Finland was found guilty by the European Court of Human Rights, because an Iraqi asylum seeker returned voluntarily back to Iraq after a negative decision, and got killed there. That drove the Interior minister of Finland, Maria Ohisalo (greens), to panic, and she promised to increase further money to asylum business, although she understood, that the Iraqi had returned voluntarily.
Naturally it is a pity and unfortunate that the Iraqi got dead. And it is true, that he would not have died if he had been given an refugee status. But it also is untenable that the court decision indicates us Finns to have eternal responsibility on everyone who has asked asylum from us even if we did not find basis for a refugee position.
Actually, it is logically clear, that the only way be sure that none of the asylum seekers (on which we are eternally responsible) will not get dead in their home countries is to give a refugee position to them all. That is because all humans make mistakes sometimes - including those who make decisions on asylum seekers.
Unfortunately it is equally clear that in Finland - or anywhere in Europe - it is not possible to give refugee position and life-lasting economic support to all asylum seekers. That is because of negative reactions of ethnic Finns, due to economic reasons and since the attraction among poor people in developing countries that would results from such a decision. That is why we need other types of solutions.
One option would be to establish asylum camps to all those who do not deserve a refugee status, although that would not solve the problem of those returning to their home countries voluntarily. However, it would remove the responsibility from ethnic Finns as no pressure to leave the country would be put on anyone.
That is why I propose our Interior minister Ohisalo, that instead of her expensive and poorly working ideas she would be active in establishing an asylum camp, where all asylum seekers lacking an acknowledged need for a refugee status could live and obtain minimum requirements for living by working. The results of that work could be used to cover part of the costs by e.g. selling subcontracting services to the Finnish Industry.
Because only people who are in Finland illegally (i.e. without residence permit) would be placed in asylum camps, they should be kept out of touch from the ordinary people. The best solution would be to rent the place from e.g. Russia, but if that is not possible, also remote areas in Finland would do. In any case, the camp should be surrounded by fences and be controlled by guards. The latter would also provide working possibilities as guards for people living in the area.
Anyone in the asylum camp should have a right to leave, but only out of the country. That should be controlled so, that no misuse of this option would occur. In the worst case, all asylum seekers leaving could be accompanied by a police to the plane.
Establishing such an asylum camp would naturally be expensive - easily more than ten million euros. It should be noted, however, that even such a big sums would be cheaper than the costs due to illegally residing (and growing) group of people, which is prone to crime and violence.
In time, the savings would be even bigger, as such asylum camps would reduce the number of people who are seeking higher status of living via seeking for a refugee status. There the scale is vast taken that the annual costs of humanitarian immigration in Finland exceed annually three billion euros.
Based on this, I put my hope on minister Ohisalo, that she would recognize asylum camps as highly producing investments. Therefore the only thing she needs is courage to make a decision to solve the problem of eternal responsibility of asylum seekers. And to start building asylum camps as soon as possible.
Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
IL:n haastattelu paljasti, ettei Maria Ohisalo ole tehtäviensä tasalla
Turvapaikka ehkäisisi laittomaan oleskeluun liittyviä negatiivisia ilmiöitä
Kielteisen päätöksen saaneille on rakennettava turvapaikka
As long as a society has a true freedom of speech it cannot be completely rotten. However, all totally rotten societies are lacking the true freedom of speech.
Most popular posts during the last 30 days
- Former President Donald Trump is Also the Upcoming President – But What Does It Mean?
- Should the Dutch Do Something About the Fact That Immigrants Don't Tolerate Visiting Jews?
- From Finland to Olaf Scholz: The Imperative of Supporting Ukraine's Independence instead of its Finlandization
- Nordic Nations Unite Against the Growing Threat of Cross-Border Organized Crime
- The Fall of Germany’s Government Could Open the EU’s Path to a Better Future
16 November 2019
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
You are free to comment on the blog posts, but I ask you to stay on topic and adhere to respectful language and good manners.