- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, Administrator
That says it all!, and as I predicted by the end of 2013 all backlogs will be cleared!, at that is the case.moro1 wrote:The total number of applications awaiting a decision currently stands at 9,000, which is less than the total number of new applications received over a 6 month period.
Your prediction was right and I respect you for that. But I doubt if they will be able to clear the 9,000 currently awaiting decision before the end of 2013. 9,000 application will be two ceremony if they decide to part into two (4500/4500 it is clear there will be only one ceremony left for the year after 21st October.IntegratedMigrant wrote:That says it all!, and as I predicted by the end of 2013 all backlogs will be cleared!, at that is the case.moro1 wrote:The total number of applications awaiting a decision currently stands at 9,000, which is less than the total number of new applications received over a 6 month period.
Applications from 2014 may be decided in just 4 months time but I must also point out that other measures might be brought in place like deferrals for people with offenses etc
Could you be more specific as what serious criminal records means? Because you made it sounds like some serial killers was granted citizenshipmred1 wrote:I doubt a decision can be made on 9000 applicants before the end of the year...But yes, when its all cleared, I guess we will be hearing more about deferrals ...Now, How will one challenge the fact that some people with serious "criminal records" were granted whilst deferrals are being given to people with "minor criminal offences"...I am certain the minister will think very carefully before granting out deferrals/refusals for no just reason. Off course I have only heard 1/2 of these cases. I do commend Alan Shatter, he has done very well...
IntegratedMigrant wrote:Could you be more specific as what serious criminal records means? Because you made it sounds like some serial killers was granted citizenshipmred1 wrote:I doubt a decision can be made on 9000 applicants before the end of the year...But yes, when its all cleared, I guess we will be hearing more about deferrals ...Now, How will one challenge the fact that some people with serious "criminal records" were granted whilst deferrals are being given to people with "minor criminal offences"...I am certain the minister will think very carefully before granting out deferrals/refusals for no just reason. Off course I have only heard 1/2 of these cases. I do commend Alan Shatter, he has done very well...
Totally agree with you, Alan shatter done a great job but what is going to happen when he leaves.jeupsy wrote:I think it would make sense to change the law so that minor offences are consistently excluded regardless of the government in charge or the person processing the application; and instead it would make more sense to request minimum English or Irish language proficiency and make sure future citizens have basic knowledge of the history and political institutions of the country.
Someone who drove through a red light once, can speak perfect English, has made the effort to learn a bit of Irish, and has pretty good knowledge of Irish culture and the politics will probably be a better integrated citizen and more informed voter than someone who never committed a traffic offence but can only speak poor English, has no local relations, and doesn't know anything able the politicians he will have the right to elect.
There you go!, its a traffic offense and if you've never been convicted of any offenses regarding how many offenses you've had, then you are 100% clean as far as I am concerned. Up to 1 miillion people every year could commit traffic offenses each year and that doesnt mean that they are bad in any way shape or form. Some or should I say all countries like the UK dont include traffic offense as their naturalisation decision making as it is totally and utter nonsense!.mred1 wrote:GOD Forbid anyone applying for citizenship is a serial killer... I wouldn't know much about Individual cases. I should have mentioned, someone with series of traffic offences may have been granted citizenship a few months back whilst someone applying in the coming months with the same offence may be deferred for 18 months. Although the minister has a discretion on whom he grants & who he defers, furthermore, it depends on the person dealing with someone's file..Is it fair that some are granted and some are deferred for the same offence? I am not condoning any form of crime or offence BTW.
Well the Irish government clearly prefer one with no offense at all and is of great character and help makes the society a safer place than one with major conviction/s , speak good English and Irish language, know everything about history and politics and is a treat to the society.jeupsy wrote:I think it would make sense to change the law so that minor offences are consistently excluded regardless of the government in charge or the person processing the application; and instead it would make more sense to request minimum English or Irish language proficiency and make sure future citizens have basic knowledge of the history and political institutions of the country.
Someone who drove through a red light once, can speak perfect English, has made the effort to learn a bit of Irish, and has pretty good knowledge of Irish culture and the politics will probably be a better integrated citizen and more informed voter than someone who never committed a traffic offence but can only speak poor English, has no local relations, and doesn't know anything able the politicians he will have the right to elect.
Well I think a drunk driver is clearly a danger to Irish society and most will agree with me on that one. And yes if someone did not re-offend for a longer period of time, it is assumed that S/he has learned their lesson and will be less likely to re-offend, unlike someone that re-offends once every year!jeupsy wrote:Would you think that someone who got caught speeding once in their life is a danger for Irish society? And is that type of person less of a danger now than it was 5 years ago? If not, why would that person not deserve citizenship 5 years ago, and deserve it today?
jeupsy wrote:And about languages ... Different people can have different opinions, but I think someone who can't handle basic life activities in English is clearly not integrated.
Also I wouldn't trust someone with absolutely no idea about Irish history and no understanding of the political system to vote and decide the future of the country.
I think that requiring a reasonable score in IELTS (5+) would be a good thing. It amazes me how many people attempt (unsuccessfully) to live and work here with no English knowledge at all. If one wants to become a citizen of an English-speaking country, one must put some effort into learning the language.IntegratedMigrant wrote:There are already lots of requirements to meet before applying for Irish citizenship and that is enough already. The Irish government have reviewed the Citizenship-Test and found out its too much burden for applicants having to meet all these requirements.
IntegratedMigrant wrote:Well I think a drunk driver is clearly a danger to Irish society and most will agree with me on that one. And yes if someone did not re-offend for a longer period of time, it is assumed that S/he has learned their lesson and will be less likely to re-offend, unlike someone that re-offends once every year!
Yes agreed as well, because someone speaks English doesn't make them a good or well integrated person.IntegratedMigrant wrote: I agree with your side of thinking Jeupsy dont get me wrong, but what I see that you think one-sided and not the other. You should think of the whole picture of things.
I have seen people with fluent English and even people born in Ireland/Europe that do not want to integrate with society. I dont want to go on about this but you what...
Most people with less understanding of political system dont vote anyway because they have no interest at it whatsoever. Those that do vote have interest in politics and have basic understanding about how it works!.
Yes exactly what I was thinking. This could easily be put in place overnight, wouldn't cost a cent to the State, would only be a small additional burden on the applicants in comparison to the existing cost of getting citizenship, and would be a fair and standardised way to ensure a minimum level of proficiency.Kinto wrote:
I think that requiring a reasonable score in IELTS (5+) would be a good thing. It amazes me how many people attempt (unsuccessfully) to live and work here with no English knowledge at all. If one wants to become a citizen of an English-speaking country, one must put some effort into learning the language.
This puts no burden on the state. As for the applicant, taking a standardized English test, assuming basic competence, shouldn't be a big deal.
I absolutely agree with this.jeupsy wrote:Would you think that someone who got caught speeding once in their life is a danger for Irish society? And is that type of person less of a danger now than it was 5 years ago? If not, why would that person not deserve citizenship 5 years ago, and deserve it today?
I think the law should set a high level definition of what "good character" means to bring a bit more consistency in the process.