Politicians are also guilty of misleading us on immigration
WE hear a lot of discussions in recent times from politicians in relation to disinformation and misinformation, particularly in relation to the issue of immigration. While I agree to a certain extent with this assertion, there is a level of disinformation and misinformation being reported in the media with regards to our inability to curtail the number of applicants presenting on our shores claiming asylum.
Some politicians have been reported as saying that we have to process all these applicants, which is not entirely correct.
I appreciate that we have obligations under EU and international law to provide refuge to people, however Ireland does have an opt-out clause in the Lisbon Treaty of 2008 under the freedom, security and justice section regarding the area of asylum.
Denmark is the only other European country that has this optout clause, and has severely tightened it’s immigration policy in recent years.
The EU Dublin Convention of 1990 states that an asylum seeker has to claim asylum in the first EU country that they enter, which in the vast majority of cases is not Ireland, due to a lack of direct flights from countries outside the EU into Ireland.
If the applicant does not adhere to this law, the Irish state is in theory obliged to make arrangements for transportation back to the original EU country of entry.
I’m not advocating that we should not accept some refugees and international protection applicants, however for some politicians to state that we are unable to curb the flow of applicants into Ireland is in itself engaging in disinformation.
EAMONN O’HARA, Manorcunningham, Co. Donegal.
…THE government has failed badly in not explaining to the people the details of agreements entered into in relation to immigration.
Is it any wonder some people are so concerned?
For example we do not know if there will be any limit on the numbers we can take. If there is not, it may be time to initiate negotiations to review any agreements.
JOHN MELIA, via email.
Jury’s out
IT’S with amazement that I read in a very small article on page 7 of The Irish Daily Mail that the US Embassy is to purchase the old Jury’s Hotel in Ballsbridge, Dublin for its new base and demolish the existing hotel on the four-acre site.
At a time when we are crying out for accommodation for our citizens, refugees, asylum seekers, etc. that we are demolishing a hotel on an ideal site. With lots of space to expand and facilities readily available nearby. It is obvious that the people of Ballinrobe or other sites around the country have not got the same influence as those in Ballsbridge.
DENIS DENNEHY, Dublin.
Nursing home reboot
REGARDING ‘Nursing home care needs ‘reboot’,” (Mail). I don’t know the details of Ireland’s corporate long-term care-home experience, but in Canada a most morbid example of the consequences of such private-sector neglect was the CHSLD Résidence Herron long-term care home in Quebec, where 47 residents perished and many others needlessly greatly suffered during the initial months of the Covid-19 pandemic.
The neglect had become so extreme that the Canadian Armed Forces got involved.
Maximising profits by risking the health or lives of product consumers will likely always be a significant part of the nature of the big business beast. Therefore, families still have reason to worry over their loved ones being left vulnerable by measures taken by some long-term care-home businesses to maximise profits.
Unfortunately, so much of the Western world, though especially Canada [and even the US], is governed within what I see as a virtual corp-ocracy.
Yet, none of the highly corporatised mainstream news media, very much including the neo-liberal New York Times and Washington Post, dare describe it as such, thus so very little of society realises it.
With Canada’s corp-ocracy, it’s enabling the biggest of businesses get unaccountably even bigger, defying the very spirit of government rules established to ensure healthy competition by limiting mass consolidation.
As it is, corporate lobbyists actually write Bills for our (Canada’s) governing representatives to vote for and have implemented, supposedly to save the elected officials their own time.
I believe the practice has become so systematic here that those who are aware of it (eg mainstream news media political writers) don’t bother covering it.
Meanwhile, powerful business interests can, and sometimes do, debilitate our high-level elected officials through implicit or explicit threats to transfer or eliminate jobs and capital investment, thus economic stability, if corporate ‘requests’ aren’t accommodated.
It’s a political crippling that’s worsened by a blaring news media that’s permitted to be naturally critical of incumbent governments, especially in regards to job and capital transfers and economic weakening.
FRANK STERLE JR, BC, Canada.