I don’t see what exactly is wrong with what he said.
Fairly weak criticism from Gannon, it’s hard to make out that what’s going on is scapegoating when Mac Lochlainn was fairly clear that he thinks government *should* help refugees but that they should also show the same eagerness to fix problems domestically:
>“The Government were complaining about having to spend billions to help their own people in utter distress whose lives have collapsed, buildings collapsing around them in Donegal and the west and the same Government were almost boasting to the world about spending billions and rightly,” he told The Nine Til Noon show with Greg Hughes.
>“**That’s our place in the world, we help out refugees, every country does that around the world. But they were complaining doing the same for their own people and I think that’s stayed in a lot of minds and hearts** and it goes to the core of what’s wrong with the approach of this government.
This is trying to suggest that SF are anti refugee , well they aren’t. We have a duty to take asylum seekers and provide them with proper accommodation (homes) and not stuffing them in hotel rooms in rural towns and student accommodation. This Government failing on housing both Irish people and refugees.
To be fair, Mac Lochlainn, can/should make the claim about MICA redress not being sufficient, but there’s absolutely no need to drag in the support of Ukranians fleeing a warzone as some form of relevant claim of hypocrisy.
Our support of refugees has nothing to do with having a cap on MICA redress.
Well he’s right.
The Government only yesterday were talking about adopting parts of Ukraine to reconstruct when they can’t even get housing and infrastructure built here.
What he said is true though. The government should make realistic and manageable commitments. Doing things just to “look good” is not a sound policy.
He’s dead right in fairness.
He’s right, you know
I wish people could otp-in to a refugee fund. By that I mean you have to pay 20% tax, but on your tax return you should have the option of specifying a percentage capped at 2% to contribute to a refugee fund. Because on one hand the government is the only entity that can give permission to enter the country, but has it’s hands tied because of the large cost in getting refugees off their feet and on the other hand, no business is allowed to help the undocumented – even if the business is struggling to find workers. The opt-in approach of the already mandatory tax is the only realistic way of enabling the government to help without having to pin them to tax payer decisions based on numbers and not contributions made. The rich and wealthy will likely opt to help refugees and can support that wish with money, but because you only get 1 vote no matter how much money you contribute, the working class will always dedicate their vote to social security.
10 comments
I don’t see what exactly is wrong with what he said.
Fairly weak criticism from Gannon, it’s hard to make out that what’s going on is scapegoating when Mac Lochlainn was fairly clear that he thinks government *should* help refugees but that they should also show the same eagerness to fix problems domestically:
>“The Government were complaining about having to spend billions to help their own people in utter distress whose lives have collapsed, buildings collapsing around them in Donegal and the west and the same Government were almost boasting to the world about spending billions and rightly,” he told The Nine Til Noon show with Greg Hughes.
>“**That’s our place in the world, we help out refugees, every country does that around the world. But they were complaining doing the same for their own people and I think that’s stayed in a lot of minds and hearts** and it goes to the core of what’s wrong with the approach of this government.
This is trying to suggest that SF are anti refugee , well they aren’t. We have a duty to take asylum seekers and provide them with proper accommodation (homes) and not stuffing them in hotel rooms in rural towns and student accommodation. This Government failing on housing both Irish people and refugees.
To be fair, Mac Lochlainn, can/should make the claim about MICA redress not being sufficient, but there’s absolutely no need to drag in the support of Ukranians fleeing a warzone as some form of relevant claim of hypocrisy.
Our support of refugees has nothing to do with having a cap on MICA redress.
Well he’s right.
The Government only yesterday were talking about adopting parts of Ukraine to reconstruct when they can’t even get housing and infrastructure built here.
What he said is true though. The government should make realistic and manageable commitments. Doing things just to “look good” is not a sound policy.
He’s dead right in fairness.
He’s right, you know
I wish people could otp-in to a refugee fund. By that I mean you have to pay 20% tax, but on your tax return you should have the option of specifying a percentage capped at 2% to contribute to a refugee fund. Because on one hand the government is the only entity that can give permission to enter the country, but has it’s hands tied because of the large cost in getting refugees off their feet and on the other hand, no business is allowed to help the undocumented – even if the business is struggling to find workers. The opt-in approach of the already mandatory tax is the only realistic way of enabling the government to help without having to pin them to tax payer decisions based on numbers and not contributions made. The rich and wealthy will likely opt to help refugees and can support that wish with money, but because you only get 1 vote no matter how much money you contribute, the working class will always dedicate their vote to social security.
Gannon is so mediocre.