Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
It's difficult to check Howard as most give false names and even wrong countries of birth ie many Visa national Ruskies are obtaining false id papers from surrounding EU countries in order to enter the UK.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
I doubt there are many countries which people have a cause to leave in order to escape persecution. Probably none at all.
I think it's more of a case of many young women who have left their country to work as domestics in other countries (not Britain or Europe), but were then cheated out of their pay, and don't know how to get back to their own country.
I read that Lebanon and Irak are two places where it is better not to go as a young African or Asian women in search of domestic work.
Assylum-seeking in Britain and Europe is usually a disguise to seek a better paid job.
Bern.....
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Sorry, I know you have a slightly different view, but opinions vary.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
I saw this article in the on line edition of the Mirror and was astounded.
A TOP official who presided over immigration "chaos" pocketed about £1million, it was revealed yesterday.
Lin Homer earned £200,000 a year as UK Border Agency chief before moving to another high-paid civil service job after five years.
She received bonuses of up to £15,000, despite criticism of immigration controls.
When I first joined the service the Chief Inspector of Immigration was chap who had worked as an Immigration Officer and then progressed his way up through the grades. So the troops respected him 'cos he had experience of the job. His pay was linked to the Civil Service pay structure so it had its agreed limits.
Thatcher in her wisdom decided to scrap this system and replace it by hiring outside executives payng market rates. I think the first immigration boss of the new era was a former Sainsbury Exec. Didn't have a clue about immigration probably would have made a good shelf stacker but other than to be able to 'talk the talk' they didn't have a clue what is was like on the controls and be faced with the daily grind of admitting or refusing entry to visitors to the UK. It's been downhill ever since and has resulted in the Chief of immigration taking home more pay than the PM. Is that right?.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
No it's not right Marek.
It's also not right that she should be paid such a high salary and given bonuses, when clearly she wasn't achieving any targets, in fact making it worse.
Sadly, this body is now described as not fit for purpose.
Whether it was Maggie or any other Prime Minister, there are horses for courses and I agree that with immigration it is better to promote from within, so the person at the top knows all the scams, lies and likely stories people will come up with and can make decisions based on experience.
When I was young in my career (at Natwest) , I was told that supervisors and managers don't necessarily need to know what the job entails, because it is the people they are supervising or managing. To a certain extend I agree, but as with finance, immigration or any specialist field, there is a definite "need to know" to be able to make the right decisions.
Roger
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
well done roger thats a half admittance on maggie
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Not everyone gets it right every time Keith; you should know that from Labour's record.
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the situation can only get worse with cuts at the border agency.
as marek said earlier in the thread we do not even know the nationality of some, let alone their name.
politicians pay lip service to the problem, but stop short of taking any action.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
They can't take action against letting in people from the EU - that's the problem.
I agree it will get worse Howard and that's why I don't understand the cuts - it will cost us so much more.
To my mind, if they came off of a boat or train, they came from France, so we send them back there.
There must be strict criteria for letting anyone reside here - as I have stated till the record broke.
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
what is the situation regarding people coming in from the europen union?
we have had a few that when convicted of crimes of here we discover that they had preious convictions abroad.
it seems that there are no checks.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Howard, last year I read in a paper that one bloke from Congo, who did 8 years in prison in Britain for rape, was allowed to stay after leaving prison, rather than be sent back to his home-country, because in prison he married another woman from Congo who has a German passport, which qualified him as an EU citizen or there-abouts.
Under EU law, there is nothing that the authorities could do if a convicted criminal walked in to Britain with an EU passport , or even if married to an EU passport-holder.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
that says rather a lot about our politicians alex, they are unlikely to live close by any of these criminal so does not affect them.
the human rights act and e.u. law are used as a cover to do nothing sometimes.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
Alex
You are mistaken. EU members can be refused entry as ''non conducive''. I know of many EC nationals that have been refused,or served a UK prison sentence or nationals that have been deported and have an outstanding D.O against them that are subject to control and are NOT allowed to enter or re-enter the UK.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
There is though some law concerning marriages, whereby any person from abroad married to a UK passport-holder has rights to stay.
The laws on marriages are being made stricter, as the authorities got behind a wide-spread criminal activity of fake marriages in Britain, where people sign a piece of paper who don't even know each other, or hardly, and have no intention of living together.
The witnesses are laid on, all liars, and often the thugs don't even speak English.
There are many facettes of illegal immigration.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
Alex
Sorry but you are mistaken again. Marriage does not give the spouse right of entry or the right to live in the UK, The spouse has to satisfy an immigration/visa officer that the marriage is genuine,that they intend to settle and live permanemtly together in the UK,that they have met prior to the marriage etc etc. There are many wives and husbands of British nationals languishing in their home countries having been refused entry who are currently appealing against these decisions.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Well at least we're fighting back!
Alec Sheldon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 18 Aug 2008
- Posts: 1,037
Taken from the Dover Express this week.
Numbers.
In Dover in the year 2009 it is estimated around 600 people from Slovakia registered for a National Insurance number followed by around 300 from the Czech Replubic, 200 from Lithuania, 250 from Nepal and about 100 from India.
This was in 2009 so how many more have registered since then? How longer can we accept so many people in to a small town like Dover? There is no work for locals never mind outsiders and don't give me all the cr-p that locals don't want to work.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Alec, it doesn't take much counting on fingers as to why the last government decided to build up green areas around Dover and Canterbury.
We all know that it is to accomodate mass immigration! The figures supplied by the Dover Express which you mention are sound proof of this.
It comes under the code "development", but with so many people out of work, instead of opening new production sites for the local population, all that happens is that masses come in and get the jobs.
So all they need then is a new housing estate to live in.
I am happy for every tenner I earn working. Being part-time self-employed, I really am happy when I get the chance to do some work and earn some money.
I made a solemn promise that I wouldn't give in, that I'd hold through; Dover is the town of my ancestors, I have no other town, and I won't give up.
No matter how many people flock over to grab jobs, I will still be here holding out, and one day I'll have an orchard where I'll be planting trees in the Garden of England, gathering fruit, and celebrating the evening with a can of Old English.
I'll just plod on till I get there, come what may, come whatever!
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
Alec & Alex
The Czechs and Lithuainians are members of the EU so there is nothing preventing their nationals in coming to the UK to seek and gain employment.
The Nepalese,I would presume are Ghurka dependants and therefore thanks to Joanna Lumley and all her other shortsighted supporters who were unable to forsee the problems that the UK would encounter once ex service men and their families got the right of abode in this country also have the 'right' to live and work here.
The Indians are nationals that unless they have spouses,parents, students,work permit holders or some other strong ties with the UK should raise a few eyebrows when they applied for N.I number.
Hope that goes some way to answering the points raised but without knowing the cases its difficult other than to generalise.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
would be interesting to know the number of dependants of the people registerin for a national insurance number.
