Law Firms Queuing Up for a MEGA PAY DAY!

[big_cod]

And today it has been revealed the government set targets of 12,000 3 years ago for people to be deported without any papers etc who supposedly shouldnt be here but in the frenzy of it all some who were perfectly legal were also deported and when Amber Rudd was questioned on any targets being present she denied this was the case when infact there actually was targets the plot just keeps thickening .

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/26/home-office-set-targets-for-deportation-of-illegal-immigrants-amber-rudd

Edited April 26, 2018 by big_cod

[chesters1]

Cod says his link is a lie

[Ken L]

And today it has been revealed the government set targets of 12,000 3 years ago for people to be deported without any papers etc who supposedly shouldnt be here

The only question that should be concerning taxpayers is "Why wasn't the target at least 10 times that figure and why isn't the team tasked with identifying and removing illegals properly resourced?"

Any money spent removing these parasites will be saved many times over by reducing the burden on schools, the NHS, local authority housing budgets and benefits.

[Martin56]

It would make sense to destroy historical documents after the deadline was past would it not?

 

It's not difficult to imagine a reverse situation where the press are lambasting the government for retaining irrelevant historical data relating to the previous immigration status if naturalised citizens.

People get twitchy about over-retention of information, just as they do about the destruction of stuff that turns out to have utility 9 years after the fact.

OK then, so what's to stop Illegal immigrants (of whom fit the right profile ie Black & the right age group) from claiming to be "Windrush Babies"??

 

The Records have been destroyed - The gate is wide open IMO.

 

I'm really not bothered either way, but it seems a fair point??

Edited April 26, 2018 by Martin56

[Martin56]

There is of course the Archive option for ANY documents, which can always be resurrected as & when required!!!

 

It could seem that the destruction of said important record smacks of political (or even personal) Agenda!!.

Edited April 26, 2018 by Martin56

[Ken L]

OK then, so what's to stop Illegal immigrants (of whom fit the right profile ie Black & the right age group) from claiming to be "Windrush Babies"??

 

The Records have been destroyed - The gate is wide open IMO.

 

I'm really not bothered either way, but it seems a fair point??

As the HMT Empire Windrush brought her last contingent of immigrants to the UK in 1948 and sank in 1954, any "Windrush Babies" would be rather long in the tooth by now.

Real "Windrush Babies" should also have no difficulty producing a UK birth certificate and consistent history of UK residency that would be a little difficult for an 19 year old illegal to fake - along with the wrinkles!

Edited April 26, 2018 by Ken L

[Ken L]

There is of course the Archive option for ANY documents, which can always be resurrected as & when required!!!

 

It could seem that the destruction of said important record smacks of political (or personal) Agenda!!.

Digital record keeping of historical government documents didn't really get started until about five years after this incident. Standard policy until then was to retain documents for 14 months.

[Martin56]

As the HMT Empire Windrush brought her last contingent of immigrants to the UK in 1948 and sank in 1954, any "Windrush Babies" would be rather long in the tooth by now.

Real "Windrush Babies" should also have no difficulty producing a UK birth certificate and consistent history of UK residency that would be a little difficult for an 19 year old illegal to fake - along with the wrinkles!

You mean like the woman who spent around 40 Grand over more than 12 Months, getting her Brother back from a visit to the Caribbean - who was told he couldn't re-enter the UK because he had no proof of UK membership!!

Who mentioned 19 year olds??

I'm a 1956 Baby - who could well have been in the same boat (no pun intended)

[Ken L]

You mean like the woman who spent around 40 Grand over more than 12 Months, getting her Brother back from a visit to the Caribbean - who was told he couldn't re-enter the UK because he had no proof of UK membership!!

Who mentioned 19 year olds??

I'm a 1956 Baby - who could well have been in the same boat (no pun intended)

You don't have "mbership" of the UK, you have citizenship.

If someone has been here for 60 years and they haven't bothered to apply for citizenship, establish legal right of abode or apply for a valid re-entry visa before leaving (while they are clearly able enough to maintain citizenship of their country of origin and an up-to-date passport that allows them to travel) then tough.

They deserve all the hassle and difficulty that they receive when attempting to re-enter the UK without a valid visa.

[big_cod]

Amber resigns now Who is next to go ? Who was the previous Home Secretary who infact created a lot of this mess .

Edited April 30, 2018 by big_cod