Immigration Control Platform


17 October 2019


At the recent AGM of Immigration control Platform the following motions were passed

1. Assuming that the decision to recommend permission to remain  made in the International Protection Office cannot depend on the degree to which the deciding officer has a bleeding heart but must be based on some Department of Justice guidelines other than the very loose criteria in section 49 of the 2015 Act, those guidelines should be made such as to make permission to remain for those who are refused asylum or subsidiary protection a very rare occurrence.

2. Immigration Control Platform deplores the regression in the area of statistics available to the Irish public in in recent years concerning the numbers granted either asylum or subsidiary protection and seeks the disaggregation of the current figures which combine protection grants and permission to remain, so that the public may know how many applicants who have failed the protection process per se are nevertheless allowed to remain.

3. Immigration Control Platform deplores the fact that two effective amnesties for overstaying student visa holders, amounting to over 5,000 people, have now been granted; one by Minister Alan shatter in 2012 and one by Minister Charlie Flanagan in 2018 and calls on the minister to ensure that this never happens again.

Issued by 
Áine Ní Chonaill   PRO

::back to top::


10 July 2019


The first amnesty for illegal immigrants "The 2004 Student Probationary Extension"  was granted by Alan Shatter in 2012.

On that occasion, people who had entered the State on student visas up to January 1 2005 and had overstayed by many years were given permission to remain.

On October 15 2018 David Stanton announced a second amnesty for the same type of person who entered on a student visa between January 1 2005 and December 31 2010. Applications closed on January 20 20119.

vStanton said this would "address a significant cohort of" illegal immigrants. In other words, it would function as an under-the-radar amnesty for illegals.

<p>Significantly, a requirement for applicants is that they "have attempted to avoid being unlawfully in the State through engaging with the immigration authorities", but on the Migrant Rights Centre website they say (and they would not mislead applicants) that to have consulted the MRCI would count. This indicates a behind-the-scenes-assurance to MRCI that such would be the case.

Is the MRCI now considered to constitute part of the immigration authorities? This is an indicator of the degree to which the MRCI has captured the Department of Justice.

A further indicator is that since the withdrawal of funding  by some major philanthropic organisations in recent years, the MRCI now receives funding from the taxpayer via various government departments and agencies.
Why should the government fund a lobby group which is insatiable in its demands, particularly on behalf of illegal immigrants and why should the taxpayers, many of whom would forcefully disagree with them, be forced to fund that?

Issued by 
Áine Ní Chonaill   PRO

::back to top::


11 Oct. 2018

ICP AGM 2018

At the recent AGM of Immigration Control Platform the following motions were passed;


1. Immigration Control Platform deplores the shamelessness with which our government can say that of the extra one million of population expected by 2040, half a million will be immigrants (Simon Coveney, News at One, 16 February) and believes that no other government in Europe would dare to say such a thing to its citizens.


2. Immigration Control Platform, while acknowledging that Foreign Direct Investment makes a valuable contribution to the Irish economy, notes recent commentary that a small group of multinationals has effectively "captured" the institutions of the state, and urges the government to take notice of recent warnings from the National Competitiveness Council and the National Treasury Management Agency that we urgently need to pivot from that position towards indigenous business. 


Issued by Áine Ní Chonaill   PRO

::back to top::


18 Feb. 2018

Leo and Fintan's Discordant Duet

Questioned about the capacity of the construction sector to build the homes and infrastructural projects envisaged in the National Planning Framework, Leo Varadkar said Ireland may benefit from more migrant workers in the years ahead.

He said that at the height of the boom Ireland had been relying on immigrants working in the construction industry to build 80,000 homes a year.
"One of the ways we were able to do that was through migration and having construction workers come in from other countries. We are going to need that again."


Writing in Ship Of Fools (2009; pp118/119) Fintan O'Toole wrote (safely after the event) "The height of absurdity was reached in the last years of the boom when Ireland was importing construction workers from Central and Eastern Europe to build the houses in which they themselves would live. In 2006, 13% of the workforce in Irish construction was made up of migrant workers.


Many builders were relying on these workers to rent the houses the last  wave of migrant workers had built, while they themselves built the houses for the expected next wave of Eastern European builders  to rent".


Simon Coveney, on the News at One on 16 Feb. said that probably 50% of the expected 1 million population increase would be immigrants. That would make the immigrant population 1 in 5 nationally and obviously far more in the larger conurbations. Did anyone ask if that is what Irish people want?


Issued by Áine Ní Chonaill   PRO

::back to top::


23 Oct. 2017

At the recent AGM of Immigration Control Platform the following motion was passed

ICP calls on the Government , particularly the Taoiseach, Minister for Housing, Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation, Minister for Education and Minister for Justice to acknowledge that the constant immigration influx is a major factor in the housing crisis and to take measures to curb immigration accordingly.


Issued by Áine Ní Chonaill   PRO

::back to top::

21 Sept. 2017

Migration and Diversity Report from 2016 Census

Combining the number of non-Irish nationals in the population with those of dual nationality/naturalised as best possible, gives a population of non-Irish origin of 13.4%.

Given the likelihood of many non-Irish nationals not filling the census(e.g. a house full of 18 non-Irish nationals where the number filling the form is ???) and given, for example, that after the 2006 census it was widely accepted that the Chinese population was hugely under-reported, it is very likely that the 13.4% is also an underestimate.

Immigration Control Platform considers this figure already too high and the evidence is that the Government has no policy of staunching the flow. If this is an indicator of what Leo Varadkar means by "managed migration" it is, in our opinion, at odds with the wishes of Irish citizens and the good of the country.

It is time we heard what percentage of non-Irish nationals constitutes "managed migration".


Issued by Áine Ní Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::


22 Sept. 2015

15 Oct. 2016



At the recent AGM of Immigration Control Platform the following motion
was passed:

ICP calls on the government to take no further part in naval operations in
the Mediterranean after the return of the LE Samuel Beckett, as it is
effectively aiding the invasion of the EU and is therefore fundamentally
contradictory to the role of Irish forces.


Issued by Áine Ní Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::


22 Sept. 2015


At the recent AGM of Immigration Control Platform the following motions were passed:

1 ICP calls on the Government not to renew the Irish naval operation in the Mediterranean once the L.E. Samuel Beckett has completed its deployment, as they are effectively assisting the people-smugglers and thereby putting further lives in danger.

2 ICP deplores the Department of Justice's whole-scale granting of leave to remain to those who fail the protection process, in what is effectively an under-the-radar amnesty, and calls on the Department to allow leave to remain to failed applicants only in the most exceptional circumstances.


Issued by

Áine Ní Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

6 Sept 2015



Under no circumstances should Ireland accept mandatory allocation of asylum seekers/refugees in the upcoming EU negotiations. Any decision we make on who enters the country from outside the EU must be our sovereign decision.

To do otherwise would be, effectively, to give away the Amsterdam Protocol. Any government that would do so would be acting in a treasonous manner. It needs to be remembered that this is not about the Syrian crisis but would bind way into the future in many other circumstances.


Áine Ní Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::


30 June 2015



Three elements of this report are of grave concern to ICP

1. The effective amnesty for those over 5 years in the system. Every amnesty is treasonous towards Irish citizens who, given the existence of an asylum system, are entitled to a situation where those who pass the system stay and those who fail are made to leave.

Given the median time for assessing claims in recent years (12 weeks for first instance; 18 for appeal), those who have been 5 years in the system have already been told "no" at least twice. They are therefore among the cohort most likely to be abusing the system yet they are going to be told "you may stay in Ireland forever".

This is the first PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGED amnesty of this type, but there have been previous secret ones; see the speech of Trevor Ó Clochartaigh in the Seanad, 22 Oct. 2014.

2. The right to work. The report says it will aim to assess claims within 12 months. Again, those over 9 months will include many who will have been refused protection or will be about to be refused and will be the cohort most likely to be abusing the system. They will be rewarded with the right to work. The last time we brought in a right to work for a particular cohort, in 1999, the Department admitted it appeared to cause a spike in applications.

It is frequently said that we are one of only 2 countries that do not give a right to work. That is very misleading. For example, our nearest neighbour, the UK only allows work from a highly restricted list of occupations where there is a skills shortage, with the result that almost no asylum seekers are entitled to work. The reference of the executive summary to the UK in this regard is particularly misleading.

3. Right to free third level education. Every other EU state limits education rights for asylum seekers to primary and secondary education. We were once the only country in the EU giving automatic citizenship at birth. It made us a target and we had to change. The very active grapevine will work to make us a target now that we are the only ones to do this. We specially warned the Working Group on this issue.


Issued by

Áine Ní Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

29 September 2014


At the recent AGM of Immigration Control Platform the following motions were passed:

1 I.C.P. calls on the Ministers for Justice and Education to reject calls for the right of asylum seekers to free third level education on the three grounds that

a) Since most asylum seekers in Ireland, as elsewhere, are found to be abusing the system and not deserving of protection, it is unjust that such a privilege be extended to them at the expense of the Irish citizenry.

b) It is against principles of fairness that non-EU people with residency rights here should not be entitled to this, when those without such residency rights get it.

c) MOST IMPORTANTLY, that such a move would be calculated to greatly increase the inflow of " unaccompanied minors", which is the most burdensome area of asylum seeking.

2 I.C.P. seeks a constitutional referendum to change Article 34.3.1 of the constitution by adding the words "apart from matters of international protection, immigration and deportation", so that there will be no judicial review available in relation to those matters.

3 I.C.P. deplores the grossly excessive liberality in relation to work permits which is the 50:50 rule (i.e. to be granted a work permit one must have at least 50% EU employees).

4 This AGM calls on the government to control advertisements solely in foreign languages by employers and agents in Ireland who recruit non-Irish labour to the detriment of Irish job-seekers' chances of finding employment.


::back to top::

25 September 2014


Immigration Control Platform has called for a constitutional referendum to change Article 34.3.1 of the constitution. It is that article that provides the constitutional right for asylum seekers to seek judicial review.

Although asylum seekers have a right of appeal to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, they very frequently refuse to accept that ruling and proceed to judicial review, to such an extent that at a High Court sitting on July 14 a total of 849 asylum cases were listed as waiting for a date to be heard.

The process is used to drag out time in Ireland in the hope that residency will eventually ensue.It is, indeed a rule of thumb that the longer you can remain, the greater your chances of avoiding removal.

Article 34.3.1 currently reads:

"The Courts of First Instance shall include a High Court invested with full original jurisdiction in and power to determine all matters and questions whether of law or fact, civil or criminal."

The amendment sought would add to this the words "apart from matters of international protection,immigration and deportation."

It would appear that such an amendment would not breach the European Convention on Human Rights,the EU Charter of Fundamental Freedoms or the EU Procedures Directive.


::back to top::

22 May 2014


It is to be hoped that recent media coverage of foreign students in Ireland will have focused the minds of the public on an aspect of international education often overlooked.

That is that they may work 20 hours a week in term-time and 40 during college holidays. Many breach these limits and work far more. Many do not "study" at all.

How many jobs does this take from Irish and legal immigrants who must be on Jobseekers Allowance instead? The government never takes this into account when they put out the bloated figure for the amount of money "brought into" the country by foreign students.

It was chilling to hear David O' Grady, C.E.O. of Marketing English in Ireland , say on News at One ( 15 May)  that; "In Brazil, Ireland is seen as an immigration destination" because of student visa abuse.

ICP regularly gets emails complaining of "students" working full time  and complaining that they have reported this to the authorities but nothing has been done.


::back to top::

7 Oct. 2013

AGM 2013

At the AGM of Immigration Control Platform held in Dublin on Sat.Oct.5 the following motions were passed:-

1. ICP calls on the Minister for Justice (the 4th Minister for Justice to promise it) to speedily introduce the "single procedure" for protection applications; if necessary doing so as a stand-alone amendment instead of in the promised Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill, which has been described as having" the longest gestation in Irish legislative history".

2. ICP calls on the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation to follow the good example of Minister Joan Burton whose department website has a facility for anonymously reporting social welfare abuse, by placing on the new site a similar facility for reporting those working illegally.

::back to top::

02 Oct 2013


Yesterday, 1st Oct.2013, the Dept. of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation launched a new website This is part of Richard Bruton's reorganisation of employment rights bodies.

In our submission to the Dept. in advance of the reorganisation we urged the Dept. to emulate Joan Burton's initiative.

On the website of the Dept. of Social and Family affairs there is a straightforward and encouraging facility where a member of the public can report a case of suspected social welfare fraud and can do so anonymously. We urged a similar facility on the new website, where the public could report a suspected case of an illegal worker.

Unsurprisingly,this has not been taken up. In the last few years,after many requests for help in this area from members of the public and after extreme difficulty and frustration, ICP finally ascertained that such reports should go to and this information was placed on our website and passed to enquirers. (International students in breach of their visa by working over the allotted hours should be reported to

Only by contacting us or our website can a member of the public currently get this information.

Our experience leads us to believe that,although, in theory,dealing with illegal working is the duty of the employment rights body, in fact they are still following the older idea that workplace relations is the full extent of their mandate and that illegal working is being effectively ignored.

::back to top::

02 Oct 2013

Day Of Action On Direct Provision

The main complaint about direct provision relates to the length of time people are in it.

FACT: The median time in 2011 for processing an asylum claim was 11.7 weeks. (ORAC Annual Report)

FACT: The mesdian time for processing an appeal was 22 weeks. (RAT Annual Report)

Q. So who causes the further delay?
A. Asylum seekers.

::back to top::

25 Sept 2012

Press Release

At the AGM of Immigration Control Platform on Saturday, the following motions were passed:

1. ICP deplores the fact that the Labour Party at its 2012 Annual Conference attacked the rights of Irish citizens and workers by adopting a policy of the regularisation of illegals.

2. ICP deplores the effective amnesty for "timed out students", some going back as far as 1999 which is currently being implemented; every such case representing a job taken from an Irish person.

3. ICP calls on the government to have Ireland join the ERPUM (European Return Platform for Unaccompanied Minors) for the repatriation of rejected asylum-seeking children between the ages of 16 and 18, which programme is already operated by the UK, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands and warns that since the UK is in this programme and Ireland is not we will become a target for such asylum-seeking children.

4. Immigration Control Platform calls upon the Irish government to protect and defend the best interest of the people of Ireland in matters relating to migration and citizenship, when dealing with Constitutional changes and a new European treaty.


Issued by Áine Ní Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

27 August 2012


It is outrageous that "students" who have been in Ireland from as far back as 1999 are being offered 2 more "probationary" years in Ireland ?during which they need not even be signed up for a course of study.After this they will be allowed to get a Stamp 4 which means effectively that they may stay forever.

These are people who in any properly run system would be classified as "overstayers" and told to leave the country.

This is an effective amnesty for these people and as such a treasonous act against Irish citizens and the unemployed whose jobs these people fill. The scheme and its terms may be seen on the INIS homepage . The schedule for interviews may be seen with the oldest ones dating from 1999 scheduled for the week beginning 27th August.


::back to top::

31 Jan 2012

Taxi Review Report

Immigration Control Platform deeply regrets that the Taxi Review Report issued today gives no indication that legal residency status will be a requirement for being issued with a taxi driving licence. This is greatly to be regretted as immigrants appear to be attracted to the industry in great numbers ,as is common across Europe. Considering the oversupply of taxi drivers and Minister Kelly's wish to see an exit from the industry,this is the first cohort which should be removed. We would strongly urge that in the planned amendment to Section 36 of the Taxi Regulation Act ,lack of legal residency status be included as grounds for mandatory refusal of a licence. Genuine taxi drivers are entitled to this.


::back to top::

04 January 2012


ICP is extremely disappointed that in his recent statement reviewing immigration matters for 2011 and indicating his plans for 2012,the Minister promises to "progress" the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill but does not indicate that we can expect to see its enactment completed during 2012.

He is the fourth minister for Justice to endeavour to enact this law and it is impossible to understand the delay.

Above all, it means that the "Single Procedure" promised for the protection system has still not been introduced.

Currently one applies for asylum and probably appeals a refusal. One probably then applies for subsidiary protection. If so the whole process begins all over again. If refused one may seek humanitarian leave to remain and again, apparently a full consideration must be done.

In the meantime the taxpayer is ripped off and the passage of time allows other circumstances to build up ?which may prevent the eventual deportation of the applicant. This is why there are still 5,400 people in direct provision and thousands not deported.

The Single Procedure was meant to provide for one application for protection and the decision on asylum ,subsidiary protection or leave to remain would be done in one procedure.

Irish people are entitled to have this brought in at the earliest opportunity.


Issued by ?ine N? Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

11 October 2011

At the recent AGM of Immigration Control Platform, the following motions were passed.

1. That, in light of the Zambrano judgement, the term of residency required of a foreign national before a child born in Ireland acquires Irish citizenship be raised to 5 years from the current 3, thereby aligning it with the period after which long term residence or citizenship can be applied for.

2. That ICP seeks the urgent resolution of the industrial action of the CPSU, which is preventing the full implementation of the expensive AFIS fingerprinting system of the GNIB, so needed to minimise asylum and immigration abuse.

3. That, considering that the expensive AFIS fingerprinting system of the GNIB cannot be fully implemented without the passage of the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill, ICP repeats its many calls for the passage of that Bill.

4. That the Department of Justice give serious consideration to the permanent implementation of the E-visa pilot scheme with AFIS which proved so successful in Nigeria.


Issued by ?ine N? Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

27 June 2011

Pamela Izevbekhai

Now that Pamela Izevbekhai has received a negative judgement from the European Court of Human Rights, Irish citizens are entitled to her immediate deportation, given the abuse of the legal system which she has perpetrated on us for years, in over 20 High Court and Supreme Court appearances. No softly, softly line should be taken in relation to the lead-up to that deportation, as this woman has previously gone on the run when faced with deportation.


Issued by ?ine N? Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

21 February 2011

Immigration Control Platform calls on the Fine Gael and Labour parties to commit themselves to the following in the next administration:

1. To pass the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill, without any dilution of its control measures, as a matter of urgency. It is a disgrace that this has been through the hands of Michael McDowell, Brian Lenihan and Dermot Ahern and still not been passed. Both advocates for asylum seekers and immigrants and those of us whose interest is control want this finalised. It was intended that the single procedure would stop the enormous and expensive timescales involved and also that the bill would facilitate deportations. Apart from the principle of control, in these times of economic difficulty, the money wasted in this area is badly needed elsewhere.

2.In any referendum on Children's Rights, there must be no return to a wording which will cause difficulties for deportations, as was the case with the wording proposed by the Oireachtas Committee. Enda Kenny has made worrying remarks in this regard.

3. There must be an absolute rejection of the campaign of the Migrant Rights Centre for an amnesty aka "regularisation" for illegals. Apart from the outrage and moral hazard involved, it would be a treasonable act in the present economic circumstances. The Migrant Rights Centre is dishonestly claiming that by removing such people from the black economy, there would be an economic advantage to the state. On the contrary, these people (estimated at 30,000) are not living on fresh air. They can only be putting bread on the table by one of two means; either they are working in a job which should be filled by an Irish person or a legal immigrant on the dole or they are surviving on some discretionary social welfare payment which is costing our cash-strapped state.

Issued by
?ine N? Chonaill, PRO
Immigration Control Platform
PO Box 6469 Dublin 2

::back to top::

22 September 2010


ICP would have grave worries about the announcement today by the Department of Education and Skills of a strategy to expand international student numbers.

1. It is highly questionable that this brings the economic benefit to the country that is claimed. Government always talks about the money that such students "bring into" the country, but in a very high number of cases they do not bring it in but earn it here. The money they originally show in their bank balance is frequently borrowed short term merely to gain access.

2. It is widely accepted that students, by overstay or by pretence of being students when their real goal is long term access to the West, bump up immigration to unwanted levels.

3. The most worrying aspect of all is the idea of allowing them to "progress within the immigration system" i.e. remain on in Ireland. Except in the most exceptional circumstances for very high calibre people, this should not be allowed.With our levels of unemployment, including graduate unemployment, this is not acceptable.

4. It is particularly worrying to see the plan to increase the English language school intake by 25%. This has been one of the more problematic areas of abuse.



Issued by ?ine N? Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

23 August 2010

Work Permits

Dara Calleary, Minister for Labour, should be made to answer why he is issuing large numbers of work permits when we have going on for half a million unemployed. (See story Irish Independent Aug 23).

ICP says no new permits should be issued and no first time renewals. This is what happens when governments allow it to happen.Industries like hotel and catering and service industries prefer to deal with agencies which specialise in cheap ,"amenable" foreign labour,bumping up immigration and leaving our own labour force on the dole. It happens everywhere unless there is political will to face it down.

It is nothing less than treachery in current circumstances. Even in the case of "ethnic" restaurants, no new permits should be issued.There are sufficient Chinese, Indian and Pakistanis in Ireland, and certainly from among those naturalised across the 50 milion of the EU that no more such permits should be isued.


ISSUED BY: ?ine N? Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

August 17 2010


The statement reported in today's press by Dennis Prior,superintendent registrar Eastern area, is very worrying. Up to 15%, perhaps, of civil marriages, he says, may be bogus ones for immigration purposes.

It is noteworthy that Section 123 of the Immigration Residence and Protection Bill(2008 version), which was to deal with this, was watered down completely in the 2010 version (Section 138). We have had no explanation for this that we know of.

While it is true that a similar proposal was struck down by the Law Lords in Britain, this should not necessarily make us change. Our laws, though similar, are not the same and we have a constitution which specifically protects marriage.

Should we not restore the section and let the President refer it to the Supreme Court, if necessary? Did the Attorney General declare it unsafe?

Denis Naughten, at second stage of the bill sought the complete removal of those proposals.He suggested, instead,making changes to Section 58 of the Civil Registration Act (re marriage). What has he in mind?

This is just one more abuse piled on to the multiple immigration and asylum abuses that the citizens have heaped on them every day.

One thing it points up is the absolute imperative of deporting those eligible for deportation AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY.The longer one is around the more time one has to operate the scams.


Issued by ?ine N? Chonaill, PRO

::back to top::

August 4 2010


Immigration Control Platform deplores the announcement by the Dept. of Justice that it has ordered a review into the cases of asylum seekers who are waiting five years or more to receive a final decision,with a view to granting leave to remain.

It is useless for them to claim that this is not an amnesty. Such decisions are that, irrespective of any words used. IT IS THE RIGHT OF IRISH CITIZENS TO HAVE FAILED ASYLUM SEEKERS REMOVED. It is the basis on which the system rests.

We further deplore the fact that the Immigration Residency and Protection Bill has still not been passed. This Bill has been in gestation since 2001!!! It is supposed to speed up these matters. It is intolerable that there are 11,700 cases for humanitarian leave to remain. This, as far as we are aware, derives from a bullshit legal concept that "the minster may not fetter his discretion".

In other words the whole affair goes back to square one again to be considered in its totality. The Minister cannot say "I'm not granting leave to any of these", or "I am not granting leave to any of these axcept those from country A".

This is intolerable. Maybe the Minister should turn them all down on the basis of "In our current economic situation, I am deciding to say no to all of them. I am using my discretion to make this judgement." And see if the courts would run with it.

This points up the fact that it is not possible to have an asylum system which is not abusive of the citizens of the receiving country.

It was never intended that it would be like this when the Convention was signed.


Issued by ?ine N? Chonaill PRO

::back to top::

17 Feb 2010

Children's rights amendment: implications for immigration control

Immigration Control Platform expressed concerns about the possible implications for immigration control of the proposed wording in 2007 for the referendum on children's rights. Our submission at the time is available on the website of the Joint Oireachtas Committee. Our concerns on the new wording remain the same.

To give just one example, the reference to the "upbringing" of a child where "their welfare and best interests must be the paramount and first consideration" would open the possibility of any deportation order, where the deportee had a child,being challenged.It is difficult to envisage a case where the child would not have a better upbringing in the west than in the developing country from which it probably came.

We note that Dr.Ursula Kilkelly, child law expert, has acknowledged that"the wording has the potential to impact on areas such as migration". You will see from our submission that we suggest two additions to the wording to counteract this.Otherwise we fear a repeat of the type of consequence relating to citizenship which followed on the 1998 referendum and which had to be revisited 6 years later.


::back to top::

9 June 2009


Deputy Maureen O' Sullivan,the successful candidate in the Dublin Central by-election,has vowed to commit herself to the concerns of the communities she represents.Observations reported from the count centre show a distinctly high number of 2nd preference votes for the Immigration Control Platform candidate, Patrick Talbot,on deputy O'Sullivan's first preference papers.

The ICP candidate transferred to Deputy O 'Sullivan far in excess of any other candidate- 243 as opposed to the next nearest of 90. This is an expression of concern by many of Deputy O'Sullivan's supporters about the level of immigration ( 27% in her own constituency). It will be interesting to see how Deputy O'Sullivan addresses the immigration issue.Will she follow the undemocratic pattern of most socialist-type leaders of voicing the concern of the voters on every other issue but defying the voters on that?


Issued by ?ine N? Chonaill, PRO
Immigration Control Platform
PO Box 6469
Dublin 2

::back to top::

25 July 2008

ECJ ruling on residence for non EU nationals married to EU nationals

We refer to the ruling today by the ECJ which blocks the deportation of those who, though without residency rights, had married an EU national resident in Ireland.

This ruling points up the importance of the article in the new Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill which requires notification by a non EU national of the intention to marry and the permission of the minister. It is vital that this not be watered down as it passes through the Oireachtas. Someone who has no residency right in the state has, by definition, no other rights in the state. He has no right to benefit from any of the institutions of the state, such as marriage.

It also points up the importance of speedy removal of those without residence permission before any complicating liaisons are formed. Our current pathetic levels of deportation lead to such complications.

::back to top::

25 July 2008

New Arrangements for Common Travel Area

ICP welcomes, in principle, the new Common Travel Area arrangements jointly announced by the Irish and British governments.

It is to be hoped that they will help in the fight against illegal immigration. We particularly point out the importance for us of checks on arrivals to Northern Ireland, as it has been long acknowledged that a very high proportion of illegal entrants to Ireland come across the border from Northern Ireland.

::back to top::

8 June 2008

Two Gaping Holes in Lisbon Debate

There have been two gaping holes in the Lisbon debate.

1. Not one media person, apparently, has asked why our Government was originally strongly opposed to the Charter of Fundamental Rights being legally binding but now wish it to be so. The Charter is of concern to several groups opposing the treaty and its implications are one of the main concerns for ICP.

2. Immigration has been deliberately sidelined as an issue. Sean Whelan of RTÉ said on the main news recently that asylum and immigration was one of the few areas in the treaty where there was significant change but that ?mysteriously? it had not featured in the debate.

It has not been allowed to feature. On the 19th March ICP held a press conference in Buswell?s. RT? cameras covered it but the piece has never been used, though even ad hoc groupings such as a women?s press conference on Thursday were shown. This is exactly as was the case in the Nice 2 campaign.

The Irish Times had many pieces pro and con on their Opinion and Analysis pages and we offered to contribute. Nothing was heard from them, though even Freddie Forsyth was considered worthy of a piece. This is in spite of the fact that the National Forum on Europe considered us suitable to make an oral presentation on their submissions day.

Our case may be seen on their website or, in an earlier draft on our own website [here].

::back to top::

5 April 2008


Much has been made of Bertie Ahern's Northern Ireland contribution and who would not welcome that.

In this jurisdiction, however, his primary legacy has been malign, and deeply undermining of democracy. We refer to the mass immigration he has presided over for the last 10 years for which he had not a shred of mandate.

The debacle he caused us regarding citizenship in the Belfast Agreement was beyond forgiving and he brazened it out for 6 years before it was amended.

We were one of only 3 countries whose labour market he opened up to unrestricted access from Eastern Europe.

He leaves office with an inexplicable 100,000 Chinese in the country.

Ironically, the very day he announced his resignation The House of Lords in Britain issued a report which found that a similar immigration in Britain had been of no economic value and of course causes all sorts of other problems and strains.

This is the argument we have been making for a few years now and which has been written on by Garret Fitzgerald,David Begg and others.

Let's hope his successor sees the light. We have had enough of having our country treated like a glorified industrial estate and of being treated as if this was a matter which simply did not concern us.

::back to top::

30 January 2008

'Immigration Control Platform to Oppose Lisbon Treaty'

In the run up to the proposed European Constitution referendum, Immigration Control Platform, at its 2004 AGM, was mandated to oppose that referendum because of our concerns on asylum and immigration. Since there is no substantial change in the Lisbon Treaty we will consequently be opposing it.

Our main concern would be the fact that the Charter of Fundamental Rights is to be legally binding. We draw attention to article 18 of that Charter which refers to ?the right to asylum?, wording which was actually rejected by the drafters of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights which replaced it by the less strong wording ?the right to seek and enjoy? asylum?.

The Charter will be interpreted by the European Court of Justice and we would have great fears for the judicial activism that could ensue from that Article and others regarding asylum and immigration.


Issued by:

?ine N? Chonaill

::back to top::

30 January 2008

Immigration Control Platform generally welcomes the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2008.

Our main concern is that there be no watering down of the control elements of the Bill in its passage through the Oireachtas.

We very much hope that the provisions in relation to judicial review, in tandem with the provisions on deportation will be sufficient to address the dreadful levels of abuse of the judicial review process and evasion of deportation which have plagued us for years.

We welcome the fact that the provision of a period of ?recovery and reflection? for suspected victims of trafficking is not to be a statutory but a discretionary right.

Such people very frequently have knowingly had themselves smuggled, not realising it would progress to trafficking and the only protection we owe them is to remove them from their enslaver.

Residency should not be a reward or compensation for being trafficked. We expect them to leave or be removed after they have helped the prosecution system.

::back to top::

11 October 2007


The AGM of Immigration Control Platform was held in Dublin on October 6th.

The following motions were passed.
Immigration Control Platform proposes that measures be put in place to limit the proportion of foreign-born persons who are not entitled to Irish citizenship to no greater than 5% within the jurisdiction. This represents a sustainable 'organic' level of migration without the attendant costs and difficulties of maintaining social cohesion inevitable in greater inflows.

Immigration Control Platform welcomes the admission of the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, on 23rd April 2007 that we cannot go beyond the current, alleged 10% or 11% at most of immigrants in our population.

The State, where possible, should limit immigration to those who can already communicate in English or Irish

Note: It is not that we expect to receive Irish speaking immigrants from Hy Brazil. This merely acknowledges the constitutional position as it is, for example, acknowledged in the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2007, Section 34 (2) (a) (II) which specifies as a standard eligibility requirement for a long-term residence permit that a person "can demonstrate a reasonable competence for communicating in the Irish or English language".

ICP deplores the decision made some time ago that non-nationals on student visas be allowed to remain to seek employment after graduation, considering this an abuse of student visas, conducive to the driving down of salaries and conditions for graduates and a boost to already excessive immigration levels.

::back to top::

19 July 2007

Roma at the M50 Roundabout

Immigration Control Platform calls for the immediate deportation of the Roma at the M50 Roundabout. These people are only entitled to be here if they can properly maintain themselves and they obviously cannot.

Extract from a NESC report September 2006 "Migration Policy p.97

In-Active Citizens
The right to residence in another Member State of EU citizens not engaged in any economic activity (as salaried or self-employed) has been relatively clear down through the years. They are required to support themselves and their family members without becoming a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State and to have sickness insurance. The grey area concerns what happens if an individual loses this ability after a period in another Member State and how soon they become entitled to apply for means-tested support on an equal basis to the host country's nationals. Generally, it depends crucially on the duration of stay that has elapsed as to whether and how they are then supported by their host state.

::back to top::

12 February 2007


Well done to Dick Spring, the first to admit that the immigration debate is primarily about numbers. Enda Kenny's call for "a debate" was almost entirely about integration and avoided the crunch question.

Does a politician have to become a former politician before he can speak the truth?

::back to top::

-- Immigration Control Platform -- P.O. Box 6469, Dublin 2, Ireland -- --