Multi-cultural Ireland makes me laugh out loud. Take, for example, TG4's recent screening of a documentary about apartheid South Africa - a grim tale made wonderfully gigglesome by the narrator's constant references to "An Taoiseach Buthelezi"!
And what about the horror of an Estonian friend of mine, who has become infatuated with Dublin slang since arriving here in the last shower, upon discovering that Chief Ahern was dating his own brother. "What?" I cried.
"It's true" he said, "He keeps on calling him "de mot".
As a source of crummy jokes, misunderstandings are bettered only by Christmas crackers. But my schoolteachers were right: there is more to life than cheap laughs, Mr Doyle. So there are times when statements must be clear and true; and at such times, confusing statements are not funny but wrong.
Back before the last general election, when men were men and cuts were increases, Ireland's major political parties put on their most unctuous poses and declared their refusal to exploit the asylum-seeker issue for the sake of easy votes. Subsequently, of course, we have seen that most of these noble humanitarians, having resolved not to exploit asylum-seekers, can't think of what else to do with them. Turns out that their noble declaration was nothing more than a rehash of their mother's advice: "If you've nothing nice to say, say nothing."
Perhaps this is no big deal. Perhaps we don't listen to politicians anyway, no more than the Government listens to 100,000 parents and children marching through Dublin, so it doesn't matter what they do or don't say. But it's worrying when nobody even bothers to pretend.
One country where the government seems to listen to its subjects is Senegal. Two weeks ago its President, Abdoulaye Wade, surprised almost everyone by announcing he was renouncing a ground-breaking accord he had signed with the government of Switzerland because of the "enormously hostile public reaction" to it. He signed the accord last January and had, until recent days, been insisting he would urge parliament to ratify it later this month. But in the wake of furious public and media outcry, he saved face and U-turned. And now Switzerland has to find a new partner for what its Justice Minister, Ruth Metzler Arnold, dubs its "pioneering" efforts to rid itself of unwanted Africans.
The "accord de transit" had seemed set to formalise a type of practice which many people claim has existed for years elsewhere. Enshrined in the Geneva Convention is the principle of non-refoulement, which stipulates that no one may be deported to a country where they will be in danger of persecution. If a person can be expected to be safe in their country of origin, they may be sent there. But what if they won't be safe there, or if you don't know their country of origin? Well, either you allow them stay on chez vous, or you find what is known as a "safe third country" which is willing to host them.
Until Senegal last January, no "safe third country" had ever officially agreed to take a random selection of rejected immigrants from a European country. Unofficially, of course, it is rumoured that several African states have admitted such consignments in return for handsome payments. A handy little trade for all concerned - except for the human merchandise, whose fate upon arrival is seldom followed up.
Both the Swiss and the Senegalese governments insist Senegal was not offered any cash, nor even promises of aid, in return for agreeing to temporarily host Africans rejected from Switzerland. Indeed, President Wade, in a pre-emptive rebuttal, said he had accepted the Swiss proposal because he wanted to ensure these vulnerable Africans were not mistreated in Europe.
We may accept his good intentions, particularly as the accord's application protocol was to spell out precisely how the detainees were to be treated. So there was to be transparency and codes of practice. Why, if either government had suggested money was involved we might even have said it was just like any other marketplace!
And why not? There would have been nothing illegal in Switzerland paying Senegal for the service it was to provide. This then, is an open goal: Europe's determination to discard surplus humans is creating a momentum whereby its governments may legalise human trafficking.
That is sure. As sure as the fact that Irish politicians will not be in the forefront of the debate to find a more enlightened, more courageous solution to the problem and plight of people who choose to remain silent for fear their country may be used against them.