My Photo

Blog powered by Typepad


« It's Fat Cat Wednesday | Main | Follow-Up to the Far Right's Problems with Immigration Data »

January 15, 2019


Derek O'Flaherty

And of course a great many of the migrants here from the US, UK Australia and NZ are part of the diaspora.


You don't tell us about the high retention rate of failed asylum applicants: endless appeals, hence hence high numbers in direct provision.

Cllr Keith Redmond

We were bound to agree on something eventually Michael! Keith.

Michael Taft

Derek - good point.

Ted - there's no comparative data on that. Don't know how Ireland's situation compares with other country. But we do know that there is a higher than average rejection rate on top of a low application rate compared to other high-income EU countries.

Keith - let's hope more to come. Don't be pessimistic!


The issue is 'Foreign Born' not 'Citizen'
The population of foreign born is around 18% as per the last census.
Seeing as that number was around 2% 20 years ago it reflects a massive shift in Irish demographics.
The entire study is an exercise in obfuscation


I appreciate that your research is comparative. And things may or may not take longer in other countries, but I wouldn't take any solace from that. The delays in Ireland are far too long regardless.


nice use of labelling. attach 'far right' so that anyone even raising any objection is automatically marked. its cheap, its lazy.

you say you want a debate? an open honest debate? you don't. you're just hoping no one calls you out

there is a mountain of data proving you wrong from every possible angle. the problem is the debate usually centres on ''economics'' which is essentially modern astrology. If you must go down that road Danish economists found such a massive impact of non western migration on their state they began finding ways of limiting exposure. Douglas Murray talks about how the gov hired favourable ideologically aligned people like Jonathan Portes to rubber stamp their policy with cherrypicked data in his book Strange Death of Europe. social cohesion is destroyed by the type of mass migration we are seeing and seems to be in store....but hey at least we weren't racist!

John Walsh

You make a comparison with eg Sweden and admit they have integration problems . I doubt Irish people want the same to happen so now is the time to object . There are no unemployment stats for those asylum seekers that got residence here . The rate of false claims for those that apply in Ireland is still 90% . This figure is only reduced as refugees were taken at source .You have shown only non eu unemployment so that is not accurate as many came here to work .A better indication would be unemployment among those former asylum seekers who got residence and their nationality .The unemployment figures include the whole population when you see stats for those between 18 and 65 the percentage is much higher .
You show a distinct bias for the left so its not an impartial article .

Michael Taft

Dave - unfortunately, Ireland doesn't supply detailed data on foreign-born. And there's no 'country of birth' data for employment in Eurostat. That's why the use of citizens / non-citizens. If you know of a comparative database re: country of birth, pleas let me know.

Con - I said the Far Right distort data, not those engaged in an informed debate (regardless of position) on immigration. Not everyone who questions immigration policy is Far Right; but all/almost all Far Right are anti-immigration.

John Walsh - If you know of a database re: former asylum-seekers' employment and a 'false claim' rate, please let me know.

Marcas Ó Doibhilin

It's wonderful how people like Con upthread, who imagine they are refuting the gravamen of this post, in fact reinforce it.


Labour Force Survey is useful for actual unemployment figures.

The far right have no interest in an honest debate on anything. But happily distort facts to suit their agenda.


Dave is wrong in claiming the percentage of the population who were ‘foreign born’ was 2% 20 years ago. In the 1996 census it was 9.3%. That’s an increase of 9% over 20 years.

First, our greater diversity has brought cultural benefits; second, the increase is linked to our economic growth - in a multitude of ways, including driving that growth, and allowing us to reap benefits of the growth.

Interestingly, by focusing on ‘foreign born’, Dave is hopefully representing an acceptance of multicultural Ireland, once we reach the second generation - and I trust he abhors hypocrisy enough to complain about returning emigrants and there families as much as the ‘new Irish’.

Michael notes that the facts aren’t central to the ‘debates’ people try to have here, but hopefully we can agree (even Dave) that it’s bst to work with the actual numbers, rather than making them up.

Michael Taft

Alan - Thanks for that link.

Andrew - well said.


Michael you wrote the line 'Claims that Ireland has a high level of non-citizens'
This is misleading.
The issue for most people is that Ireland has a high level of Non Nationals i.e. foreigners.Not merely 'Citizens'
I realise that probably upsets you, horrifies you even.

Pader B

What sort nonsence is this. Anybody with eyes who can see common sence knows that foreign population in Ireland is more than 11.8%. It's more like 20% at this stage. But then again yer here to give out about the right wing cause apparently they don't like to use facts, well apparently the left don't either!

Could ye highlight the negative impact immigration is having in Ireland? Maybe the gangs sprouting up in Parts of Dublin, or about cases of the "New Irish" being involved in ISIS abroad. Or the cases amongst sexual assaults carried out by'Asian men' no no ofcourse not! That would be actually telling the truth for a change and the left don't like the truth.


That’s a very useful set of figures, thank you. I’ve only just seen it now, a month later, but if you are still looking at it, I was wondering about your first conclusion:
‘Ireland has a relatively high level of non-citizens in its population. But this is down to the high level of UK citizens and citizens from other English-speaking countries (US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand)’.
Is this accurate? Your figures are as follows:

Total non-citizen - 11.8%

Subtract from this

UK - 2.5% (ie 19% of 11.8%)
US, Canada etc. - 0.5%
Asian, African etc. - 1.9%

This leaves just under 7%. I assume this consists of EU citizens (excluding UK). So this is the biggest block, nearly 3 times the size of UK citizens, or more than twice the English speaking group. So it would be more accurate to say that the relatively high level of non-citizens is principally down to those of EU origin.
(By the way, where are Russians counted - is it among ‘Asians’?)

Gregory Finkelson

Wonderful post! This article includes very important information. I find this post very useful to me. Thank you for sharing it with us.

The comments to this entry are closed.