Arrivals and departures: we need real debate on both issues
After a number of predictable, unexceptional and not very original thoughts on the evil and pain of emigration — which no one disputes — we come to the crunch in the final three paragraphs:
“In recent days we have had controversy surrounding asylum seekers in Mosney. Just yesterday we had the Supreme Court’s dismissal of Nigerian woman Pamela Izevbekhai’s appeal against her deportation. She sought to have the decision by the Minister for Justice to deport her and her two daughters to Nigeria reversed.
“These are hugely emotive issues and the instinct of most Irish people is to be as helpful as they can be. Nevertheless, in the absence of a well-defined policy on immigration — like Canada, America and New Zealand, say — these issues will continue to turn something that should not be a problem into a problem.” And in conclusion:“We might take the soft option and hope that our economy makes us an unattractive destination even for the most desperate, but that would be unwise. Despite the fact that we face so many daunting issues we need a debate on immigration that considers all points of view — not just the voices that suggest our obligations are unavoidable and open-ended.”
What lessons do we draw from this?
1. There is some sort of equivalence, never spelled out clearly, between the situation of Irish emigrants and that of immigrants and asylum-seekers in this country
2. There is no racism in Ireland and we want to help because we’ve been there ourselves.
3. Something that should “not be a problem is a problem ”. What is this “something”? Answer: immigration
4. Most dishonest of all, the straw man of the ‘open door’ is then deployed, ie, people who “suggest our obligations are unavoidable and open-ended”. Who are these people? We aren’t told. I’ve been in this business for more than 20 years. I don’t know anyone who argues that our obligations are “unavoidable and open-ended” when it comes to immigration in general. As far as humanitarian rights are concerned — ie, the asylum system — Ireland, along with most other countries, has signed the 1951 Refugee Convention, which does entail a legal humanitarian duty. Even here Ireland does its level best not to comply fully with its obligations.
The deliberate conflation in your editorial of immigration in general with the asylum regime in particular is one of its most disgraceful aspects. But it is not the only one.
The most salient fact is that Ireland has one of the lowest rates of successful applications for asylum in the entire EU.
Secondly, while it would be simply wrong to claim this country is a hotbed of racism, there are widespread assumptions about who belongs (white, ethnically Irish, Catholic) — others are here on sufferance. And there has been a spate of racist attacks, including at least three murders, in the past couple of years.
Finally, we have an inhumane and unaccountable immigration service which treats people with extreme harshness. Some of the people in Mosney have been there for years and are still living in limbo — no decision, they cannot work, get an education or get on with their lives.
We do need a robust debate, but your kind of faux-naif “concern” is just the kind of thing we don’t need. We need a real debate about immigration and a real, separate debate about emigration.
Government politicians have been almost totally silent about the fact that their policies have led directly to the return of large-scale emigration on a scale not seen since the 1980s. With no stimulus package, no credit in the market place and no ideas from our leaders, that can only continue.
Piaras MacÉinrí
Department of Geography
UCC
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
