Noted in the Newry Democrat (03/07/07) that the crime clear up rate has fallen in the Newry and Mourne area. Under 21% of crimes were cleared up as against over 32% during the previous year.
What I find most interesting was the comment by Chief Inspector Cordner that the fall in the clear up rate was because the Home Office had changed the way an offence was deemed to be cleared up. It appears that previously a crime was considered cleared up if an individual was named and was told that they were considered a suspect. Now the definition has been changed to a definition that a crime is cleared up if the PSNI are able to supply sufficient evidence to charge and secure a conviction in court.
Now forgive my ignorance but I would have thought that a crime would not have been considered cleared up (closed) until a conviction was secured. It would appear that the previous method allowed the police to make their figures look good without ever relating their success to the outcome of court proceedings. To merely have to tell someone that they were considered a suspect in order to have a crime listed as cleared up seems far to easy a way to measure performance. I wonder if they were receiving a performance related bonus based on the original methodology?
NI Assembly - Getting Priorities Right
Day Three of official business in the NI Assembly and already our MLAs are addressing the issues that impact on our lives - the CPA. I initially figured that this referred to the appointment of some accounting body to oversee their expenditure as they would want to be seen to be frugal in these challenging times. But I was mistaken.
How do trips to Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Barbados or Montserrat appeal to you? Nice holiday destinations?.....well then membership of the CPA is just what you need. The CPA is the The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) and membership is open to the national, provincial, state and territorial Parliaments and Legislatures of the countries of the Commonwealth. MLAs passed a motion to re-apply for membership in light of the return of devolved government.
But of course its not about the possibility of exotic trips that Northern Ireland is joining. There are serious political reasons why membership would be advantageous. Alban Maginness stated that "it is important that parliamentarians mix together and learn from one another." Well if one thing Northern Ireland politicians need it is lessons in how to mix together. They have spent the last 4 or 5 years avoiding all efforts to do just that (while continuing to take their salaries of course). All the better if this can be done in Sydney rather than Belfast. In addition over the course of the peace process our politicians have had direct contact with politicians like Albert Reynolds, John Major, Bertie Ahern, Tony Blair, George Mitchell and Bill Clinton - but maybe they were not school days and they forget to learn anything from them.
Even more interesting was the contribution to the debate from Sean Neeson who argued that "it is time for the Government of the Republic of Ireland to consider joining the CPA in order that they can interact with the other major nations throughout the world"......and I thought that the Republic's membership of the EU and the United Nations already provided that opportunity....silly me.
Jim Wells did point out that any member Government that does not meet normal democratic standards is removed, with its membership suspended until democracy is restored. I wonder if the CPA might like to consider the fact that one of the first decisions of the NI Assembly was to exclude the Alliance Party from membership of the Review Committee, the committee charged with policing the actions of the devolved Government. By excluding any member from a party not already in Government they are not showing much of the democratic standards Mr. Wells aspires to.
At the outset of the debate Alban Maginness did argue that membership of the CPA should not be an exercise in junketing - well if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck I think its safe to assume its a duck.
How do trips to Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Barbados or Montserrat appeal to you? Nice holiday destinations?.....well then membership of the CPA is just what you need. The CPA is the The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) and membership is open to the national, provincial, state and territorial Parliaments and Legislatures of the countries of the Commonwealth. MLAs passed a motion to re-apply for membership in light of the return of devolved government.
But of course its not about the possibility of exotic trips that Northern Ireland is joining. There are serious political reasons why membership would be advantageous. Alban Maginness stated that "it is important that parliamentarians mix together and learn from one another." Well if one thing Northern Ireland politicians need it is lessons in how to mix together. They have spent the last 4 or 5 years avoiding all efforts to do just that (while continuing to take their salaries of course). All the better if this can be done in Sydney rather than Belfast. In addition over the course of the peace process our politicians have had direct contact with politicians like Albert Reynolds, John Major, Bertie Ahern, Tony Blair, George Mitchell and Bill Clinton - but maybe they were not school days and they forget to learn anything from them.
Even more interesting was the contribution to the debate from Sean Neeson who argued that "it is time for the Government of the Republic of Ireland to consider joining the CPA in order that they can interact with the other major nations throughout the world"......and I thought that the Republic's membership of the EU and the United Nations already provided that opportunity....silly me.
Jim Wells did point out that any member Government that does not meet normal democratic standards is removed, with its membership suspended until democracy is restored. I wonder if the CPA might like to consider the fact that one of the first decisions of the NI Assembly was to exclude the Alliance Party from membership of the Review Committee, the committee charged with policing the actions of the devolved Government. By excluding any member from a party not already in Government they are not showing much of the democratic standards Mr. Wells aspires to.
At the outset of the debate Alban Maginness did argue that membership of the CPA should not be an exercise in junketing - well if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck I think its safe to assume its a duck.
Entrepreneurship in Northern Ireland
The most interesting topic to arise out of the visit of EC President Manuel Barroso to the incoming First and Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland was his undertaking that a study would be carried out into ways to encourage entrepreneurship.
According to Wikipedia it was the Irish born economist, Richard Cantillion, that first defined an entrepreneur. So in some ways this island already has a head start in understanding entrepreneurship. The Wikipedia definition goes on to define an entrepreneur as an individual who undertakes and operates a new enterprise and assumes some accountability for the inherent risks. Business entrepreneurs are willing to accept a high level of personal, professional or financial risk to pursue that opportunity.
If anything Northern Ireland has certainly created a breed of individual who recognise an opportunity and assume the risks associated with pursuing this enterprise. The Organised Crime Task Force (OCTF) estimates that intellectual property theft in NI is worth £200 million, and that fuel (and other cross border) smuggling is worth £245 million in lost revenue. Add to that some NI farmers ability to be creative in the claiming of headage payments for sheep and I think it is fair to say that we have a strong entrepreneurial culture, its just some of it is very poorly directed.
The success of companies like Norbrook, under the direction of Edward Haughey and the Quinn Group ,with Sean Quinn at the helm, prove that Northern Ireland is capable of producing entrepreneurs that can compete with the best the global marketplace can offer.
If it is generally accepted that real entrepreneurship can not be taught what can be done to encourage the risk takers in business to thrive and prosper in NI? Personally I think any study would need to focus on the role of Invest NI and its culture for developing entrepreneurial spirit within the business community. Is Invest NI prepared to match the risk that the start up business might be taking? At times I find that, due to public accountability, that Government departments tend to operate like banks in the way they decide on the allocation of monies. For local businesses, unless you can gold plate a return on the money invested, it is very hard to get support from Invest NI. Rather than being guided by consultants and educators the guidance should be coming from successful business people who have started up an enterprise and made a success of it. Of course public money needs to be accounted for and not spent foolishly, as otherwise the tab is picked up by the taxpayer, but a balance might need to be struck.
While reality TV can not always be taken as a guide to real life it was evident from watching BBC's Dragon's Den that successful business people, while of course looking mostly for a track record in business from potential candidates, were sometimes prepared to take a risk on a project, despite it being risky, as they believed that could recognise a drive, an ambition in the individual to make it work. While on a business plan the project was full of risk they were prepared to invest in the individual. You would have to wonder in a climate of public accountability if there exists in bodies like Invest NI the ability to take a high risk chance on an individual - there might be some failures, but one success could give you a Sean Quinn or Edward Haughey whose contribution to the NI economy would outweigh other failures.
According to Wikipedia it was the Irish born economist, Richard Cantillion, that first defined an entrepreneur. So in some ways this island already has a head start in understanding entrepreneurship. The Wikipedia definition goes on to define an entrepreneur as an individual who undertakes and operates a new enterprise and assumes some accountability for the inherent risks. Business entrepreneurs are willing to accept a high level of personal, professional or financial risk to pursue that opportunity.
If anything Northern Ireland has certainly created a breed of individual who recognise an opportunity and assume the risks associated with pursuing this enterprise. The Organised Crime Task Force (OCTF) estimates that intellectual property theft in NI is worth £200 million, and that fuel (and other cross border) smuggling is worth £245 million in lost revenue. Add to that some NI farmers ability to be creative in the claiming of headage payments for sheep and I think it is fair to say that we have a strong entrepreneurial culture, its just some of it is very poorly directed.
The success of companies like Norbrook, under the direction of Edward Haughey and the Quinn Group ,with Sean Quinn at the helm, prove that Northern Ireland is capable of producing entrepreneurs that can compete with the best the global marketplace can offer.
If it is generally accepted that real entrepreneurship can not be taught what can be done to encourage the risk takers in business to thrive and prosper in NI? Personally I think any study would need to focus on the role of Invest NI and its culture for developing entrepreneurial spirit within the business community. Is Invest NI prepared to match the risk that the start up business might be taking? At times I find that, due to public accountability, that Government departments tend to operate like banks in the way they decide on the allocation of monies. For local businesses, unless you can gold plate a return on the money invested, it is very hard to get support from Invest NI. Rather than being guided by consultants and educators the guidance should be coming from successful business people who have started up an enterprise and made a success of it. Of course public money needs to be accounted for and not spent foolishly, as otherwise the tab is picked up by the taxpayer, but a balance might need to be struck.
While reality TV can not always be taken as a guide to real life it was evident from watching BBC's Dragon's Den that successful business people, while of course looking mostly for a track record in business from potential candidates, were sometimes prepared to take a risk on a project, despite it being risky, as they believed that could recognise a drive, an ambition in the individual to make it work. While on a business plan the project was full of risk they were prepared to invest in the individual. You would have to wonder in a climate of public accountability if there exists in bodies like Invest NI the ability to take a high risk chance on an individual - there might be some failures, but one success could give you a Sean Quinn or Edward Haughey whose contribution to the NI economy would outweigh other failures.
Northern Ireland - A Blueprint for the rest of the world?
Bertie Ahern has called the next Dail election for 24th May. Based on the latest opinion polls the Government is likely to be comprised of some form of coalition government as no party in Ireland no longer has enough support to form a single party government. I would find it very unlikely that Fianna Fail will ever find themselves in a position whereby they have a majority of the elected TDs again. Irish voters like coalition, in my opinion, as it provides a balance within the corridors of power by not allowing one party to act as supreme overlords.
Here in Northern Ireland we are about to embark on an enforced coalition whereby the four main parties, with about 90% of the elected Stormont MLAs, form a government where positions are allocated in accordance with their success in the elections.
In advance of this Government actually taking up office on May 8th there has been a remarkable change in the relations between the parties in Northern Ireland, especially between the DUP and Sinn Fein. As well as Sinn Fein signing up to the policing boards, we have seen the DUP sidetrack the issue of the existence of the IRA Army Council as a bar to forming the Government. Martin McGuinness speaks in a Sunday Tribune interview of positive, courteous meetings with Ian Paisley and speaks of his admiration for Dr. Paisley having stood by his principles, although obviously he did not agree with them.
As well as new working relations (and the bulk of the ministries) being shared by the DUP and Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP, despite their electoral disappointments of the last few years, will also have a part to play in this coalition Government. Depending on the success of their Ministers, and the exposure that their portfolios might bring them, they may hope to use the opportunities provided to help rebuild their parties. Being seen as successful within a Government department, or committee, especially as when the next elections arrive all the parties involved could be pushing manifestos which would be broadly in the centre and less to the extremes, might be seen as giving some hope to the UU and SDLP that they can now rebuild their support base. They will of course argue that the current positions of the DUP and SF are exactly those of their parties in the past.
All the positives ahead of the return of the devolved Government at Stormont do make me wonder if a form of imposed coalition is the best way to govern a country. Maybe in the future, in the context of the UK and Ireland, it should be mandatory that a government could only be formed from parties which command at least 60% of the elected representatives. This would mean in the context of the forthcoming election that a possible coalition between FF/Labour/SF or FG/Green/PD/Labour/SF/Ind.
The reason for this suggestion would be to try and engage voters in elections and politics generally. As one party would be very unlikely to ever achieve 60%, coalition would be almost certainly guaranteed. Positions would be allocated, like here, in relation to election success, but would mean more parties being involved in Government. Policies would be negotiated as per norm, but with an input from more parties, leading to a more interesting mix of policies - PD right wing ideals diluted by Labour's socialist leanings for example. As well as involving more of a mix of individuals in positions of power it might also give more prominence to the parties not involved in the government as the voice of the opposition, maybe giving it a greater chance to get its message across. In effect Alliance must be the opposition party of the Stormont assembly, with the duty of holding it to account for its decisions, which in effect would give their spoke persons the chance to debate matters on local TV and radio, in the process raising both party and individual profiles.
I think it would apply better to the last Westminster elections of 2005 where Labour, under Tony Blair, won 55.2% of the seats in the first past the post system with 35.3% of the first preference vote. Despite the unpopularity of the war in Iraq Labour won in part due to the even more mistrust of the Conservative Party. In effect two thirds of the population find themselves governed by a party they did not vote for. The 60% rule would have allowed Labour to form a government after the 2001 election, but in 2005 would have forced them into a coalition with possibly the Lib Dems. This might have assured that checks and balances were in place to police Labour policy, especially in relation to divisive issues like the management of the war in Iraq and investment in the NHS. It might also have allowed a junior Government party to be able to comment better on the cash for honours question and hold people accountable, if required. Such a forced partnership might help to counteract a certain indifference in a electorate feeling disenfranchised from being able to exercise influence on their Government, while still allowing the Tories to rebuild and re brand under Cameron.
Maybe Northern Ireland have the right idea after all, by forcing people to work together, - but time will tell.
Here in Northern Ireland we are about to embark on an enforced coalition whereby the four main parties, with about 90% of the elected Stormont MLAs, form a government where positions are allocated in accordance with their success in the elections.
In advance of this Government actually taking up office on May 8th there has been a remarkable change in the relations between the parties in Northern Ireland, especially between the DUP and Sinn Fein. As well as Sinn Fein signing up to the policing boards, we have seen the DUP sidetrack the issue of the existence of the IRA Army Council as a bar to forming the Government. Martin McGuinness speaks in a Sunday Tribune interview of positive, courteous meetings with Ian Paisley and speaks of his admiration for Dr. Paisley having stood by his principles, although obviously he did not agree with them.
As well as new working relations (and the bulk of the ministries) being shared by the DUP and Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP, despite their electoral disappointments of the last few years, will also have a part to play in this coalition Government. Depending on the success of their Ministers, and the exposure that their portfolios might bring them, they may hope to use the opportunities provided to help rebuild their parties. Being seen as successful within a Government department, or committee, especially as when the next elections arrive all the parties involved could be pushing manifestos which would be broadly in the centre and less to the extremes, might be seen as giving some hope to the UU and SDLP that they can now rebuild their support base. They will of course argue that the current positions of the DUP and SF are exactly those of their parties in the past.
All the positives ahead of the return of the devolved Government at Stormont do make me wonder if a form of imposed coalition is the best way to govern a country. Maybe in the future, in the context of the UK and Ireland, it should be mandatory that a government could only be formed from parties which command at least 60% of the elected representatives. This would mean in the context of the forthcoming election that a possible coalition between FF/Labour/SF or FG/Green/PD/Labour/SF/Ind.
The reason for this suggestion would be to try and engage voters in elections and politics generally. As one party would be very unlikely to ever achieve 60%, coalition would be almost certainly guaranteed. Positions would be allocated, like here, in relation to election success, but would mean more parties being involved in Government. Policies would be negotiated as per norm, but with an input from more parties, leading to a more interesting mix of policies - PD right wing ideals diluted by Labour's socialist leanings for example. As well as involving more of a mix of individuals in positions of power it might also give more prominence to the parties not involved in the government as the voice of the opposition, maybe giving it a greater chance to get its message across. In effect Alliance must be the opposition party of the Stormont assembly, with the duty of holding it to account for its decisions, which in effect would give their spoke persons the chance to debate matters on local TV and radio, in the process raising both party and individual profiles.
I think it would apply better to the last Westminster elections of 2005 where Labour, under Tony Blair, won 55.2% of the seats in the first past the post system with 35.3% of the first preference vote. Despite the unpopularity of the war in Iraq Labour won in part due to the even more mistrust of the Conservative Party. In effect two thirds of the population find themselves governed by a party they did not vote for. The 60% rule would have allowed Labour to form a government after the 2001 election, but in 2005 would have forced them into a coalition with possibly the Lib Dems. This might have assured that checks and balances were in place to police Labour policy, especially in relation to divisive issues like the management of the war in Iraq and investment in the NHS. It might also have allowed a junior Government party to be able to comment better on the cash for honours question and hold people accountable, if required. Such a forced partnership might help to counteract a certain indifference in a electorate feeling disenfranchised from being able to exercise influence on their Government, while still allowing the Tories to rebuild and re brand under Cameron.
Maybe Northern Ireland have the right idea after all, by forcing people to work together, - but time will tell.
Want to Live Forever - Become an MLA
A Mr. Alec Holden from Surrey picked up his winnings from bookmaker William Hill, which gave him odds of 250/1 that he would live to 100 years. Alec placed a £100 bet on himself reaching that milestone 10 years ago.
So I got to thinking should I place a similar bet on myself? But to understand my chances I have to look at the reasons Alec has reached the milestone of 100 years. He put it down to eating porridge every morning and remembering to keep breathing. He said it was also important not to worry about anything, do as little work as possible, and go on lots of holidays.
Having gathered all this information I applied Alec's principles to my lifestyle to analyse my chances of living another 60 or so years. Porridge - that's OK. Now I know why my mother used to feed us porridge every morning when we were young. I have not taken it as much in recent years, but I could easily make that change again - we are off to a good start.
Breathing - Alec's left us a handy tip there, but a little unnecessary. I think I've got the breathing down to a fine art - maybe a little meditation to get those good deep breaths would increase my chances.
So far its all going well and I feel a trip to the bookies coming on.
But........the not worry bit. Now I don't know circumstances of Alec's life, but holding down a challenging job in the private sector is not worry (or stress) free. Add to that the Building Society who demand their mortgage payment every month, the rates, the electric, running a car (have you seen price of fuel) and of course a wife and I fail miserably on Alec's "don't worry" lifestyle. While I try to do as little work as possible it not always easy to bluff the boss and I am only getting the minimum holidays from work so I fail that test also.
So I have decided that taking a punt on my reaching 100 might be a bad bet and I will not be backing myself - but I will keep it under review. But I looked at who might be a good candidate to reach 100 and came up with the perfect profile.
On Alec's basis of no worry, little work and plenty of holidays I am looking at anyone who was elected to the Stormont Assembly in the 2003 election. After all they did no work, got paid a huge salary (which I am sure left them worry free) and the holidays were never ending.
All I need to find out now is how many of them take porridge for breakfast and I am off the the bookie shop with my slip.
So I got to thinking should I place a similar bet on myself? But to understand my chances I have to look at the reasons Alec has reached the milestone of 100 years. He put it down to eating porridge every morning and remembering to keep breathing. He said it was also important not to worry about anything, do as little work as possible, and go on lots of holidays.
Having gathered all this information I applied Alec's principles to my lifestyle to analyse my chances of living another 60 or so years. Porridge - that's OK. Now I know why my mother used to feed us porridge every morning when we were young. I have not taken it as much in recent years, but I could easily make that change again - we are off to a good start.
Breathing - Alec's left us a handy tip there, but a little unnecessary. I think I've got the breathing down to a fine art - maybe a little meditation to get those good deep breaths would increase my chances.
So far its all going well and I feel a trip to the bookies coming on.
But........the not worry bit. Now I don't know circumstances of Alec's life, but holding down a challenging job in the private sector is not worry (or stress) free. Add to that the Building Society who demand their mortgage payment every month, the rates, the electric, running a car (have you seen price of fuel) and of course a wife and I fail miserably on Alec's "don't worry" lifestyle. While I try to do as little work as possible it not always easy to bluff the boss and I am only getting the minimum holidays from work so I fail that test also.
So I have decided that taking a punt on my reaching 100 might be a bad bet and I will not be backing myself - but I will keep it under review. But I looked at who might be a good candidate to reach 100 and came up with the perfect profile.
On Alec's basis of no worry, little work and plenty of holidays I am looking at anyone who was elected to the Stormont Assembly in the 2003 election. After all they did no work, got paid a huge salary (which I am sure left them worry free) and the holidays were never ending.
All I need to find out now is how many of them take porridge for breakfast and I am off the the bookie shop with my slip.
SLOW DOWN THERE LADS!!!!
SDLP members in Crotlieve want to reduce the speed limit in certain parts of the area from 30mph to 20mph. To this end they have submitted a motion to Newry and Mourne Council for their support on this issue and are hopeful of getting the unanimous support of their fellow Councillors.
Now while I am all in favour of traffic calming measures in built up areas, or near schools, I feel that a reduction in the speed limit is a ridiculous suggestion. People who tend to break the speed limit will not reduce their speed because the legal limit has changed. Better to install speed ramps in areas of particular concern rather than stick a different number on a pole. Or maybe even encourage the police to take their speed detection equipment to roads that have genuine problems re speed, related to the condition of the road or size of residential area, than what seems to be their current policy of positioning their cameras at the end of a dual carriageway where the speed limit suddenly reduces to 30mph, even though it is possible with care to drive a little faster. It might prove that the PSNI are more interested in road safety than revenue generation from traffic branch.
Karen McKevitt of the SDLP identified Milltown Street in Burren and Ballyholland Road as areas that concerned her. If Road Service are unable to install speed ramps, rather than reduced speed limits, while does her party just not propose a ban on cars in these areas. Maybe she would like to make it compulsory that people only use bicycles on these roads, or better still why not the traditional horse and cart - it would give people the opportunity to car(t) share and its much more environmentally friendly. That Henry Ford has a lot to answer for.
It would appear that this may be a gimmick to show to their local areas that, while they are unable to convince Road Service to put speed prevention measures in these places, at least they are acting on it by getting a few signs changed. The only people who will observe the 20mph speed limit are the same ones who would observe 30mph - the speeders won't change their habits.
And the message to all the speed freaks and boy racers is - a tree never hits an automobile except in self defense.
ONE RULE FOR ALL?
Last night as I lay dreaming.....ahh I felt a song coming on. But in my mind I have, in my time, imagined myself as the Irish heavyweight champion, and if I keep consuming cakes and chocolate at my current rate I easily make the weight, taking on Rocky (and I'm still younger than him) for the World title and defeating him to bring glory to my land.
But in order to prepare for the fight I need an easy warm up fight, an opponent I can easily beat. And my local advisors, PJ Bradley (SDLP) and Mick Murphy (SF) suggest I look at the US immigration department. They have been alerted to this potential adversary by their support for the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform (ILIR), a body which is trying to get official status for the estimated 50,000 "undocumented" Irish living and working in the US. As these people do not have Green cards to work legally in the US they are unable to travel home as it would prove very difficult to re-enter again. As well as this inability to return home on holiday they also risk capture by the Immigration service and being deported, they cannot get social security numbers or a US driving licence. The Irish Government have weighed in also to help finance the ILIR campaign by donating monies to help their campaign of lobbying the US Government to look at the possibility of legalising the status of these individuals living in this twilight world.
So as I prepared to head into the ring with the US Immigration Service I felt very confident. After all my Irish heart was beating, wondering why any nation would deny any rights to my fellow countrymen. I was ready to batter this opponent to pieces. And yet......
As my mentors held up the ropes for me to enter the ring a strange feeling washed over me. What if I was standing in the Immigration's shoes. What if every nation that has illegal immigrants living here, either in the UK or Ireland, were to say to me please legalise their status and allow them to live here without threat of deportation would I be so understanding? As I looked into my heart I would have to say that the answer would be no. Here in the Newry area I have seen the very positive, under rated and under appreciated, efforts of members of the Polish and Lithuanian community have made to the economic success and growth of the community at large in the last few years. There is no doubt that some companies would not have grown (maybe some not have survived) without this available workforce from Eastern Europe. I would also hope that some will put down roots here long term as cultural diversity is very welcome in a growing region.
And yet I am mindful of the fact that when Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU restrictions were placed on the ability of its citizens to take up work here. Immigration should probably be limited to that necessary to allow the economic growth of a country. I do not think that any country should have totally unrestricted immigration, as I think that would allow an underworld of exploitation to develop and grow. So while of course I feel sympathy for the plight of the illegal Irish in the US, I have to recognise the right of the US, as well as the UK, Ireland or any other country to have rules re the access of people to their country looking for work.
So as the bell rang my opponent landed the knock out blow and I had no fight to offer.
As I hit the floor I saw stars (and stripes maybe!!!!) - terrible pun (could not resist)
But in order to prepare for the fight I need an easy warm up fight, an opponent I can easily beat. And my local advisors, PJ Bradley (SDLP) and Mick Murphy (SF) suggest I look at the US immigration department. They have been alerted to this potential adversary by their support for the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform (ILIR), a body which is trying to get official status for the estimated 50,000 "undocumented" Irish living and working in the US. As these people do not have Green cards to work legally in the US they are unable to travel home as it would prove very difficult to re-enter again. As well as this inability to return home on holiday they also risk capture by the Immigration service and being deported, they cannot get social security numbers or a US driving licence. The Irish Government have weighed in also to help finance the ILIR campaign by donating monies to help their campaign of lobbying the US Government to look at the possibility of legalising the status of these individuals living in this twilight world.
So as I prepared to head into the ring with the US Immigration Service I felt very confident. After all my Irish heart was beating, wondering why any nation would deny any rights to my fellow countrymen. I was ready to batter this opponent to pieces. And yet......
As my mentors held up the ropes for me to enter the ring a strange feeling washed over me. What if I was standing in the Immigration's shoes. What if every nation that has illegal immigrants living here, either in the UK or Ireland, were to say to me please legalise their status and allow them to live here without threat of deportation would I be so understanding? As I looked into my heart I would have to say that the answer would be no. Here in the Newry area I have seen the very positive, under rated and under appreciated, efforts of members of the Polish and Lithuanian community have made to the economic success and growth of the community at large in the last few years. There is no doubt that some companies would not have grown (maybe some not have survived) without this available workforce from Eastern Europe. I would also hope that some will put down roots here long term as cultural diversity is very welcome in a growing region.
And yet I am mindful of the fact that when Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU restrictions were placed on the ability of its citizens to take up work here. Immigration should probably be limited to that necessary to allow the economic growth of a country. I do not think that any country should have totally unrestricted immigration, as I think that would allow an underworld of exploitation to develop and grow. So while of course I feel sympathy for the plight of the illegal Irish in the US, I have to recognise the right of the US, as well as the UK, Ireland or any other country to have rules re the access of people to their country looking for work.
So as the bell rang my opponent landed the knock out blow and I had no fight to offer.
As I hit the floor I saw stars (and stripes maybe!!!!) - terrible pun (could not resist)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)