Tuesday, September 12, 2006
PDs prospects under McDowell…
Good analysis (subs needed) from one of the Republic’s leading public psephologist, Noel Whelan, who notes that few, if any, of the party’s seats are safe and one or two look almost certain to go. The primary danger lies in the expected resurgence of Fine Gael after an extremely low point in 2002. Perhaps that’s why its voters were the first target in McDowell’s first press statement as leader.
My own suspicion is that a noteably successful outcome from Harney’s time in health could be the key to finding a bounce in the party’s fortunes, and deflect criticism that the party is little other than a small group of Thatcherite fundamentalists. For all that they are almost universally reviled on the left, the PDs have the distinction of being a government party still more focused on policy issues, than of personality. Visible improvements in a health infrastructure that, reputedly has been a ministerial poisoned chalice for all of he FF predecessors, could act as a sober foil to McDowell’s flambuoyant leadership style
A style which most would accept will certainly get the party noticed again, in a way that the industrious and modest Harney couldn’t.
Mick Fealty @ 08:22 AM
You’re right I’ll be drowned out by the sound of cranes and rampant profiteering. But not because I’m wrong - I’m right and this country will see it within 5 years.
I’ll be drowned out because the Irish are foolish, short-termist, unimaginative, badly led and greedy. The same characteristics that made them unable to build up a decent economy for three-quarters of a century prior to the yanks coming in.They suffer from low expectations too, as evidenced by the phrase commonly used in the face of ambition in this country, a phrase which I grew up hearing - “it doesn’t put bread and butter on the table”.
They are also, culturally speaking, depressed.
Posted by on Sep 13, 2006 @ 04:32 PM‘They are also, culturally speaking, depressed. ‘
Sez who? Irish music -writing etc has never been stronger for those who are interested in it .
Profiteering ? Lesson number one in business -If you can’t sell it there’s no point in making it. And if are selling it you better sell it at a profit . Elementary capitalism Mr Marx !‘The same characteristics that made them unable to build up a decent economy for three-quarters of a century’
So you denigrate an entire people on the basis of the fact that having been submerged economically and politically for several centuries they have the audacity to take more than 6 months to pull themselves up by their bootstraps . I suppose if they were still tit dependent on HMG like the hard headed savvy folks in the North then they too could enjoy a GDP per capita income of 28,000 Dollars a year instead of 52,000 and be still reliant on a Colonial Secretary to tell them when and how to blow their nose !
Obviously numbers are not your forte .
FYI the period 1958 through 1977 saw an average economic growth rate of 4% which was respectable given the base . Your three quarters of a century is more than a little exaggerated .
But hey if you want to insult the Irish go right ahead . They’ve heard it before and they’ll hear it again . But the 400,000 new immigrants are’nt listening to you and at the end of the day those people are making a great contribution to Ireland’s future.Posted by on Sep 13, 2006 @ 09:10 PM“Profiteering ? Lesson number one in business -If you can’t sell it there’s no point in making it. And if are selling it you better sell it at a profit . Elementary capitalism Mr Marx !”
Of course, there is a distinction between profiteering and making a profit, and I think you’ll find that most democracies have some fairly extreme laws for companies that make supernormal profits through exploitation or cartels.
Posted by on Sep 13, 2006 @ 09:24 PMBrilliant deduction Kensei -Who’d a thought it :) ?
Full marks for the obvious . Harry may be one of those who preferred jam on his bread and butter -in the long term of course .
Capital accumulation be it financial or human is not easy . It takes at least 15 years to become an overnight success. Anyone who understands the power of compound interest and delayed gratification or who runs a business should know that . Yes there a re a few exceptions . A country’s economic strength is ultimately based on the number of ‘entrepreneurs’ it generates from within . Like everything else you have to build an economy in which it makes economic sense to become an entrepreneur . If you drive those people away through extremist ‘socialist’ politics then society will eventually be the poorer for it !
Posted by on Sep 13, 2006 @ 10:25 PM“Brilliant deduction Kensei -Who’d a thought it :) ?
Full marks for the obvious . Harry may be one of those who preferred jam on his bread and butter -in the long term of course .”
It was a perfectly valid point in the context of you banging on about the profit motive.
“Capital accumulation be it financial or human is not easy . It takes at least 15 years to become an overnight success. Anyone who understands the power of compound interest and delayed gratification or who runs a business should know that . Yes there a re a few exceptions . A country’s economic strength is ultimately based on the number of ‘entrepreneurs’ it generates from within . Like everything else you have to build an economy in which it makes economic sense to become an entrepreneur . If you drive those people away through extremist ‘socialist’ politics then society will eventually be the poorer for it ! “
Which does not automatically lead to the type of politics and inequality that is so prevalent in the South at the moment. Harry may be advocating “extremist Socialist” politics but you are implying that the right course of action is the precise reverse. It isn’t, and ultimately extreme inequality is detrimental to society.
Though just by the by, I’d be interested in how many entrepreneurs Switzerland produces. I suspect there is more than one route to economic sucess.
Posted by on Sep 13, 2006 @ 10:35 PM‘but you are implying that the right course of action is the precise reverse.’
I’m not . I’m aware that society is the stronger if there is less obvious inequality . I’m in favour of a equal acess to a decent education and health care for all citizen’s . But I’d like to achieve this through sensible health policicies policies than just throw millions at health consultants who then tell people for 200 euros an hour to stop smoking and cutback on their drinking and stop eating fried mars bars if they want to live to 59 !
‘I’d be interested in how many entrepreneurs Switzerland produces.’
I don’t know but I suspect more than Sweden . Mind you both countries haven’t had a war in over 350 years ? I’m sure that’s been a help with capital accumulation .
‘I suspect there is more than one route to economic sucess. ‘
There is but history tells us that societies don;t get much chance or time to choose between the alternatives . If you were British in the mid 18th century and you had coal and iron guess what -you did’nt fart around contemplating whether there was not a better way forward . Same in Ireland today . You have to make use of what we’ve got going for us at this time now not in 2016 when there will be a UI and we can all live happily ever after planning the long term and enhanced quality of life blah blah blah .
Don’t get me wrong Kensei . I’m all for planning and long term thinking . I guess it’s a question of priorities .
Anyway the subject of the thread was the PD’s and I happen to believe that they have been effective in government and will be so again .
Posted by on Sep 13, 2006 @ 11:15 PMListening to you Greenflag is like getting a lecture from Harry Enfield’s ‘Loadsa’money’. With a bit of White Van Man thrown in.
Capital accumulation be it financial or human is not easy: 180 million euros in venture capital has been invested by Irish people in Irish start-ups over the last few years compared to 30 billion euros invested by Irish people in property at home and overseas over the same period. That’s not capital accumulation, that’s capital dispersal. Profit-taking without productivity (financed by credit) and capital flight.
If you drive those people away through extremist ‘socialist’ politics then society will eventually be the poorer for it!: Having spoken to people involved in the nanotechnology sphere I am aware that institutions are having great trouble attracting world-class reasearchers to ireland because the cost of living, the crappy infrastructure, the price of housing and the quality of life are inferior to what those people can find elsewhere.
Entrepreneurs who want to create rather than hand over large parts of the value of their labours on a monthly basis to gombeens are being priced out by huge costs, huge rental prices and levels of risk and stress that are not justified by the rewards. You are driving these people away.I am not advocating ‘extreme socialist’ policies. I am advocating common sense, some decency, the recognition that people shouldn’t have to struggle just to live in their own country and real - as opposed to pretend - ambition.
Posted by on Sep 14, 2006 @ 04:12 AM‘That’s not capital accumulation, that’s capital dispersal.’
Harry you may not be aware of this but Ireland is a small country with a small domestic market . For companies to expand beyond a certain size overseas acquisition is just a fact of life . If the returns are there to be had they’ll invest there . Fyffe’s , Jefferson Smurfit, Kerrygold , CRH etc etc being just a few . The same for overseas companies investing in Ireland . Ireland attracted 20% of all FDI into the EU with just 1% of the population so despite your ‘anecdote’ we still continue to attract investment and now some of our local entrepreneurs have been been taking up the slack. Like it or not Chindia is going to be the magnet for capital for this century so I happen to believe that the Republic ‘made hay’ while the sun shone whereas NI has missed the boat.
You complain about ‘crappy infrastructure’ and at the same time berate the construction industry ?‘I am advocating common sense’
I presume by now you have discovered it’s not as common as it’s made out to be .
‘the recognition that people shouldn’t have to struggle just to live in their own country’
Why not ? We may live on an island but we can’t isolate ourselves from the global economy . Sinn Feinism as an economic policy won’t work and can only be made to attempt to work in places like North Korea /Cuba . There are 6 billion people on the planet . You might like to believe that life should not be a struggle but I’m afraid it is and always will be to a greater or lesser extent . There are no free lunches.
I’ll agree that our costs of doing business are becoming prohibitive in some areas . Our dependence on oil for energy just being one area . Property costs being another .
My apologies if you feel I’m lecturing a la Harry Enfield . Not my intention . If I sound like a cross between Loadsa Money and the White Van man then you come across (no pun intended) as a cross between William Ulsterman and Tony Boy !
You might want to take account of the Ad Hominem rule on Slugger :)
Posted by on Sep 14, 2006 @ 12:03 PM‘the recognition that people shouldn’t have to struggle just to live in their own country’
Greenflag: Why not ?Because one should not have to struggle to get by. Only a people who have been brought up on low expectations and a history of struggle would think that struggling for the basics is normal. It has not been the norm in Europe for half a century.
By all means struggle for extras - fancy cars, holidays, material goods - but struggling for the basics, for a roof over your head, for medical care, is not on. Yet struggle over the basics is the social model that is being advanced by FF and the PDs. It is certainly the result of their policies, and increasingly so.Posted by on Sep 15, 2006 @ 12:01 PM‘Only a people who have been brought up on low expectations and a history of struggle would think that struggling for the basics is normal. It has not been the norm in Europe for half a century. ‘
It WAS the norm in Ireland for a lot of people half a century ago .‘Because one should not have to struggle to get by.’
Ideally perhaps not . And yet many of our greatest economic and political achievers have only got where they are through ‘struggle’ . Not everybody is content to
‘Sit on their arse for 50 years
And hang their hat on a pension’ to quote Louis MacNiese . And it’s just as well . When everybody works for the public sector you get Albania . When 70% of the economy is dependent on public sector expenditure you get economic stagnation and eventually relative economic decline - Northern Ireland /Puerto Rico being good examples .‘Yet struggle over the basics is the social model that is being advanced by FF and the PDs. ‘
Solving our ‘housing/health’ problems is not amenable to a quick fix . With an election on the way FF/PD will have to address these issues or face the electoral consequences . I happen to believe they will .
Posted by on Sep 15, 2006 @ 12:25 PMkensei,
‘I suspect there is more than one route to economic sucess. ‘
And the same applies to economic failure .
Here’s the Swedish route .
‘Although big companies in Sweden have long thrived , the regulatory and tax climate is chilly to newer and smaller companies . Only 1 of Sweden’s 50 biggest companies was founded after 1970 : and Sweden has the lowest rate of self employment in the OECD ’
Source -Economist .
Posted by on Sep 15, 2006 @ 12:38 PMYour characterisation of the different choices available (‘rampant profiteering/sitting on yer arse’) is laughable. There is a difference between what Nietzsche would call the ‘agonistic’ - ‘competition’ in PD parlance - and exploitation. In Ireland we have exploitation, not competition. And we have a society beginning to head towards some of the excesses of the Victorian era rather than the enlightenment of the post WW2 era in social welfare provision. In Ireland at present we have a huge increase in homelessness, people having to defer visits to their doctor becasue they can’t afford the 50 euro fee, we have people living in one room hovels & bedsits for 600-700 euros a month. We have a situation where the minimum wage will give you 1200 euros a month in an economy where a one-bedroom flat will cost you 900-1000 euros a month for anything half decent. Transport will cost you 25 euros a week - 90 euros for a monthly ticket - on top of that.
Not to mention no significant levels of increase in public transport provision or quality. Amongst the most expensive broadband in europe - if its available, which at 8% penetration it usually isn’t. Expensive food, hugely expensive drinks in a pub (the pub as an Irish cultural phenomenon has been largely killed under this government, certainly around Dublin. The licensing system has a large part of the blame for this - a cartel operated by millionaires as a means of directing the huge resources from drinking into their - an on-one elses - pockets).
The list is endless. If you are a public servant and have been paid off through benchmarking then perhaps you’re happy with the state of affairs, since you’re on maybe 35,000 to 45,000 per annum. But people in the privtae sector are untouched by benchmarking or any of the other mutual back-scratching deals come to between the government and the so-called social partners. That is why the social partner system is at breaking point, and the next 5 years will break it. It has largely been a process whereby the bosses have used the unions to pacify their members while the bosses made disproportionate gains.
But the greatest scam is property. You think people should have to struggle to pay money to gombeens who themselves produce nothing and live off the sweat of other people’s labours? That’s what you call ‘getting off yer arse’? Nonsense, it’s exploitation pure and simple and a form of economic activity which benefits the few to the disadvantage of the very many. It is a short-term pyramid scheme which will cause hardship and damage when all is said and done. It is an attempt to sell the idea of money for nothing to those greedy enough to fall for such things.
And after 10 years in power to talk about the problems of health and housing not being amenable to a ‘quick fix’ but requiring more time from this government is preposterous. These problems have appeared under this government, it is not they who will fix them. They are pursuing extreme right-wing policies which are producing levels of hardship that will lead to social unrest.
By all means struggle. We will. We have opportunites to create something great in this country. But those opportunities will be blown by these these unimaginative, landlord-minded, intellectually bereft clowns.
Only a people with low expectations and a history of abuse would support them.
Posted by on Sep 15, 2006 @ 01:16 PMCalm down Harry, you are beginning to sounds like one of those Harry Enfield characters you like to bring up: Frank Doberman of the Self Righteous Brothers (“Oi McDowell - NO!’)
It is property prices not rents that are crazy. Rents in Dublin are not particularly high by international standards. See here for a reference, scroll down almost to the end. They are less expensive than Paris, Amsterdam, Madrid and Rome, all of whose countries have lower minimum wages than us - and lower average earnings. Looking on Daft.ie you can get one bedroom places for under 500 euro a month.
Of course there are problems here - I would share many of the concerns you list but show me a place where there aren’t problems. The blacker-than-black picture painted by you is just not one that is my experience or that of any of anyone I know. If it is so terrible here why are 16,000 people from the original 15 EU member countries coming here to live, every year? Are their expectations so low too?
The laissez faire policies towards private property have been in place since the foundation of the State. Have all our governments been ‘extreme right-wing’ ones? It is my opinion (pure hunch) that the particular kow-towing to the builders by this government is more due to the FF side than the PDs. The relevant ministries have always been held by FF.
Final point: it was McDowell that tried to bring in cafe bar licenses which would have broken up the licensing cartel - and got shot down by FF: The Publican Party.
Posted by on Sep 15, 2006 @ 02:18 PMHarry ,
The glass is not that empty . A lot of people (the majority ) see it as being more than half full . If you stop turning the glass on it’s head so often it may not look so empty .
Like Lorenzo I share some of your concerns . If the voters share them to the degree you do then you’ll have your ‘slump coalition ‘. I can’t see it happening from here .
Posted by on Sep 15, 2006 @ 02:29 PMI note that according to the CSO report Estimated Immigration of foreign-born citizens into Ireland in 2004 was 33,200. Yet according to the government (here) it issued 134,000 PPS numbers to foreign-born people in 2004 alone. Something of a discrepancy I would have thought.
Greenflag: Just Government Bureaucracy and how the numbers are processed, and reported . The PPS numbers probably refer to applications from earlier years.
Bit of a glib reply to what should be a startling discrepancy. Are you sure that’s the reason for the difference in the numbers?Posted by on Sep 17, 2006 @ 07:25 PMTo paraphrase the PD’s slogan last time, I would recommend “Illegal Immigration - No Thanks” this time.
Posted by on Sep 17, 2006 @ 07:51 PMFor those who are interested, I sent an email to the CSO to ask why was there such a discrepancy between the estimated annual net migration statistics and the actual number of PPS numbers issued to non-nationals. They very obligingly replied and told me that the migration estimates were collected from 3 different sources:
1) Census 2002
2) Vital Statistics Section (annual births and deaths)
3) Quarterly National Household Survey (QNHS)
The QNHS is the main source for the migration statistics. It is a survey carried out on 39,000 households, mainly to find employment information, but which is also used to ask questions about residency and migration. From these answers the figures are, as the CSO say, ‘grossed up’ to represent a national perspective.The CSO go on to state:
<font size=“2” face=“Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif”>To answer
your question there are a number of factors that may explain the difference
between the Population and Migration results and the number of PPS numbers
issued. In theory it is possible for an immigrant to obtain a PPS number
one week and leave the country the next. Therefore by solely looking at
PPS numbers it is difficult to measure how many immigrants are staying in
the State. </font><font face=“Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif”>
<font size=“2”>As the QNHS is a randomly selected sample survey, it is
possible that data could be recorded from an indigenous Irish household,
whereas their next door neighbours, a household occupied by recent emigrants,
would be missed.</font>
<font size=“2”>Another factor that may contribute to the difference is
that the QNHS surveys private households. This therefore would exclude
those immigrants residing at their place of work, e.g hotels etc.</font>
<font size=“2”>As a consequence of these factors, the Migration
statistics published recently can be considered as an under estimation
of reality. As you state, this arguement can be reinforced when
comparing the Estimates to the number of PPS numbers issued.</font>
I then sent an email to the Department of Social and Family Affairs to get a list of all the PPS numbers issued to Irish people and non-nationals from 2000-2001. They very obligingly sent me a huge list, country by country, which I collated as below.
<u>PPS Numbers issued to non-nationals</u>
2000 52,000
2001 112,000
2002 165,000
2003 104,000
2004 133,000
2005 191,000
TOTAL 757,000<u>CSO estimates of immigrants (Irish & non-national)</u>
2000 52,600
2001 59,000
2002 66,900
2003 50,500
2004 50,100
2005 70,000
TOTAL 349,100<u>CSO estimates of immigrants (non-national)</u>
2000 30,000 approx.
2001 32,700
2002 39,900
2003 33,000
2004 33,200
2005 51,000
TOTAL 219,800<u>CSO estimates of emigrants (Irish & non-national)</u>
2000 26,600
2001 26,200
2002 25,600
2003 20,700
2004 18,500
2005 16,600
TOTAL 134,200<u>CSO estimates of net migration (Irish & non-national)</u>
2000 26,000
2001 32,800
2002 41,300
2003 29,800
2004 31,600
2005 53,400
TOTAL 214,900[cont’d below…]
Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 10:32 AMThe first thing that is striking is that 757,000 PPS numbers have been issued to non-nationals over the last 5 and half years! Subtracting the CSO estimate of Irish and non-national emigration over this time from this number gives a net inward migration of foreign nationals 2000-2005 = 623,000 approx.
Throughout the last 5 years the CSO has consistently underestimated the number of foreign-born nationals immigrating into Ireland by a factor of between 3 and 4. Net immigration of foreign nationals into Ireland over the last 5 years is 409,000 more than the CSO estimates according to actual PPS numbers issued . That is to say, there were 830,000 foreign nationals (not 420,000) living in Ireland by the end of last year or 18% of the population. This will come as no surprise to people living in Dublin.
The average net migration of foreign-born nationals into Ireland over the last 5 years was around 100,000 per annum. If this trend continues (and leaving aside the actual upward trend in order to be conservative) there will be 1.3 million foreign nationals living in Ireland out of a population of 5.3 million (including natural increase) by the end of 2010, or 25% of the population. This does not include figures for immigration from Romania and Bulgaria which are likely, despite ‘restrictions’, to be a conservative 200,000 over the coming 5 years, bringing the likely total to 1.5 million foreign-born nationals by 2010 out of a population of 5.5 million, or 27% of the population. The truth is that annual trends indicate that these figures could well be conservative.
This massive population change - to almost a third of the population of the ROI being made up of foreigners by 2010 - has taken place within a decade and is unparalleled in the modern history of migration into any european country. One can extrapolate to 2016 and 2025 to see what proportions of our population will be 1st and 2nd generation immigrant at those times. The prospects are extreme by anyone’s standards.
The situation across the island north and south will be, by 2010, that out of a total population of 7.3 million almost 2.5 million - or 34% - will class themselves as ‘non-Irish’, comprising 1.5 million foreign-born nationals and approx. 950,000 unionists. I have no figures on the level of immigration into the north and so these can be taken as minimum figures.
I seem to be the only person in the entire country who has bothered his arse to collate the data available from the different sources in order to get a more accurate picture. RTE see themselves more in the role of Pravda, passing on the official line and making no effort to independently investigate the figures being peddled by the establishment. Clearly they are ‘onside’ with the establishment.
Whatever ones position on immigration, these figures - and these are the real, actual figures - demand debate.Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 10:34 AMHarry - well I never, who’d have thought the answer to the Irish Question was “Poland”!
Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 10:37 AMHarry a lot of these “foreigners” are the children of Irish emigrants you know. I share grave concerns about immigration levels but am highly sceptical that we have as many foreigners as you suggest. I was surprised by how closely the preliminary Census figures corresponded to CSO estimates. We’ll have a better picture next year though.
Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 10:57 AMI don’t know why you’re sceptical Brian, other than that the media try to make you. The numbers I’ve given are the actual numbers from the CSO and the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Where do you think most of these sons and daughters of Irish emigrants would be coming from? From the English-speaking world perhaps? Well, the breakdown for those figures is as follows:
<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from the UK</u>
2000 9421
2001 15349
2002 14050
2003 13667
2004 13909
2005 14207
TOTAL 80,603<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from the USA</u>
2000 1222
2001 2645
2002 2736
2003 3010
2004 3195
2005 3811
TOTAL 16,619<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from Australia</u>
2000 1027
2001 2874
2002 2656
2003 2421
2004 1713
2005 2128
TOTAL 12,819<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from Canada</u>
2000 737
2001 1019
2002 733
2003 754
2004 866
2005 970
TOTAL 5079<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from New Zealand</u>
2000 572
2001 1462
2002 1408
2003 1016
2004 896
2005 923
TOTAL 6277By contrast the new accession countries are increasing dramatically, as expected:
<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from Poland</u>
2000 570
2001 2259
2002 2649
2003 3828
2004 27295
2005 64731
TOTAL 101,332<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from Lithuania</u>
2000 642
2001 2735
2002 2782
2003 2379
2004 12817
2005 18717
TOTAL 40,072<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from Latvia</u>
2000 1046
2001 3023
2002 1538
2003 1230
2004 6266
2005 9328
TOTAL 22,431And a category mysteriously titled ‘Other’ amid all the countries of the world (possibly real aliens?):
<u>PPS Numbers issued to people from ‘Other’</u>
2000 8917
2001 17496
2002 77152
2003 22078
2004 8593
2005 5245
TOTAL 139,481Strangely enough, the numbers from ‘Other’ fall dramatically just after accession of the new EU 10. One wonders if many of these mysterious ‘others’ came from these countries but were categorised in this way to make the figures of potential immigrants into Ireland from these countries seem less prior to accession. This would appear to indicate this possibility. One presumes, if this is the case, that the figures were massaged in this way to make the public more accepting of no controls being put in place over the free movement of labour from these countries.
Apart from that, some of the main immigrant countries are Spain, France, Germany, China (21,000) and Nigeria (approx.20,000). China obviously has such low PPS numbers because lots of chinese come in as students, so I presume they don’t appear in these figures. It’s certain that the idea that only 21,000 Chinese have come to Ireland over the last 5 years or so is a huge underestimation.
Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 11:50 AM</font>So now you know (and I think I’ve fixed the font problem).
Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 12:18 PMWell Harry maybe you are right but I am doubtful. Apparently though there is a hell of a lot of PPS no. fraud (33% of PPS no.s obtained fraudulently I have heard), partly to allow illegals in the country to work. I would feel though that a lot of these immigrants may have returned home. I favour restrictions on Romania and Bulgaria and on asylum-seekers, but I don’t believe the number of foreigners of non-Irish origin are as high as your figures imply.
One source of confusion may be that a very large proportion of the numbers issued per annum are actually renewals to existing immigrants rather than to newcomers.
Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 12:26 PMA work permit can be renewed, not a PPS number. It is issued only once. (See here Q.15).
I subtracted the CSO figure for emigration of both non-nationals and Irish from the overall figure of non-national immigration to arrive at an approximate figure for net immigration of non-nationals. I did this to be conservative and because no separate breakdown was given for non-national and Irish emigration figures - the two were added together in the figures emailed to me.
As for 33% fraud - well, I haven’t heard of that. Is is really believable that these government figures are going to be skewed to such an extent by fraud? Try emailing the department and asking them.
The fact is the figures speak for themselves; they are huge and are being deliberately kept from mainstream discussion.
Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 12:44 PMHarry ,
‘I seem to be the only person in the entire country who has bothered his arse to collate the data available from the different sources in order to get a more accurate picture.’
Entirely possible Harry . The rest of us are too busy making money , investing our savings and wondering who will win the Ryder Cup.
’ ‘Whatever ones position on immigration, these figures - and these are the real, actual figures - demand debate. ‘
Harry ,
Thanks for going to the trouble of getting these figures . And I agree with you they do demand ‘debate’ . I suspect that along with Housing , Health -Immigration will be an issue for the coming election . My own personal feeling is that 15 to 20% is about the ‘limit ’ that a small country like Ireland can afford (or indeed any country can without endangering it’s cultural/national identity . Of course once we joined the EU with it’s common labour market in 1973 we were always exposed to the possibility of being ‘swamped’ . Theoretically 3 million English and 4 million Germans and 2 million French plus others could have moved to Ireland at that time and we Irish would now be 25% or less of the total . It did’nt happen because all of the above counries could offer their people better economic opportunities and a higher standard of living .
The only practical way out of this conundrum IMO is for some kind of percentage limit or range (dependent on the economic situation) to be placed on migration to EU countries based on a percentage of each destination countries total population. Or else allow each country to set it’s own percentage within an overall EU range . This would still allow for relatively free movement of labour between EU countries including the new member countries. The same immigration rule could be adopted world wide ?
China could thus open it’s doors technically to (assume a 10% limit) 130 million . India to another 130 million and Saudi Arabia to 2.8 million etc etc . Russia which is suffering a population implosion at the same time as it’s experiencing economic growth rates of 8% could take in 15 million ? Xenophobes of the world
I believe the UN will be addressing the issue of world wide migration soon . At this time there are 200 million people around the world living in countries other than their country of birth . Many are illegal and many have less rights than the indigenes .
New Old Joke
Dublin 2006.
A Dubliner returned to to Ireland for the first time since 1986. He was looking for an old friend whose address he carried on a faded slip of paper . But the city had changed a lot in 20 years and he got hopelessly lost . So he stopped a Garda who to his astonishment looked Chinese . ‘Excuse me Guard can you tell me how to get to Mountjoy Square?’ he said
‘Mountjoy Square ’ ? It’s not called that anymore . It’s called Piludski Square now ’ said the Garda .
‘Oh. Well then could you tell me the way to Clanbrassil Street , then?
‘It’s not called that any more’ said the Garda . It’s called Lithuania Street .
‘Oh I see ’ said the Dubliner who was now totally confused . He walked on through his old city until he came to anna livia plura bella . He stood there gazing mournfully into the water . Meanwhile the chinese Garda who had noted his confusion followed him .‘So what are you doing now’, the Garda asked the Dubliner .
‘I’m just taking a look at the Hwang Ho ’ said yer man :)
Posted by on Sep 21, 2006 @ 01:26 PM
