Justice Minister's first interview - Extracts on Immigration

cynical.... arent you....

@mktsoi

Even thought you made some valid points about state of the affairs in Ireland that they are flawed , you are sliding towards slippery slope where there is no coming back from. Assesments and personal views I do admire but having a go at such a pace and with no regard to people that maybe love and appreciate this country I find astounding.
To put it straight to you.
You don’t like it , fine ,so what on earth you are doing here[Ireland]?

mktsoi wrote:

BigAppleWoodenShoe wrote:

the irish doesnt want to speak it themself. you think it is good to impose it in the new immigrants?

Euh, no, I disagree with the minister. Did you read my message?

actually, since your an american. one more thing i would like to mention. ireland is not economically independent from it's big brother(S). may be they getting less money from the british now. but ireland getting alots of money from the us firms. so they not economically independent, plus they got lots of grant from EU. the irish governement are suckers. they sucking up from the american government now. i tell you what. the IRS in states just turning a blind eyes about the us firms in ireland. if the IRS wants their money back, most of the us firms might pull out. good time will be over for ireland certainly, plus the EU doesnt want to hand out as much as used to be, soooo the economy is going to dive at some stage here.

you married to a dutch man, by law, your legal in this country, and they cant even give you a legal status quickly? dont you even feel the american deport all the illegal irish instead? they are over there illegaly working and bagging this and that, saying that the american government should make them legal or even give them american citizenship straight away. and your are legal here by the EU law, and they cant even do something? how nice how nice, we all love ireland dont we:)))))))))))))))

fair point and you are spot on about future in ireland prospects and the hypocritical views of th irish. i for one would rather see these irish people come home, seen that the economy need more workers, these people are needed here.

i am sure you have noticed though, the irish citizen is also affected by this stupid law. like yourselves, there is no statutory grounds for irish people to have their non eea spouse to unite with them as a family unit in this country, unless the eu1 form application is successful or they had met their spouse in another eu state were that spouse was legally resident and the irish citizen comes back to ireland (using his free movemnet rights) the only group of people that are entitled to such family reunification in this country are refugees (and rightly so) and an eu couple. Not look weird to ye, an irish citizen not having the absolute right to have their american, australian, african etc spouse with them on the basis of their marriage?

but ya must think it has been all taking (ok EU grants fair enough) but its not like all these US firms not get anything out of this deal. in the early 1990's they got a young and highly qualified group in the irish and non irish work force and of course a very generous taxation package in 12.5% corporation tax and several low tax treaties. something the eu want to get rid of, and to do so would feck up this country. it was these factors that made the celtic economy roar and its these factors that will help the likes of poland and lativa etc to get their economies going in the next tens years and more luck to them. it was american companies who decided to come here in the early 1990's. it is just business not this country's fault if they (USA) rather fork out lower taxes and wages here than with their own people. the days of eu grants will soon come to an end, as countires like poland, lativa etc wil lbe given more attention, and good luck to them. so basically NO, economically ireland are not sucking up to the most powerful economy nation in the world. for the people who have not come from war thorn countries or countries full of corruption, what has your governments done for you, why are ye here? (making a point , not attacking) it just took the irish longer, you all seem to forget that this country is only about 90 years old or 50 if you count the year when it offically left the british commonwealth. how many modern countries that have left the common wealth done so well as this country? of course with the help of migrants. think the td's are still stupid ?(of course within reason)

you say when (and at some time they will) all these business do move on to other pastures, the good times willbe gone. but that is why there are strict immigration laws in this country. this country needs workers not holiday makers, however, it is of the uptmost importance that immigrants are looked after and treated and rewarded highly. look at the irish born child applications 2005 and 2007, these won't be renewed unless each applicant is economically viable or making themselves so.

the problems in ireland is that whilst it is the uptmost importance to look after our own interests and their people, they are going around it the wrong way and threating people who are in genuine marriages to eu citizens like dirt. discriminating against people from visa required countries and people from visa free countires. (not one country in the world doesnt look out forthemselves, if ye think joining the eu was for the sake of joining a gang, you are very naive, ak yourself when turkey want to join?)

With economically dependent I ment the fact that in the 80's a lot of Irish companies and persons where aided by there proximity to GB and the higher costs for employment in GB, making it advantageous to invest in Ireland by GB company's merely because of low wages. Now that wages are 'the same' as in GB, this dependence is gone.

I don't mean the global economy we live in, in which large cooperations have sites anywhere in the world. The fact that Intel has a site in Ireland doesn't mean Ireland is dependent of Intel, Intel couldn't care less where their fab-site is. For the same reason Smurfit has locations around the world as well, and I bet their are some other Irish owned international companies.

Anywho, Ireland has still a lot going for itself, the new wealth is mainly provided by investors from abroad and the real estate market. But now finally the gov is investing in high-tech research (that's why I am here) which will allow other companies to settle here. But the main advantage is that the population is very young, unlike mainland Europe where there are as much old people as there are young.

There was a newsitem today with the average income of each country in Europe:

• 1. Luxemburg
  2. Ireland
  3. Netherlands (woohoo)

So although Ireland has its problems, it won't be in grave danger anytime soon.

The Irish I talk to don't really agree with the politics here either. Sometimes I think this country is just a little bit too small for this political system. But politicians are lying and cheating bastards in any other country as well.

walrusgumble wrote:

mktsoi wrote:

BigAppleWoodenShoe wrote:

the irish doesnt want to speak it themself. you think it is good to impose it in the new immigrants?

Euh, no, I disagree with the minister. Did you read my message?

actually, since your an american. one more thing i would like to mention. ireland is not economically independent from it's big brother(S). may be they getting less money from the british now. but ireland getting alots of money from the us firms. so they not economically independent, plus they got lots of grant from EU. the irish governement are suckers. they sucking up from the american government now. i tell you what. the IRS in states just turning a blind eyes about the us firms in ireland. if the IRS wants their money back, most of the us firms might pull out. good time will be over for ireland certainly, plus the EU doesnt want to hand out as much as used to be, soooo the economy is going to dive at some stage here.

you married to a dutch man, by law, your legal in this country, and they cant even give you a legal status quickly? dont you even feel the american deport all the illegal irish instead? they are over there illegaly working and bagging this and that, saying that the american government should make them legal or even give them american citizenship straight away. and your are legal here by the EU law, and they cant even do something? how nice how nice, we all love ireland dont we:)))))))))))))))

fair point and you are spot on about future in ireland prospects and the hypocritical views of th irish. i for one would rather see these irish people come home, seen that the economy need more workers, these people are needed here.

i am sure you have noticed though, the irish citizen is also affected by this stupid law. like yourselves, there is no statutory grounds for irish people to have their non eea spouse to unite with them as a family unit in this country, unless the eu1 form application is successful or they had met their spouse in another eu state were that spouse was legally resident and the irish citizen comes back to ireland (using his free movemnet rights) the only group of people that are entitled to such family reunification in this country are refugees (and rightly so) and an eu couple. Not look weird to ye, an irish citizen not having the absolute right to have their american, australian, african etc spouse with them on the basis of their marriage?

but ya must think it has been all taking (ok EU grants fair enough) but its not like all these US firms not get anything out of this deal. in the early 1990's they got a young and highly qualified group in the irish and non irish work force and of course a very generous taxation package in 12.5% corporation tax and several low tax treaties. something the eu want to get rid of, and to do so would feck up this country. it was these factors that made the celtic economy roar and its these factors that will help the likes of poland and lativa etc to get their economies going in the next tens years and more luck to them. it was american companies who decided to come here in the early 1990's. it is just business not this country's fault if they (USA) rather fork out lower taxes and wages here than with their own people. the days of eu grants will soon come to an end, as countires like poland, lativa etc wil lbe given more attention, and good luck to them. so basically NO, economically ireland are not sucking up to the most powerful economy nation in the world. for the people who have not come from war thorn countries or countries full of corruption, what has your governments done for you, why are ye here? (making a point , not attacking) it just took the irish longer, you all seem to forget that this country is only about 90 years old or 50 if you count the year when it offically left the british commonwealth. how many modern countries that have left the common wealth done so well as this country? of course with the help of migrants. think the td's are still stupid ?(of course within reason)

you say when (and at some time they will) all these business do move on to other pastures, the good times willbe gone. but that is why there are strict immigration laws in this country. this country needs workers not holiday makers, however, it is of the uptmost importance that immigrants are looked after and treated and rewarded highly. look at the irish born child applications 2005 and 2007, these won't be renewed unless each applicant is economically viable or making themselves so.

the problems in ireland is that whilst it is the uptmost importance to look after our own interests and their people, they are going around it the wrong way and threating people who are in genuine marriages to eu citizens like dirt. discriminating against people from visa required countries and people from visa free countires. (not one country in the world doesnt look out forthemselves, if ye think joining the eu was for the sake of joining a gang, you are very naive, ak yourself when turkey want to join?)

uuuuuuuuuuu listen. i will answer the Microlab in this reply as well. not trying to be rude here. if you have been throught what i have been throught. you will understand what i am trying to say.

you got that right. irish governement is not sucking up the american. just like they let the us military landed in shannon. i am sure the irish government just want to fight terrorism. dont you forget. when the american government take in those educated irish workers. they are in legally. just like myself or some other people in this foreign. but in america. at least the american government gives out permanent residency. not like here. green card my foot from michael martin. it just another money making scheme. so you telling me all those working irish people in states should come home when the irish economy is doign good and when the irish economy is not doing good. they should stay away from ireland and go take someone else job in some other countries even they stay illegal?

what the hell am i doing in ireland? i am from hong kong myself. i left home when i was a teen. all my adult life is living abroad and half of my adult life is in british isles including ireland. i finished university in britain. i got a choice to go to london or ireland. fxxx i should stayed in britain in the first place. i never had any trouble. in fact, if i stayed in britain. i would have the british passport by now instead still waiting on the stupid dept of justice here. i came here instead because the good word from the people. so much for ireland. to start with. i used to work in one of the government department here. when i first started. it took them 5 months to get me a work permit. and they were late for my work permit application every year. one time. i found out that one of the student placement from america got the work permit issued in 2 days time because his dad knows the guy in charge of my departmant and the american embassor. how nice huh. so i wasnt too happy about the place. as a civil servant in this country. employee can apply for leave of absence for personal reason. i wasnt too happy about here anyway, so i applied for a leave of absence for one year. i went to australia. the year of leave of absence went fast. i came back, but before i came back. i emailed the government department i was working in and ask them if i should come back or not because i only had 3 months contract left in my remaining contract. i asked them so should i come back. they said come back. so i did. when i came back, they told me that they have not apply for work permit so i have to wait. they made me waited for 3 months before they let me work again. AND. they told me right on the spot that they would not renew my contract. ok, if you were me, what would you do. would you fly 10000 miles back for 3 months? tell me tell me? i am single. my parents are old. they thought that i have a good job in ireland and ireland is giving me alot. i couldnt tell them i became unemploye because i made a stupid decision to come back for 3 months from the other side of the globe. the worst thing is not that they did not renew my contract. i found out something else as well. one of the guy at my old work. he has a criminal conviction. guess what guess what. ,y old job let him took 2 years leave of absence, kept the job for him and after he got out from jail. he came back to work. how nice. and i have done nothing wrong. they made me flew 10000 miles to come back for nothing. if you were me, would you be piss off about this country? every time when i go off for holiday for past 5 years. everytime when i come back. the stupid immigration officer in the airport keep looking for a visa on my passport and saying that i need visa to come in to the country even tho i work here. what a stupid xxxx. i was unemplyed for almost 8 months because of the last stpid job conned me fly back here from oz. i thought ireland is good, but no, no no. it is not. i just found a job not long ago. i am trying to save some money and get the hell out from thsi country.

and uuuu, my country has been very good to the irish, so i can complaint however i wish in here, hong kong host the biggest group of irish immigrants in the whole asia per for it size of population, it is not like we need them to be there, guess how they got there, my people been under the british for years. the irish came with the british, we used to have the open door policy that the british can move to hong kong whenever they wish. and in the british eyes. irish still within the british. the irish would qualify not the british citizenship but they would be qualify as british subject, in front of the hong kong government. the british do whatever they like, so the irish came along because they could walk in without going throught the same stupid immigration pain like i went throught or some of the people went throught here in this forum. the british left few years ago. the hong kong government did not imposed any new measure to make the white people diffcult to stay. and uuuuu, dont even think we need the irish to be there. the biggest investor in hong kong was not the irish, and not even the British. it was the japanese back then. now is the chinese government itself. we didnt say we dont need the irish, lets kick them out. no. i am an engineer myself. look at the irish government. the way they want is your young and edcuated, come to work for us. we will be good to you. when you come over. now your here. we can talk to you whichever way you like. you might be able to stay, we will think about it. come over. is that right? you tell me, is that right? plus, all those irishmen in hong kong. they all got good job because they are white when the british in charged. are you telling me a migrant working legally here in ireland is not contributing? do they have to be one of those white irishmen working in some high pay job in hong kong. then we can say that that migrant is contributing to the society??? huh?

is there any excuse there? some people told. is ireland. we have not experience things like this. the economy has been going good for past 10 years. and people has been coming in for past 10 years. i can understand that things cannot be changed over night. it has been foreigners coming for 10 years and they cannot think of something that could keep the edcuated and young people to work for ireland and make them feel ireland is their home? i can understand if ireland has changed government for past 10 years. in fact, the same bloody government in charge. finna FAIL. they really failed big time. i am just about to leave. the reason i am talking here because i am pssied about this place, and i need somewhere to take it out. i cannot yell at my friends. and uuuuuuu. some of my friends are facing the same problem. actually, if you live in dublin. why dont you go down to GNIB and ask the people there, i am sure i am not the only one!!!!!!!!

all i am saying, just be nice to people. make a change. and if the irish cant even do that for the foreigners spending their tiem here working for the society here. then forget it. you should write to the newspaper and tell tehm not to promote ireland anymore.

will answer the Microlab in this reply as well. not trying to be rude here. if you have been throught what i have been throught. you will understand what i am trying to say.

Oooolaahlaah.We all have to feel sorry for you now that you took 1 year holiday and that takes 5 months to sort out your work permit.
You can "debate" as much as you want.
That said, I`ll stop posting in this thread.

runie80 wrote:I suggest Irish Immigration Minister to learn different between "Embassy" and "Home Office".

dosent matter how anyone paints it these are two seperate entities.one working under the supervision of the other.

In fact the British Embassy is under the "supervision" of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office.

walrusgumble wrote: british citizen? you ignorant f*(k. SHe is an irish citizen (she never took up the british passport, entitled from birth, dont go whinging cause ye dont have it. maybe ye should understand this countries history before forking out a bit of money and waiting 5 years before getting yours. i would love if you had the balls to say that in a nationalist area in northern ireland. you wanna check out was articles 2 and 3 of the constitution and section 6 of inc act 1956-2004 before ya come out with that guff.so no she is not legally or politically a british citizen or nor was she ever.

Only the United Kingdom has the right to say who is and is not a British citizen. As a person born in Belfast in 1951, there is absolutely no ambiguity about the British citizenship of President McAleese. She is of course more than welcome to visit the British Embassy in Dublin to renounce it, if she sees fit.

It is ironic that contrary to many other "national minorities", those in the Irish nationalist community in Northern Ireland have always held full British citizenship. Had that not been the case, one suspects that they (and the Irish government) would have been the first to complain.

mktsoi: There is no doubt that you have been messed around here. Be strong! You would think your time in Ireland would count for something.

But speaking as a person who has had the mis-fortune of dealing with the Chinese Embassy in the UK. I can you they are no better and probably worse.

Also, an Irish person needs a visa to visit Hong Kong now. I don't know what any previous rules were. A British citizen does not need a visa to visit Hong Kong but does to visit the Chinese mainland. So I'm sure a few Irish people would exploit any British links if it meant they could stay, live and work in Hong Kong if thats what they wanted.

I have already been messed around by the Chinese Embassy when just applying for a visa! Also, I am only allowed to visit my wife in China for one month at a time.

limey wrote: Also, an Irish person needs a visa to visit Hong Kong now. I don't know what any previous rules were. A British citizen does not need a visa to visit Hong Kong but does to visit the Chinese mainland. So I'm sure a few Irish people would exploit any British links if it meant they could stay, live and work in Hong Kong if thats what they wanted.

Irish passport holders do not need a visa for visiting the HKSAR:
http://www.immd.gov.hk/ehtml/hkvisas_4.htm

The only difference is that British citizens may remain for 180 days, Irish citizens only for 90 days.

JAJ: In my case,I was applying for a one year multi-entry visa to china and Hong Kong using my British passport. But just because I also have Irish citizenship they refused to process my application and told me to leave the Embassy!

After reading up on it I thought that the person who dealt with me hadn't a bloody clue what they were doing so I went back a week later just with my British passport and got the visa no problem!

Thta is not the only time they have messed me around either!

Just a quick update on linguistic test for citizenship applicants. Yesterday, Justice Minister, during the interview to Today FM, clarified that he plans to carryout only English test for those who intends to take up citizenship.
He would, welcome, as a bouns, if anyone wants to take Irish exam, but not compulsory.

microlab wrote:

will answer the Microlab in this reply as well. not trying to be rude here. if you have been throught what i have been throught. you will understand what i am trying to say.

Oooolaahlaah.We all have to feel sorry for you now that you took 1 year holiday and that takes 5 months to sort out your work permit.
You can "debate" as much as you want.
That said, I`ll stop posting in this thread.

yeah, taking a year away from the people i used to work for. something is wrong? that year i was away. i didnt get pay. and if you think i am bad taking a year off. what about they let people take time off to go to jail? thats even better?

limey wrote:JAJ: In my case,I was applying for a one year multi-entry visa to china and Hong Kong using my British passport. But just because I also have Irish citizenship they refused to process my application and told me to leave the Embassy!

After reading up on it I thought that the person who dealt with me hadn't a bloody clue what they were doing so I went back a week later just with my British passport and got the visa no problem!

Thta is not the only time they have messed me around either!

limey

i am sorry to hear about you and your wife. here is my opinion. china still in charge by the dictators. whatever they say is the law. not like in ireland here. there is law to protect people, but you see. the irish government themself cannot even make sure the law and order is working. thats why people wants democracy and not dictatorship.

did you see ChIrL posted that the minister for justice really thinking to put the language test on. ok. i agree that the new citizen should know something about the country. here is the thing. those idiot in government here keep adding on something but they dont want to due with the problems from before. if i can speak englsih and know irish history, would that make them speed up their process time?

Ireland gets its first black mayor
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070628/ap_ ... tn3HEDW7oF

I am glad some people have positive stories.

JAJ wrote:

walrusgumble wrote: british citizen? you ignorant f*(k. SHe is an irish citizen (she never took up the british passport, entitled from birth, dont go whinging cause ye dont have it. maybe ye should understand this countries history before forking out a bit of money and waiting 5 years before getting yours. i would love if you had the balls to say that in a nationalist area in northern ireland. you wanna check out was articles 2 and 3 of the constitution and section 6 of inc act 1956-2004 before ya come out with that guff.so no she is not legally or politically a british citizen or nor was she ever.

Only the United Kingdom has the right to say who is and is not a British citizen. As a person born in Belfast in 1951, there is absolutely no ambiguity about the British citizenship of President McAleese. She is of course more than welcome to visit the British Embassy in Dublin to renounce it, if she sees fit.

It is ironic that contrary to many other "national minorities", those in the Irish nationalist community in Northern Ireland have always held full British citizenship. Had that not been the case, one suspects that they (and the Irish government) would have been the first to complain.

oh really??? so can you please enlighten me on what parts of the good friday agreement 1998 was all about?? or britiain finally recognising the new articles 2 and 3 of bunreacht na heireann (changed in order to keep te unionists happy and to finally recognise partition). calling gerry adams british now are you? (no i am not a supporter of him)head up to west belfast/derry city and ask them what nationality most of them consider themselves.the nationalists do not need to complain, they are entitled to make an application for an irish passport any time they want, the same as they can apply for a british passport its their entitlement by birth, its up to them to excercise their rights. this has always been the way since 1937. check out mary mcalese's books to see if she considered herself as british.

or the chen v mjelr/ireland case in ecj in 2003, you might remember that prior to the change of law in relation to automatic rights of non national parents who were allowed to stay here on basis of child been born in ireland, chen was granted residency despite the fact that her child was born in belfast. uk were kicking them out. but guess what? the chen's applied for an irish passport. why? article 2 and 3. what happens next? because of this new status, they have freedom of movement in europe. what was the reaction of european commissions reaction to ireland been the only country at that time allowing non nationals residecy on the basis of irish born child? they went mental fearing that ireland was a backdoor to imigrants abusing the immigration process all over europe. what was the reaction of eu when ireland came more into line with the rest of the union with regard to ireland's change of law? ting of relief.

walrusgumble wrote:

JAJ wrote:

walrusgumble wrote: british citizen? you ignorant f*(k. SHe is an irish citizen (she never took up the british passport, entitled from birth, dont go whinging cause ye dont have it. maybe ye should understand this countries history before forking out a bit of money and waiting 5 years before getting yours. i would love if you had the balls to say that in a nationalist area in northern ireland. you wanna check out was articles 2 and 3 of the constitution and section 6 of inc act 1956-2004 before ya come out with that guff.so no she is not legally or politically a british citizen or nor was she ever.

Only the United Kingdom has the right to say who is and is not a British citizen. As a person born in Belfast in 1951, there is absolutely no ambiguity about the British citizenship of President McAleese. She is of course more than welcome to visit the British Embassy in Dublin to renounce it, if she sees fit.

It is ironic that contrary to many other "national minorities", those in the Irish nationalist community in Northern Ireland have always held full British citizenship. Had that not been the case, one suspects that they (and the Irish government) would have been the first to complain.

oh really??? so can you please enlighten me on what parts of the good friday agreement 1998 was all about?? or britiain finally recognising the new articles 2 and 3 of bunreacht na heireann (changed in order to keep te unionists happy and to finally recognise partition). calling gerry adams british now are you? (no i am not a supporter of him)head up to west belfast/derry city and ask them what nationality most of them consider themselves.the nationalists do not need to complain, they are entitled to make an application for an irish passport any time they want, the same as they can apply for a british passport its their entitlement by birth, its up to them to excercise their rights. this has always been the way since 1937. check out mary mcalese's books to see if she considered herself as british.

or the chen v mjelr/ireland case in ecj in 2003, you might remember that prior to the change of law in relation to automatic rights of non national parents who were allowed to stay here on basis of child been born in ireland, chen was granted residency despite the fact that her child was born in belfast. uk were kicking them out. but guess what? the chen's applied for an irish passport. why? article 2 and 3. what happens next? because of this new status, they have freedom of movement in europe. what was the reaction of european commissions reaction to ireland been the only country at that time allowing non nationals residecy on the basis of irish born child? they went mental fearing that ireland was a backdoor to imigrants abusing the immigration process all over europe. what was the reaction of eu when ireland came more into line with the rest of the union with regard to ireland's change of law? ting of relief.

ireland is not the only country to give non eu parents child citizenship. spain still doing that. it just the irish law talk to up. united states and canada still giving out citizenship to illegal immigrants(including the so call undocumented irish) childs as long as they born within north america. here is the fact. the irish government will only bring out new immigration policy when the british has new policy. in fact, if those guys in the irish government so patriotic, why mary harney and the pds voted in favor of the british government before about the northern ireland.

if it wasnt the chen's case, the irish government wont even bother to change the law itself.

walrusgumble wrote: oh really??? so can you please enlighten me on what parts of the good friday agreement 1998 was all about?? or britiain finally recognising the new articles 2 and 3 of bunreacht na heireann (changed in order to keep te unionists happy and to finally recognise partition). calling gerry adams british now are you? (no i am not a supporter of him)head up to west belfast/derry city and ask them what nationality most of them consider themselves.the nationalists do not need to complain, they are entitled to make an application for an irish passport any time they want, the same as they can apply for a british passport its their entitlement by birth, its up to them to excercise their rights. this has always been the way since 1937. check out mary mcalese's books to see if she considered herself as british.

Once again. There was no amendment to the British nationality legislation in 1998. And the British Nationality Act 1981 does not make British citizenship acquired automatically under the law conditional on whether the individual concerned (or the parents of a child) want to have it or not.

And you need to do a little more historical research. The Irish government did not start freely granting Irish citizenship in Northern Ireland until 1956.

or the chen v mjelr/ireland case in ecj in 2003, you might remember that prior to the change of law in relation to automatic rights of non national parents who were allowed to stay here on basis of child been born in ireland, chen was granted residency despite the fact that her child was born in belfast. uk were kicking them out. but guess what? the chen's applied for an irish passport. why? article 2 and 3. what happens next?

Nothing to do with "articles 2 and 3" as you suggest, but instead the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended.

And you should be aware that Chen rights are restricted quite significantly, with no work rights for parents.

quote="JAJ"]

walrusgumble wrote: oh really??? so can you please enlighten me on what parts of the good friday agreement 1998 was all about?? or britiain finally recognising the new articles 2 and 3 of bunreacht na heireann (changed in order to keep te unionists happy and to finally recognise partition). calling gerry adams british now are you? (no i am not a supporter of him)head up to west belfast/derry city and ask them what nationality most of them consider themselves.the nationalists do not need to complain, they are entitled to make an application for an irish passport any time they want, the same as they can apply for a british passport its their entitlement by birth, its up to them to excercise their rights. this has always been the way since 1937. check out mary mcalese's books to see if she considered herself as british.

Once again. There was no amendment to the British nationality legislation in 1998. And the British Nationality Act 1981 does not make British citizenship acquired automatically under the law conditional on whether the individual concerned (or the parents of a child) want to have it or not.

And you need to do a little more historical research. The Irish government did not start freely granting Irish citizenship in Northern Ireland until 1956.

or the chen v mjelr/ireland case in ecj in 2003, you might remember that prior to the change of law in relation to automatic rights of non national parents who were allowed to stay here on basis of child been born in ireland, chen was granted residency despite the fact that her child was born in belfast. uk were kicking them out. but guess what? the chen's applied for an irish passport. why? article 2 and 3. what happens next?

Nothing to do with "articles 2 and 3" as you suggest, but instead the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended.

And you should be aware that Chen rights are restricted quite significantly, with no work rights for parents.[/quote]

the good friday agreement is an internatinal treaty.Article1 vi made both the uk and ireland and ni, to recognise the right of a person in ni to hold one or both nationalities. article 2 of the said agreement established that both governments would change their laws to give this treaty effect. ireland did in amending article 2 and 3 of bunreacht na heireann. this was significant in that ireland (wronlgy) never offically in writing into law ever recognise partition or the legal status of northern ireland. uk changed their laws to repeal act of government of ireland 1920. and gave this act (good friday) effect nothwithstanding any other previous enactments,(see annex A)

the chen case. yes you are correct with the inc act 1956 as amended. but, articles 2 and 3 of the consitution would always be invoked if chen had to appeal to irish courts if grant of passport was rejected. or if their was a dispute in relation to a proposal to change the irish nationality and citizenship act. the issue of catherine been irish was not in dispute in the ecj, but in the rep it helped to influence, along with lobe, the people of the country to vote for a change in the inc act by referendum

the chens intended to live in the uk, they were previously in wales but uk proposed to deport them and with no chance otherwise, they were legally advised to go to belfast so that the daughter could avail of irish citizenship. it was the uk who went mental who refused long term residency to mother and catherine because uk felt catherine did not excersie her eu free movemne rights . however applying eu law the court held that with regard to the fact that Mrs Chen’s move to Ireland was expressly intended to enable the child she was expecting to acquire Irish nationality, the Court made it clear that the United Kingdom cannot reject Catherine's application for a residence permit on the sole ground that her acquisition of Irish nationality was intended to secure a right of residence under Community law for a national of non-member country. As the Court has held in the past, the conditions for the acquisition and loss of nationality are a matter for each Member State and a Member State cannot restrict the effects of the grant of the nationality of another Member State.

the ecj also held that Community law guarantees dependent ascendant relatives of the holder of a right of residence a right to install themselves with that person. According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, that situation is characterised by the fact that the material support of the ascendant is provided by the person holding the right of residence. Since Mrs Chen is in the opposite situation, she could not therefore enjoy a right of residence on that basis.However, the Court held that to refuse Mrs Chen a right to reside with her daughter in the United Kingdom would render her daughter's right of residence totally ineffective. For Catherine to be able to enjoy her right of residence, she must, as a young child, be entitled to be accompanied by her mother, who is her carer.

as you know, Where a child who was an EU citizen was brought to the UK from another EU state by her parents, who themselves lacked EU status, two pre-conditions applicable to adult EU citizens seeking to exercise their right of free movement applied equally: the child and her parents thus each had to demonstrate possession of medical insurance as well as sufficient resources to avoid becoming a burden on the social assistance system of the host state. mrs chen's husband was a business made, so they proved that they had sufficent funds.the uk an irish gov argued that the person (catherine) would have to personally prove this. the ecj ignored the orign on basis of childs right to have parents with her. i dont think Mrs Chen was actually in a postion to work she was seen as an economic inactive person, (maybe you can confirm that) so rights to work were not at issue.

in the chen case, intrpretation of legislation concerned were:EC Directive 90/364 (on the right of residence a right to EU nationals who wish to take up residence in another MS for purposes other than economic activities or for the purpose of retirement which is subject to the conditions that the EU national has sufficient funds to support themselves and health insurance. Household and ‘dependent’ family members, regardless of their nationality, may join non-active and retired EU nationals).

as for the issue of citizenship to northern ireland people prior to the 1950's
they were still entitled to such citizenship under the 1956 act, but as you are correct, they were not given it automatically.the good friday agreement changed that. but mary macalese was and always was an irish citizen. her father was born in roscommon,in the free state. as such under the the 1935 act was a natural irsh citizen through her father.

walrusgumble wrote: the good friday agreement is an internatinal treaty.Article1 vi made both the uk and ireland and ni, to recognise the right of a person in ni to hold one or both nationalities. article 2 of the said agreement established that both governments would change their laws to give this treaty effect. ireland did in amending article 2 and 3 of bunreacht na heireann. this was significant in that ireland (wronlgy) never offically in writing into law ever recognise partition or the legal status of northern ireland. uk changed their laws to repeal act of government of ireland 1920. and gave this act (good friday) effect nothwithstanding any other previous enactments,(see annex A)

The Northern Ireland Act 1998 did not amend the British Nationality Act 1981.

"International treaties" do not become enforceable in domestic law without an Act of Parliament.

the chen case. yes you are correct with the inc act 1956 as amended. but, articles 2 and 3 of the consitution would always be invoked if chen had to appeal to irish courts if grant of passport was rejected. or if their was a dispute in relation to a proposal to change the irish nationality and citizenship act. the issue of catherine been irish was not in dispute in the ecj, but in the rep it helped to influence, along with lobe, the people of the country to vote for a change in the inc act by referendum

They didn't vote for a change in the Act. They voted for a constitutional change to enable a change in the Act. Big difference.

the ecj also held that Community law guarantees dependent ascendant relatives of the holder of a right of residence a right to install themselves with that person.

But no right to work.

as for the issue of citizenship to northern ireland people prior to the 1950's
they were still entitled to such citizenship under the 1956 act, but as you are correct, they were not given it automatically.the good friday agreement changed that.

No, that's not correct. Irish citizenship under the 1956 Act was automatic for those born in Northern Ireland, with the proviso that those born there on or after 6 December 1922 were not Irish citizens unless:

- they had ties by way of descent with the Republic of Ireland, or Northern Ireland prior to 06.12.1922, [this was most of the population] OR
- they made a declaration on a special form.

Don't believe me? The 1956 Act as originally enacted is on the BAILII website:
http://www.bailii.org/ie/legis/num_act/ ... 956.1.html

but mary macalese was and always was an irish citizen. her father was born in roscommon,in the free state. as such under the the 1935 act was a natural irsh citizen through her father.

No-one is disputing whether or not President McAleese is or has been an Irish citizen. That, however does not affect her status as a British citizen.

walrusgumble wrote:british citizen? you ignorant f*(k. SHe is an irish citizen (she never took up the british passport, entitled from birth...

Charming.

Has she formally renounced her British citizenship? She might have: I don't know. However, the mere fact that she (presumably) does not carry, or has never carried, a British passport does not affect her British citizenship, since citizenship is not predicated upon the possession, or not, of a passport. Neither is British citizenship predicated on the basis of whether one wishes (or not) to be a British citizen.

Since she holds another citizenship (Irish), she could renounce her British citizenship (to the British authorities and in the way prescribed by British law and regulation) and she would no longer be a British citizen - if she hasn't done this already.

JAJ wrote:

walrusgumble wrote: the good friday agreement is an internatinal treaty.Article1 vi made both the uk and ireland and ni, to recognise the right of a person in ni to hold one or both nationalities. article 2 of the said agreement established that both governments would change their laws to give this treaty effect. ireland did in amending article 2 and 3 of bunreacht na heireann. this was significant in that ireland (wronlgy) never offically in writing into law ever recognise partition or the legal status of northern ireland. uk changed their laws to repeal act of government of ireland 1920. and gave this act (good friday) effect nothwithstanding any other previous enactments,(see annex A)

The Northern Ireland Act 1998 did not amend the British Nationality Act 1981.


"International treaties" do not become enforceable in domestic law without an Act of Parliament.

the chen case. yes you are correct with the inc act 1956 as amended. but, articles 2 and 3 of the consitution would always be invoked if chen had to appeal to irish courts if grant of passport was rejected. or if their was a dispute in relation to a proposal to change the irish nationality and citizenship act. the issue of catherine been irish was not in dispute in the ecj, but in the rep it helped to influence, along with lobe, the people of the country to vote for a change in the inc act by referendum

They didn't vote for a change in the Act. They voted for a constitutional change to enable a change in the Act. Big difference.

the ecj also held that Community law guarantees dependent ascendant relatives of the holder of a right of residence a right to install themselves with that person.

But no right to work.

as for the issue of citizenship to northern ireland people prior to the 1950's
they were still entitled to such citizenship under the 1956 act, but as you are correct, they were not given it automatically.the good friday agreement changed that.

No, that's not correct. Irish citizenship under the 1956 Act was automatic for those born in Northern Ireland, with the proviso that those born there on or after 6 December 1922 were not Irish citizens unless:

- they had ties by way of descent with the Republic of Ireland, or Northern Ireland prior to 06.12.1922, [this was most of the population] OR
- they made a declaration on a special form.

Don't believe me? The 1956 Act as originally enacted is on the BAILII website:
http://www.bailii.org/ie/legis/num_act/ ... 956.1.html

but mary macalese was and always was an irish citizen. her father was born in roscommon,in the free state. as such under the the 1935 act was a natural irsh citizen through her father.

No-one is disputing whether or not President McAleese is or has been an Irish citizen. That, however does not affect her status as a British citizen.

i am not disputing with you about the position on british legisaltion. i am not disputing any northerns automatic right to irish citizenship or to british citizenship. why would the 1998 agreement want to change british legisaltion? it does not effect the main land britian. they changed their law in relation to laws affecting northern ireland and the laws in relation to the devolution of powers to northern ireland, as they had to change their setting arrangements in westminister, so it was not a change to nationality legislation.

what i find ignorant and annoying is when people who are not from this island, but i fully aware of the historical situation in the north blurt out, as assumed in previosu threads including this, - ya sure ireland dont make sense, sure they have a british citizen as thier head of state. i cant speak for every nationalist in the north, but for many i know, extinuishing their british citizenship is often as a sign that they dont wish to be considered a brit (not neccessary for all nationalists of course, i would assure you that if you researched a person such as macalese, that would be very much the case) their is a joke we have about the brits when it comes to sport. when someone like the boxer barry macguigan (who is from monaghan in the province of ulster- but in the rep) won fights, the brits were always quick to confirm that he was one of their own,and out comes the union jack, but when he lost, all of a sudden they realise he is from the south and out comes the tricolour. the same with eddie irvine when he was a formula 1 driver. an other example was colin farrell (bad example)... samuel l jackson was interviewed by sky news at some flashy do in hollywood when he was interviewed by some ignorant brit who asked samuel what was it like to "to work with one of your own"... to with mr jackson goes i dont know because he is not one of your own, he is irish

another fine example of such ignorance, came 3 years ago from fifa. when they proposed that for administrative reasons it would be easier if all the northern ireland soccer players hold a british passport and used it for travelling to away games. the nationalists went crazy because, 1. they never exercised their right to get a british passport (yes you are correct they dont need to do such a thing to be considered a brit) as in their eyes they did not wish to be seen as a brit. 2. they held irish passports, as evidence that they wished to be considered as irish. 3. fifa, possibliy accidently faield to recognise that there was such a thing as the good friday agreement. after the dispute, fifa coped on and scrapped the proposal.

what i am disputin is a previous post stating some one such as macalese is a british citizen. yes to an outsider that is techically correct and you are correct in stating what you said. but, as you know it is not nor has it ever been so straight forward to assume a person in northern ireland is a british citizen stright away. whilst at the same time one would techincally be correct to assume such a thing, it is wrong to say it conslusively. i got the opinion to the previous posts were saying a northern did not have automatic rights to nationality and for reasons stated i submit that people such as our irish oresident was always entitled to such through decent and this was something she excerised. i do apoligise for going on, but political identity is alot different to want legisaltors put into the staute books.

Christophe wrote:

walrusgumble wrote:british citizen? you ignorant f*(k. SHe is an irish citizen (she never took up the british passport, entitled from birth...

Charming.

Has she formally renounced her British citizenship? She might have: I don't know. However, the mere fact that she (presumably) does not carry, or has never carried, a British passport does not affect her British citizenship, since citizenship is not predicated upon the possession, or not, of a passport. Neither is British citizenship predicated on the basis of whether one wishes (or not) to be a British citizen.

Since she holds another citizenship (Irish), she could renounce her British citizenship (to the British authorities and in the way prescribed by British law and regulation) and she would no longer be a British citizen - if she hasn't done this already.

well, all i can say is my reaction/kinder is alot better than the reaction one would might get if they went up to someone from derry city or west belfast to remind them that they are also british citizens. (that includes people from this side of the country who have done so when they are arguing with a northie) lets just say there is still some bad blood in certain areas with the south and main land britian in the eyes of said people.

They didn't vote for a change in the Act. They voted for a constitutional change to enable a change in the Act. Big difference. [/quote]

right, .

i mentioned the consitution in realation to chen because the constitution gave the power to inc act to state the laws of citizenship. you are correct the consitution was not mentioned in chen, as the scope was put into practise by the irish citizenship act. i was wrong to bothe to mention the constitution as the chen's irish nationality was never in dispute as that was the status quo then. but had the laws under the act disputed catherine chen's irish nationlity, chen would have relied on article 2,3, and 9. of the consitution to avail of such citizenship, (again no one is disputing this)

as you know constitution will always enjoy supremacy over acts made by legisaltors who are voted by the people. as you know,no laws could infringe the constitution. under article 6 - All powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive, under God, from the people, whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State and, in final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy, according to the requirements of the common good. of course, These powers of government are exercisable only by or on the authority of the organs of State established by this Constitution.


the constitution helped to change the irish nationality and citizens act twice.

the first referendum was to change article 2 and 3 as a result of the good friday agreement. as a result section 6 would have alter slightly(ok not in relation to chen,)

the second referendum in june 2004, article 9 of the consitution changed (27th amendment). as result of such change, the irish nationality and citizenship Act 1956 was amedened. this change in the constituion was brouht about or influenced by the cases of loebe and chen, which are in relation to the irish citizenship of a person whose parents are non nationals. these cases influenced peoples decisions in the referndum. as a result of the change in article9 ofbunreacht na heireann, section 6a was added to the inc act 2004, with references to such people if born in northern ireland whose parents where not from either of the jurisidictions.

Walrus: Whilst many in Northern Ireland would not appreciate the fact they are entitled to both Irish and British citizenship.

There is no denying that it can be extremely useful when it comes to immigration matters as many on this forum have already discovered!