outsidein

Lenihan v Varadkar

September 8, 2008 @ 9:00 am | by Bryan

Leo Varadkar

Fine Gael enterprise and employment spokesman Leo Varadkar sparked some controversy last week. He asked about the feasibility of foreign unemployed workers in Ireland being given a lump-sum benefit payment if they agreed to return home.

I had the pleasure of catching the TD and Conor Lenihan, Minister of state for integration, go at it on radio. Unfortunately I only caught a short snippet of the debate, but it was very interesting. From the little I heard, it seems that the minister feels that Fine Gael is trying to stir up anti-immigrant feelings for their own political ends. Mr Varadkar on the other hand was basically saying that any suggestion the opposition makes to do with immigration is branded as racism. The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.

On one hand, I think the word ‘racism’ is thrown around too loosely here. The problem with using it in any but the most obvious cases is that it loses its power, and when it is used correctly, the phrase ‘playing the race card’ gains unwarranted credibility. Worse still, the fear of being labelled a racist is probably a one of the biggest reasons that more politicians do not openly discuss immigration related issues.

On the other hand, there have been some ‘clumsy’ statements on immigrant issues from Fine Gail lawmakers recently. The word ‘segregation’ comes to mind. Call me a cynic, but I doubt there is a politician out there who is unaware of the publicity that comes from making such a statement. It then makes it difficult to tell the innocent gaffe from something more sinister.

As the next election cycle approaches, especially if the economy doesn’t improve, I’m sure that there are going to be a lot more immigration related controversies. Society needs a scapegoat.

28 Comments »

September 8, 2008
9:21 am

I’d pay Leo Varadkar to leave the country and not return for at least 3 years.

Comment by An Fear Bolg

September 8, 2008
10:37 am

…which is ironic, since most of these immigrants came here because they feel they had been made scapegoats back home!

Comment by JL Pagano

September 8, 2008
2:31 pm

It was an incredible proposal from Varadkar, and one that deserves to be wholly condemned. It’s a bit scary how far to the right FG seem to be willing to swing at the moment….

Comment by Neil

September 8, 2008
4:17 pm

Bryan, it doesn’t all have to be about finding scapegoats. Any nation state is going to seek to control the movement of people in and out of its area of responsibility simply because if populations were to increase or decrease wildly it would be impossible to plan at all. I think that if significant numbers of recent economic immigrants in particular those from eastern Europe move, either home or to the UK or Germany, there will be talk of a further need to bail out the housing sector as it will leave many houses empty.

There are economic upsides and downsides to changes in the demographics of any country. More people of working age is a boon to a country in that it usually means more tax revenue to fund services for the young and the old but more people who are dependent then the opposite is true. In many ways the problems in schools on the outskirts of Dublin mirrors those of the late 60s and early 70s when many Dublin families were moved to new estates around Tallaght and Finglas that were ill equipped to cope with them in terms of schools and other facilities. Problems that in truth, we never got around to dealing with.

Strangely enough the suggestion from Leo echoes a practice that used to exist (and I think may still be on the books) in the early 90s in which in moving to another EU country you could retain your existing social welfare payments for 6/12 months. It was used by some Irish people to go to places that were less expensive to live in while they looked for work there. I meet an Irish person in Portugal in ‘92 who had done this. It may be that this was only available to those on unemployment benefit rather than assistance I’m not sure. But the scheme did exist, I’m pretty sure of it.

Comment by Dan Sullivan

September 8, 2008
6:42 pm

AFB - why?

JL - It’s not a comfortable place to be.

Neil - It’s interesting you should say that. I’m sure a lot of people will think it is a sensible proposal. I don’t think it makes much sense since we are talking about EU citizens for the most part. I think the overall reaction though will be a good indicator of public sentiment w.r.t. migrants.

Dan - Isn’t freedom of movement a central tenant of the EU? Doesn’t paying EU citizens to move to another jurisdiction fly in the face of what the union is supposed to represent?

Comment by Bryan

September 8, 2008
6:44 pm

I support Varadkar on this. What I call the PC-brigade are trying to force Ireland to repeat the mistakes of other EU countries like France and the UK where the political Establishment silence all debate on immigration-control. On the point some have made about Varadkar being of Mauritian ancestory on his father’s side, I would argue that surely this proves he is not being racist. The US is a multi-ethnic melting-pot yet even there, immigration control is a major issue. I am tired of the Irish Left and the PC-brigade demonising people who question the open-doors stance on immigration that the party-bosses want in order to reward corporate-benefactors with cheap labour. I am opposed to racism, but strongly believe that a head-in-the-sand approach that denies that immigration comes with disadvantages as well as advantages risks leading to the rise of Far Right parties in this country. It is also notable that one of the main reasons for the collapse of the National Front vote in the French presidential elections was that Sarkozy pushed for a policy of tightening controls on immigration, as well as the need for integration. The French, with a huge population, had a long lead-in time to learn the lessons of integrating such a huge foreign-national population. We don’t have the same luxury considering we have a small native population and that foreign-nationals have reached critical-mass in just 10 yrs here, compared to 50 years for France and the UK. This is a good policy-proposal from Varadkar, unlike his colleague Brian Hayes’ proposal for segregation. In a country in a severe recession, we can no longer sustain a situation where we are importing cheap labour to compete with Irish labour for work, and whereby 90% of new jobs are going to foreign-nationals. I have no ill-will towards foreign-nationals, but charity begins at home, and ignoring the challenges of immigration and focusing only on the advantages, is no longer tenable and I welcome FG’s realisation of that.

Comment by Brian Boru

September 8, 2008
9:51 pm

Brian - I think the ‘racist’ allegation is unwarranted. But I don’t think there is any merit to this suggestion. I don’t think it has anything to do with immigration control. The majority of migrants in this case are EU nationals. They have as much right to claim welfare benefits in Ireland as an Irish person has doing the same thing in Britain, France or Poland.

Comment by Bryan

September 8, 2008
10:04 pm

You’re completely correct to say that freedom of movement is a basic tenant of the European Union as is free movement of labour, though they’re not exactly the same thing. The first means you can move around and live anywhere you can afford to, the other means you’ve the right to work in that country. Ireland, UK and Sweden were the only ones to offer the latter in 2004 when the accession of the ten happened.

They’re not being paid to move, they’re being provided with the financial means to look for work elsewhere in Europe where they might have a better chance of getting work. We used to do this for Irish people a decade or so ago. Like I said I’m not sure if the system still allows for it. The additional proviso is that they don’t come back which would seem to break the principle behind the free movement of labour. The dole is after all a jobseeker’s allowance there is nothing wrong with saying, we’ll pay some of it up front and you can seek a job anywhere in the EU that it is legal for you to work in. It’s not Ireland’s fault that the UK and Sweden would be the only other options.

What I find curious about the source of some of the outrage, say that from Thomas Byrne TD, is that the Irish government prevented people who did come to Ireland from the accession countries from claiming benefits here unless they had been working here for more than 2 years and I don’t recall any FFers beating their chest about the racism of it all then.

Comment by Dan Sullivan

September 8, 2008
11:58 pm

(1) Bryan, there is a lot of worth in your article. Some people are too quick to label other points of view as being racist, but I also think that others equally use this term as a pre-emptive belittlement of likely rebuttal whenever they make a contraversial remark on immigration or multiculturalism. Given the pain and suffering that this vile predjudice has caused, the term should be used a lot more carefully and sparingly than it is.

(2) I find it very troublling that mainstream Irish politicians are increasingly taking pop shots at our migrant community. Migrants have the least amount of suffrage in this country and the least amount of public representation. We like to think that, as Irish people, we will stick up for the little man. Now, though, when a politican launches a cowardly attack on this soft target, they are more likely to be applauded for it! It is bullying and, as such, it angers me to be honest.

(3) As a remark on the Varadkar question, the reason why it is unacceptable is that we allowed migrants in, gave them jobs that often times Irish people did not want in order to sustain our growing economy, and taxed them accordingly. Some have lost their jobs in recent times, but have earned the right to unemplyment benefit having paid their dues along the way. However, rather than pay them what is rightfully theirs, this idea would have us say to such people that they are thanked for their hard work, but that they are now being SINGLED OUT for pressure to leave our country again. Cut it anyway you want, but that is to imply a degree of second-class citizenship.

PC is so 1990s, but no one who believes in either the preservation of human dignity and citizens in a democracy having the right to equal opportunities can ever think that this is a wise path to travel down. Even if you could get your head around this proposal, another more draconian one would surely follow and then another. It is called the thin edge of the wedge.

Comment by Longman Oz

10.

September 9, 2008
12:41 am

Dan - They’re not being paid to move, they’re being provided with the financial means to look for work elsewhere in Europe where they might have a better chance of getting work. We used to do this for Irish people a decade or so ago.

That may well be the case, but it come across as, ‘We really don’t want you here. We don’t want you here so much that we’ll pay you to leave.’

And that may be how some people feel at the moment, but I would be very surprised if that were true of the majority.

Longman - I totally hear you. The sad thing is that as a migrant, I do feel as though I’m a second class citizen. Actually, I’m not even a citizen legally, and I am aware of the fact that next time I go to get my visa renewed, the Justice Minister would be well within his rights if he decided that he no longer wanted me in this country.

It surprises me that some groups are seem to want the same state of affairs to exist in relation to migrants from EU member states.

Comment by Bryan

11.

September 9, 2008
1:39 am

Surely the fact that Varadkar’s father was of Mauritian origins means that what he is saying can’t be racist?

Comment by Brian Boru

12.

September 9, 2008
9:42 am

I don’t think LV is racist, but I think it is a stupid idea which, at the very least, is likely to breach EU rules (surely if we were to offer EU citizens this package we would have to offer it to Irish citizens too?). Maybe not racist, but verging on xenophobic. Are we to accept foreigners only as workers, as productive units? These people have paid taxes just like the rest of us, and are entitled to stay here for as long as they are entitled to stay here.

There was an excellent piece on this in (I think) the Sunday Tribune last week saying that this is the FG method at the moment - float this kind of rubbish, sit back and watch the outrage, say things like “oh this is just debate and we can’t even have a debate anymore, PC gone mad etc etc” (remind you of the Tories maybe?) but quietly signalling to the racist/xenophobic/mean elements of society “don’t worry, we hear you”.

Comment by An Fear Bolg

13.

September 9, 2008
10:10 am

@Longman
“Cut it anyway you want, but that is to imply a degree of second-class citizenship.”

I agree with your points, but of course, legally the people in question aren’t (Irish) citizens at all.

With regard to the question about “segregation” in schools, the choice of words was moronic, but the question needs serious consideration. The current system simply dumps recent immigrant kids who often speak next to no english into the exam cycle without any preparation, whereupon regardless of their abilities, large numbers of them fail miserably. A friend of mine teaches in an inner city school, with about 30-40% foreign nationals (most of them from outside the EU). They are regularly presented with recently arrived teenagers of indeterminate age who are shoved into a leaving cert class to discuss the works of John Donne before they’ve learned more than a couple of words. This is, to say the least, of little educational value. Is it really racist to suggest that some kind of intensive english tuition before entering the mainstream might be of benefit here?

Comment by Gar

14.

September 9, 2008
11:13 am

Longman and Bryan, you’ve both touched on something that it is properly deserving of it’s own post, citizenship. We have an actual legal concept of citizenship and then we have the broader idea of being a member of a community, in this instance the national community. They are not the same thing.

If people are not actually legal citizens then it doesn’t make sense to talk about 2nd class citizenship, I worked in the US and Japan and I didn’t anticipate that I would be treated exactly like a citizen of both those countries. And at no time did I think of myself as 2nd class citizen, fact is I wasn’t a citizen at all. I was a legal alien. The difference is that in one place there was a pathway to becoming a citizen if remained there and so choose to do, in the other that would never have been an option. In Ireland we don’t have a proper predictable system for people to become legally citizens and I believe that is wrong and we should look to reform that process. And have a proper public debate about it.

Last year around the time of the general election, the deputy leader of Fine Gael, Richard Bruton, suggested that we should introduce the concept of residency in electoral law and if people have been living and working in Ireland for a period - 3/5 years - that they should be able to vote in general elections since after all they’ve paying tax and contributing to society why shouldn’t they have a say in how it is governed. Hardly a lurch to the right, but where was the media coverage of that idea? Lost in a sea of preconceptions.

Comment by Dan Sullivan

15.

September 10, 2008
12:39 am

Brian - I think it is wrong to accuse the TD of being a racist based on his comments on the foreign unemployed.

AFB - That’s a pretty cynical view. I’m not going to try and guess what their motives are, but it is a little worrying when one party does anything that can be construed as pandering to the xenophobic/racist bloc.

Gar - That is the unfortunate thing. There are real issues that need serious attention, like language provision, welfare reform and immigration reform. The way in which some of these have been raised by some politicians has meant that most of us have been distracted by silly things like a poor choice of words and have therefore not focused on the issues.

Dan - you are right, the issue of citizenship deserves its own post. I’ll tackle it soon. Thanks.

Comment by Bryan

16.

September 10, 2008
8:38 am

Brian Boru says: “What I call the PC-brigade”

I wouldn’t credit yourself with that Brian. Many unimaginative name-callers have used that term to poor effect before you.

Varadkar is a professional hyperbolist.

Comment by Steve K

17.

September 10, 2008
12:47 pm

On the issue of citizenship, I did use the term knowing that it was a provocative remark. What I really mean is that if people pay / have paid taxes in this country and are now entitled to the benefits that this confers, then to treat them differently to other people who have done likewise is to create an “us and them” mentality.

For me, there is no such thing as “a bit of cancer”. If we go down the route of saying to people that you helped us build a society, you have formed a life with friends and family here, but now we are introducing programmes to encourage you to leave again now that we have hit a sticky patch, then we are heading down a slippery slope of an agenda that bothers me greatly.

Whatever the legal position is, there is a clear moral issue here that none of us should be hiding behind statutes about.

Comment by Longman Oz

18.

September 10, 2008
5:18 pm

Have you seen the new Fine Gael advert on Sky about “Change”?
If you think they are developing a tendancy to swing to the right then they are sending a very mixed message to the public!

Comment by AnonyMouse

19.

September 10, 2008
10:30 pm

Longman - Thank you. I think migrants are often seen as economic statistics rather than human beings. My sister-in-law, T, is a film student in England. Her mother has lived and worked in Ireland for the last 10 years. T is still totally dependent on her mum but needed to apply foe a visa to come home over the vacation. The visa was denied. The simple reason is that in the eyes of the state, she isn’t a person who has a family and feelings, she’s just a statistic. Another migrant who needs to be kept out.

AnonyMouse - not yet. Can you describe it?

Comment by Bryan

20.

September 10, 2008
11:43 pm

The advert shows old clips of Irish immigrants on a boat looking out to sea, Irish soldiers marching and Irishmen from yesteryear looking very gloomy. The background music is an inspirational latin-type Gregorian chant. While the clips roll a commentator says in a deep and meaningful voice “Different generations face different challenges…” (I can’t remember the whole statement).

At the end of the ad, they zoom out to a picture of the world rotating and the commentator states “Change your world. Change the world.”

I suspect it came directly from the Integration Minister’s desk but it is promoted as a message from Fine Gael as a whole. I thought it was a really good advert.

Whether or not it was appropriate inbetween a show on Crime Channel is up for debate though.

Comment by AnonyMouse

21.

September 10, 2008
11:50 pm

Thanks AnonyMouse. I’ve searched for it on youtube but can’t find it. In any case, I hope that all the parties start talking about immigration constructively and begin seriously debating the issue rather than walking on egg shells. I suppose posts like this one don’t really help though.

Comment by Bryan

22.

September 11, 2008
12:40 am

That change ad is the one from the department of the environment about climate change.

Comment by Dan Sullivan

23.

September 11, 2008
1:00 pm

Here is the BBC clip that Leo Varadkar watched about a scheme in Spain that gave him the idea to mention it last week:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7593773.stm

As can be seen from that clip, in Spain the proposal has split immigrants down the middle, with some welcoming it as a chance to set up businesses in their countries of origin, while others, those who have settled in Spain and feel at home there and don’t want to avail of the money, think that it will cause resentment against them from the Spanish.

Interestingly, a similar idea was floated about in France in May 2007 - not sure if it was actually enacted upon:
http://euobserver.com/9/24140

Regarding the issue of whether the scheme could be availed of by unemployed non-Irish EU citizens, I e-mailed Leo Varadkar on this point and this was his response:

It might be possible to extend it to other EU nationals if they agreed to waive their ‘habitual residency’ rights meaning if they returned they would not be eligible for welfare payments for at least two years. In Spain, the lump-sum is paid in to tranches – on leaving and then at a later date.

With regard to the dole payments, there are about 40,000 foreign national but only 8,000 of these would be non-EEA citizens. However, the proportion on non-EEA nationals receiving other benefits would be much higher (eg supplementary welfare allowence, rent supplement, HSE payments etc)

AnonyMouse, as Dan said, that nostalgia-laden ad is about the Department of Environment’s plan of action on climate change.

Comment by James

24.

September 11, 2008
3:18 pm

I second Dan Sullivan……..I also thought that advert was for climate change, nothing to do with immigration or anything.
anonymouse…… get your facts right before
posting!
it’s also on RTE…. Bryan….. u haven’t seen it?

Comment by malika

25.

September 11, 2008
8:30 pm

Malika - my life has been interesting lately. It’s been a while since I’ve sat in front of a tv.

James - Do you think the proposal is a good one?

Comment by Bryan

26.

September 11, 2008
9:08 pm

My apologies! It is a climate advert! I watched it late at night while thinking about Varadkar’s comments. I don’t know why I assumed that the advert was somehow a response to my thought patterns (maybe I’m going mad). Although not intended, I do think it could easily be applied to immigration though. After all, it is a challenge of this generation. Change in terms of a multicultural Ireland could be a stepping stone towards a changed world. How is that for a recovery?

Comment by AnonyMouse

27.

September 12, 2008
11:03 pm

Not bad. Mistakes happen.

Comment by Bryan

28.

September 15, 2008
12:04 pm

By the way, there were two versions of the advert. One was a short version and one was a long version. The short version was used in the beginning but is no longer used as it was “ambiguous”.

Comment by AnonyMouse