View Full Version: Would You Employ A Labour Politician ?

Shrewsbury Forum > General Chat > Would You Employ A Labour Politician ?



Title: Would You Employ A Labour Politician ?
Description: Thousands wrongly cleared to work


Andy Cooke - December 13, 2007 10:25 PM (GMT)
Bumbling Labour Cabinet ministers are showing their true lack of management in letting thousands of illegal immigrants work in our country in yet another home office farce. In the real world surely these so called ministers would have been sacked. These so called ministers seem to be unable to administer anything these days and show clearly they are crap at their jobs. What worries me is if they have found discrepancies in the security industry goodness knows what other proffessions will. reveal.See Here

the old codger - December 13, 2007 11:56 PM (GMT)
Hang on. When these firms employed these people didn't they ask for their National Insurance numbers etc ? Sounds like cheap labour cash in hand.

eatshrewsbury - December 14, 2007 10:25 AM (GMT)
The employers should be checking but they are not obliged to. However, they are obliged to give them a Security Industry Authority certificate. And the SIA report directly to the Home Secretary. So would it not be logical for the Home Secretary's office to check each SIA certificate to see that the people being issued them were fit for purpose? Apparently not.

I have to agree with Andy. Most government ministers couldn't manage there way out of a paper bag. The public sector needs to be run by people who have proved their worth in the private sector.

Town_Walls - December 14, 2007 07:23 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (eatshrewsbury @ Dec 14 2007, 10:25 AM)
I have to agree with Andy. Most government ministers couldn't manage there way out of a paper bag. The public sector needs to be run by people who have proved their worth in the private sector.

I would have hoped that our 30 years of experience of the brilliant successes of privatisation might have convinced people that the private sector is not uniquely wonderful at running things, but hey, there's none so blind, and all that.

Please explain how the privatised railway service receiving three times as much subsidy from taxpayers as 'inefficient' British Rail did in 1994 demonstrates private sector flair.

As Old Codger has hinted, if farmers, building sites, takeaways and all the rest weren't falling over each other in their eagerness to employ illegal immigrants for starvation pay cash in hand, then there would be far fewer of them arriving on these shores. Have you ever wondered why so many of them are desperate to leave Calais (in France, a rich and peaceful country) to get to Britain?

Andy Cooke - December 14, 2007 09:07 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
Town_Walls  Posted on Dec 14 2007, 07:23 PM
 
QUOTE
As Old Codger has hinted, if farmers, building sites, takeaways and all the rest weren't falling over each other in their eagerness to employ illegal immigrants for starvation pay cash in hand, then there would be far fewer of them arriving on these shores. Have you ever wondered why so many of them are desperate to leave Calais (in France, a rich and peaceful country) to get to Britain?


True enough TW but the government of the day should oversee such practice and could readily enforce heavy financial penalties on people who employ illegal immigrants are not at all 'switched-on' as we all know so it is down to the poor management of the situation by government ministers, isnt that where the buck stops?

the old codger - December 16, 2007 02:09 AM (GMT)
Ah, but that means more regulation, something that government and opposition vie with one another to oppose. Of course, the private sector is always much more efficient......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/7145664.stm

eatshrewsbury - December 17, 2007 10:56 AM (GMT)
Town Walls, that's a completely unfair comparison. Did I suggest that the Home Secretary's office should be split into 100 different privately owned companies as the greedy Tories did to the railways? No. If I had then your argument would have been valid. If the railways had been privatised in the same form - a single entitiy - then there is a very good chance that it would have been far more efficient than the governement run equivalent.

I'm not saying the private sector always gets it right, never makes mistakes. Not at all. You can link to a hundred stories of private sector stupidity if you like. I accept that. But I still say the private sector isn't a scarily inefficient as the public sector.

Andy Cooke - December 18, 2007 11:40 PM (GMT)
How many MPs does it take to change a light bulb?

None, they'd rather keep you in the dark!

On the subject of MP's. I was amused to see the health and safety directive for MP's on how to dispose of a broken light bulb. The instructions are that the cleaning operative, using protective gloves and wearing a mask, should collect the main fragments of the light bulb and carefully place them in a sturdy box.
All splinters should then be collected using stiff card or paper. The area should then be
cleaned using a damp cloth. The splinter and the cloth should then be placed in the box.
Once the area is clear and clean, the box should be sealed and labelled with details of the item. The box should then be taken to the waste removal area in the loading bay and passed to the waste disposal contractor in an appropriate manner."

Okay, I know that energy saving light bulbs have a slight amount of mercury but ' carboard boxes sealed and probably marked 'broken lightbulb' surely could give a potential terrorist an opportunity here. PC gone mad again I feel
:unsure: See article




Hosted for free by InvisionFree