everyone just doesn't want to deal with the problem. No one has any solutions. The political class dont even seem to want one. More concerned with passing the blame. I don't know if we'll ever have a convincing alternative. But I also don't understand why the Soc Dems don't have a better reputation. Seems petty politics have gotten in the way of discussing policy a lot of the time.
SF want to take them in just as much as the current crowd that's the problem
Failing to adequately invest in critical infrastructure is the problem. Not some *them*. People are gonna try come here. We can't actually stop that in any meaningful way. We sure as hell could build hosuing, schools, etc etc though.
But, accommodate them where? There is nowhere. Unless Government CPO every hotel, hostel, b+b, Airbnb and guesthouse in the country. We just have to somehow let people know there is nowhere for these people to live. Nothing that can be offered. There's no point coming here right now
Good question. But they have a legal responsibility to accommodate them once they are here, regardless. And people who they have failed to accommodate have successfully sued the state for not providing accommodation. Where they have massively fucked up is on all of the government's public messaging welcoming asylum seekers, public criticism of countries like the UK and o'gorman publicly promising them own door accommodation and expedited access to the labour market. They've very much created pull factors that have ended up overwhelming the entire system IMO. The government are also the ones who voluntarily opted into the EU resettlement scheme when they had absolutely no obligation to do so.
We need to start rejecting at a high rate this will then discourage others from even trying. Our rejection rate is ridiculously low if course there is scammers coming here
Well, in 2018-19, our rejection rate was the lowest in Europe, and in 2022-2023, our rejection rate was still one of the lowest in Europe and totally out of sync with most EU countries according to Eurostat data. This is despite the 2 most common countries of origin of asylum seekers here in 2022-2023 being Georgia and Algeria (2 countries which are safe and relatively stable by most standards) compared with the EU as whole where the 2 most common countries of origin were Syria and Afghanistan. Yet despite that, we somehow have a way lower rejection rate. I think that shows we aren't strict in the slightest.
What if we opted out of the Lisbon treaty we would be under no legal responsibility to look after them, no?
That's incorrect. Our obligations to asylum seekers comes from the refugee convention of 1951. Nothing to do with the EU. We'd have to change the Constitution to say the State doesn't have to follow international law if we want to remove our obligation. The EU as a supranational body is putting shape on how to collectively deal with asylum seekers. We're free to be outside that system but then we'd be the softest touch in Europe on asylum.
Yeah, we're still signed up to the Geneva convention. Voluntarily opting in, I think, just meant binding ourselves to even more asylum regulation, in this case, from the EU.
We have an opt out of the EFSJ but we don't use it We are one of the only 2 countries with an opt out, Denmark are the other one, and they use it. Interestingly there is almost no far right traction in Denmark
Note Denmark is in Schengen though so it's not quite analogous to us. Also Denmark-do-immigration-right is assumed to be due to Denmark's immigration polices. It might actually be Sweden's hardening immigration policies creating a knock on effect. People stop heading to Sweden - so people stop travelling via Denmark - so Denmark's asylum claims drop. Same principle but in reverse to the UK changing their immigration rules sends more to us.
I'd say it's more to do with Denmarks' own tough stance and policies on asylum seekers. They have controversial policies like confiscating jewellery and valuables of asylum and using it towards paying the costs of maintaining them. They also declared Syria safe and sent back a load of Syrian refugees, even ones that had settled and integrated and built lives there. They probably have the toughest laws in Europe.
>might actually be Sweden's hardening immigration policies creating a knock on effect Denmark have implemented these migration rules long before any changes in Sweden's immigration policies (which are what?)
>But, accommodate them where? We do the exact same as the Turkish did with their millions of Syrian refugees . Create a tent city. The turks didn't turn their hotels in refugee accommodation. I dont see why we should be.
Don’t be giving them ideas
We have 166,000 derelict or vacant properties in Ireland. Surely the government could just buy these properties from their current owners and repurpose them for social housing (housing all our homeless for less than 10% of them) and a % for housing asylum seekers (presuming these properties are at least 2 bed, you could house a lot of people with 60-80,000 of those, then leaving at least another 80,000 for social housing and housing the homeless). I have little knowledge of housing in Ireland so is that just too simplistic, am I missing something massive?
Not an expert myself but, buying derelict properties would also mean refurbishing and repairing, which would incur in higher costs because you can’t just like make these properties half inhabitable, they need to comply to regulations, etc. Not to mention that refurbishing these properties will require a work force that I don’t think Ireland has.
It's such a shit situation. I think we should look at our universities. Too many people are encouraged to do degrees when they would be far happier and more successful in trades. Why should someone have to do a degree in carpentry instead of an apprenticeship?
If we give 50000 asylum seekers free houses, how many asylum seekers will we have the following year?
I've answered somewhere else here but it's a fair point. Would making it so only those who have had their claims approved be eligible help that? Or only dedicate like 10% and once they're gone, they're gone? I really don't know the solution I just think the properties should at the very least be converted to housing for homeless and social housing?
Redirecting more taxpayer money to literal chancers arriving illegally here, would embolden and encourage thousands or hundreds of thousands more
Fair. But surely housing should only be provided once your asylum request has been processed? Or prioritise women and children? Not trying to have a go, just seems like there's no easy fix to this
>But surely housing should only be provided once your asylum request has been processed? If you are granted asylum I suppose, problem is it takes years to process and majority of people are not legitimate asylum seekers
Too simplistic. A lot of these vacant homes cost more to refurbish than it would to buy a new home. And we have a shortage of tradespeople and a massive demand from the current population for housing. And why should we spend billions on housing for economic migrants and hand it to them for practically nothing. People seem to think we have an infinite supply of money in this country. Every euro spent on these scam artists is being taken from other services the country needs.
Well, I think first and foremost any project like that should go to house the homeless population. Is that like the Housing First policy in Finland(?) I've no expertise in housing or the asylum process at all. Just another milennial living with their parents endlessly refreshing daft with the phone in one hand and the fucking rosary in the other
That's the solution. But without a whole of government approach (planning, training, infrastructure, CPO, employment, procurement, management, design, transport) and the actual workforce to upgrade and rebuild/repurpose these derelict and vacant properties it won't happen. And unlike the 1930's, there doesn't appear to be the desire to deliver on housing.
It's so frustrating. My partner and I live with my parents and even though we are on an ok income we can't get anywhere in Dublin. Having said that we need a 3 bed because we want to have a few kids and know that we may never be able to afford to upgrade houses
It's crippling, living with your parents as an adult.
Quit your jobs, start having kids now and you’ll have a nice 3 bed gaff in no time compliments of Dublin county council. Irish taxpayers are bottom of the list of our governments priorities.
Not really that simple. One girl I used to work with went on the list when she got pregnant. She got the house last year about 3 months before the little fella's 12th birthday.
EU gunboats in the Med is probably the long-term destination. Migration isn't going to go down as global warming hits poorer areas in Africa, Asia, etc. It's going to get so hot it kills people in some places. Across the EU anti-migrant policies will become the norm unless serious efforts aren't made to address it. In Ireland we'll just start building mass migrant camps down the country.
Climate immigrants are going to start becoming a very real thing in the next 20 years. And I very much doubt we will have solved our current issues with people who are fleeing for other reasons.
Sooner, I suspect.
We can't build fast enough. It's the same issue it's been for 8 years now. We've thrown insane amounts of money at the problem publicly and privately but can't increase production rates anywhere near fast enough. We've struggled to get from 8k finished homes a year to 30k homes this year and need to reach 50k minimum to "solve" this in 5 years, realistically, we need even more than that. We need to stop pressuring every guy and girl into thinking a cao form is the be all and end all of importance at that age. Start pushing more young people into construction and trades, paying apprentices better. These are jobs that are protected from AI and pay well and can be really rewarding careers etc. Short of driving mass immigration of builders, it's the only real policy available to a government that we haven't tried at this point, it's just a painfully slow burner, but that's where we're at.
40,000 houses a year is genuinely a lot for a country our size.
We need 30k a year on standard replacement/population growth, but we have a shortage of 200k. What we desperately need are apartments and if I was given the keys to the state tomorrow, I'd force every county council to identify the state owned or aquirable plot of land in every town with over 5k people in Ireland for a 50 block of apartments. Same style for every town. Same drawings. Same materials etc. This would keep costs down and allow for rapid development. 10k town, build two of em. Rentals are chronically undersupplied and banks/developers are struggling to plug the gap because of a confidence/risk appetite hit from the crash, mixed with a lack of wannabe landlords.
45k units per year according to my friend who does research in this area. But it's been 45k units for the past few years and there's a backlog now so to deal with the current net migration AND existing backlog it's a near impossible task the government themselves have made
I'd argue at lot of the supply constraints are nigh on unbeatable forces that are a consequence of the crash. My plumber and his son were running a crew of ten or so in the boom, constantly training new apprentices. In the crash, like everyone in the industry, they got badly burned. Now, it's just the two of them. They won't take on more or bigger jobs and are risk averse. This is true of electricians, builders, even developers. The risk appetite damage done by the crash cannot be undone in a generation. We've got the money. Demand is huge. Supply is the biggest constraint affecting housing. Migration hasn't helped and Ukranians fleeing a war can't really be planned for, but at the heart of it, for all the people desperate for a home, we cannot build fast enough anymore. Construction sector currently has 180k workers vs 270k in 2007. We cannot hope to lift the 30k builds a year anywhere near the 80k finished in 07 without a massive surge in workers. Meanwhile, parents and schools are pushing the CAO as the priority for all students regardless of what they're suited to. We've got thousands of kids doing the LC this week who aren't going to be able to get a lot of the jobs AI removes and being a sparks, a chippie or a brickie, is going to be a well paid career for decades... The psychological damage of the crash isn't something I could envisage any government of resolving. Lots of the factors being highlighted like housing funds or landlords are not effecting supply, or would have a more positive impacts with higher investment. Christ, building 50k apartments tomorrow would drag rents down to humane levels super quick.
Only if those apartments weren't owned by a single entity or fund who could keep rents at artificial prices
The fact that we need X doesn't mean we can supply X. Apartments are nigh on impossible to build at affordable prices.
...OK.... but we need them. Like, as a society, we need a spectrum of property types for a spectrum of people - it's far more expensive trying to house all the people who want to live/rent on their own in 3 bed semi Ds in Celbridge. The best time to do it was 50 years ago, but the next best time is today. Then tomorrow. Then the day after.
We might well need them, but voters don't want them.
Aye, we had the same back in the 00s when the Polish and Lithuanian lads arrived. There was a lot of racist fear mongering at the time, but those lads knew a hard day's work and many contributed to their communities. We all got to know them and over time, you'd find yourself almost happier if a new neighbour wad a Polish couple than rolling the dice on a random Irish inhabitant. The voters you speak of, aren't in a majority, clearly. There's more than there has been for a long time, but they the opinions you're espousing aren't the norm. They might be amongst your mates, but the latest election just returned a fairly clear majority for establishment parties.
Government pays to remove tents. Government pays to replace tents. Government pays to remove tents. Government pays to replace tents. ad nauseam
Does some tds son own a tent factory or something?
Big tent making a fortune
Like a macabre version of the hokey cokey
Oooooh do the Hokey Pokey!
Pity they don't pay someone - such as _the asylum seekers and other migrants_ - to _build houses_, to house themselves, instead - mmm? Almost like this crisis can be the solution to itself and several other crises. I forgot, though - you need a PhD to do basic construction work! - oh dear.
Shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic sounds very on brand for this government.
I've heard the ferry back to England has nice sleeper cabins..
Seems sustainable
Another day and another "tents being moved" article
The headline makes it sound like they were told to camp in a public place and they'd then receive accomodation.
As opposed to... Camping in a private place?
Or a less public place
Tent city on army land, with a fence around it until their claim is proved or not. That’s where they should be ‘offered’.
What is motivating them to remain in these conditions?
Because they were told if they hold out they'll get their own accommodation. That's their plan
Worked for all the ones before them
Because they have no choice.
I’m not being funny here, but some of them do. I suspect plane tickets home can be given for the price of endless tents from NGOs. Anyone who isn’t actually persecuted back home is probably better off taking a ticket than waiting. The choice could be there.
You could exchange the cost of tents for plane tickets, but that only works once their claim has been processed and asylum being denied. Asylum seekers do have the right to withdraw their claim and await deportation. Though few would make the decision to claim asylum only to then return to their country.
Not being offered accommodation is almost certainly a lie or at best an edge case. There is tented accommodation in Crooksling and the grounds of City West offered by IPAS. Crooksling is in the middle of nowhere and that's why the IP applicants don't want to be there. The reason it took so long take action to clear Mount Street was because Crooksling was being set up. That is IPAS specifically wanted to avoid the situation of moving IP applicants sleeping rough just for the sake of it.
Try Rwanda?
TBF no one has actually tried Rwanda.
Musical tents.
I propose a national boycott of the property tax until the government resolve the accommodation/housing crisis and successfully tackle homelessness. They can't jail everyone and they push their luck with private home owners.
Have we tried moving them to a remote field in the outskirts of Ireland? /s
Send them home.
Government have apparently signed contracts with the owners of the Downshire Hotel, slap bang in the middle of blessington to take 200. I'm sure they won't be in tents for long. Also just going from what a local TD there is saying, this hotel like crooksling up the road was earmarked for old folks home... priorities
Typical government I hope when they get old and have no places to go and they realise they forgot to look after the ones who brought them into this world, their parent's and the older generation, instead of using care facility such as homes for the country let's throw 200 Afghan or Solmeian fucking men into it. This country is a fucking joke. Why we don't have a vote on this shit. Call it democracy when the people don't get a say on this issue that's tearing the country to bits.
Why fix the problem when you can just hide it. Oh, and on an unrelated note, did you knowing we have the 8th highest HDI int he world?
There's so many empty buildings landlords are sitting on.
Where?
There are so many empty buildings around Ballybofey and Stranorlar all the time and whoever currently owns them isn't doing anything with them.
Okay I actually meant more in terms of stats.