Discussion
CraigyMc said:
Murph7355 said:
CraigyMc said:
Randy Winkman said:
£340k? Not bad for being a snowflake Sir Humphrey type. 
Shame we have to pay it. 
He was on a £150K salary. After tax that'll be about £90K PA so you could look at that payment as three and a half years of pay. Shame we have to pay it. It's not that much in the grand scheme.
If she was innocent the govt should have taken it to tribunal.
(I'm not a fan of out of court settlements on this sort of thing).
jakesmith said:
I don’t have a good word to say about her normally but hasn’t she just potentially solved illegal immigration? By looking to introduce life sentences for people smugglers. I’d support that. These abhorrent individuals will soon will switch to cigarettes or drugs or something with a lower sentence surely?
She wants to change it to life, but everyone doubts it will actually happen. 14 years is already the top range but generally most people get 1-5 depending on severity. Same with a life sentence, it’s the sentencing rules which affect the amount of time given. Regardless, all the boats coming over are generally sailed by someone trying to get over illegally themselves and as they’re asylum seekers and the “captain” doesn’t get paid for his brief stint behind the wheel no one gets charged as for facilitating asylum seekers you need to gain financially for the offence to be complete. Hence why the Home Office are playing smoke and mirrors games by throwing out lines like this. Where it will impact is those doing the same as what happened to all those who died in the lorry in Essex. However as others have said, financial greed means people don’t care about long sentences.
Edited by Sgt Bilko on Thursday 4th March 22:01
Sgt Bilko said:
jakesmith said:
I don’t have a good word to say about her normally but hasn’t she just potentially solved illegal immigration? By looking to introduce life sentences for people smugglers. I’d support that. These abhorrent individuals will soon will switch to cigarettes or drugs or something with a lower sentence surely?
She wants to change it to life, but everyone doubts it will actually happen. 14 years is already the top range but generally most people get 1-5 depending on severity. Same with a life sentence, it’s the sentencing rules which affect the amount of time given. Regardless, all the boats coming over are generally sailed by someone trying to get over illegally themselves and as they’re asylum seekers and the “captain” doesn’t get paid for his brief stint behind the wheel no one gets charged as for facilitating asylum seekers you need to gain financially for the offence to be complete. Hence why the Home Office are playing smoke and mirrors games by throwing out lines like this. Murph7355 said:
Senior govt personnel shouldn't be putting us in a position to have to pay anything out.
If she was innocent the govt should have taken it to tribunal.
(I'm not a fan of out of court settlements on this sort of thing).
I think you will find patel put the uk govt is this position by her actions i am sure the civil servant would have preferred to see out his time until retirement.If she was innocent the govt should have taken it to tribunal.
(I'm not a fan of out of court settlements on this sort of thing).
citizensm1th said:
Murph7355 said:
Senior govt personnel shouldn't be putting us in a position to have to pay anything out.
If she was innocent the govt should have taken it to tribunal.
(I'm not a fan of out of court settlements on this sort of thing).
I think you will find patel put the uk govt is this position by her actions i am sure the civil servant would have preferred to see out his time until retirement.If she was innocent the govt should have taken it to tribunal.
(I'm not a fan of out of court settlements on this sort of thing).
Not a good look from govt.
CoolHands said:
You’re all welcome to abuse me right here right now for £340k
W*nker! (cheque is in the post...)Rutnam was earning £180K+ back in 2010, and I doubt his salary's gone down since then. Add pension contributions, etc... and I guess it's based on a year's salary plus,
When you've been a civil servant for 30+ years, finding a similar level of job is likely to take a little time. He's probably still got a mortgage to pay
Murph7355 said:
citizensm1th said:
Murph7355 said:
Senior govt personnel shouldn't be putting us in a position to have to pay anything out.
If she was innocent the govt should have taken it to tribunal.
(I'm not a fan of out of court settlements on this sort of thing).
I think you will find patel put the uk govt is this position by her actions i am sure the civil servant would have preferred to see out his time until retirement.If she was innocent the govt should have taken it to tribunal.
(I'm not a fan of out of court settlements on this sort of thing).
Not a good look from govt.
Rutnam has had a six figure payout to avoid her behaviour seeing the light of day in a tribunal.
Patel is still Home Secretary whilst Rutnam and the the independent advisor who found she'd broken the Ministerial Code chose to resign because the Prime Minister backed Patel for political reasons rather than support her victims.
All this shows is that if you abuse your staff you'll be supported and your victims won't.
Bit of an understatement.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Patel has been found to have broken the Ministerial Code.
Rutnam has had a six figure payout to avoid her behaviour seeing the light of day in a tribunal.
Patel is still Home Secretary whilst Rutnam and the the independent advisor who found she'd broken the Ministerial Code chose to resign because the Prime Minister backed Patel for political reasons rather than support her victims.
All this shows is that if you abuse your staff you'll be supported and your victims won't.
Bit of an understatement.
Whilst rutnams tribunal case might have been settled there is still a judicial review funded by the FDA over patel's behaviour and the consequential report and how no10 decided to disregard it. It isn't over by a long chalk.Rutnam has had a six figure payout to avoid her behaviour seeing the light of day in a tribunal.
Patel is still Home Secretary whilst Rutnam and the the independent advisor who found she'd broken the Ministerial Code chose to resign because the Prime Minister backed Patel for political reasons rather than support her victims.
All this shows is that if you abuse your staff you'll be supported and your victims won't.
Bit of an understatement.
princeperch said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Patel has been found to have broken the Ministerial Code.
Rutnam has had a six figure payout to avoid her behaviour seeing the light of day in a tribunal.
Patel is still Home Secretary whilst Rutnam and the the independent advisor who found she'd broken the Ministerial Code chose to resign because the Prime Minister backed Patel for political reasons rather than support her victims.
All this shows is that if you abuse your staff you'll be supported and your victims won't.
Bit of an understatement.
Whilst rutnams tribunal case might have been settled there is still a judicial review funded by the FDA over patel's behaviour and the consequential report and how no10 decided to disregard it. It isn't over by a long chalk.Rutnam has had a six figure payout to avoid her behaviour seeing the light of day in a tribunal.
Patel is still Home Secretary whilst Rutnam and the the independent advisor who found she'd broken the Ministerial Code chose to resign because the Prime Minister backed Patel for political reasons rather than support her victims.
All this shows is that if you abuse your staff you'll be supported and your victims won't.
Bit of an understatement.
It will be interesting to see how far the FDA get on, if he has signed an NDA in order to receive his payout for absolute failure to manage his department. A couple of years salary is not much in order to get rid of a useless PS.
Compared to what Mourinho has been handed, many times, its peanuts.
CraigyMc said:
Unrelated: Is Max Mosely considered a conservative or a national socialist?
Asking for an unrelated friend.
A tad to the right me thinks. Asking for an unrelated friend.
However.
The Tories have been giving money to his Nephew and grandson of Oswald, who is the UK boss of Palantir. I can't think what controversy there is in the grandson of the most famous Nazi supporting fascist in this country's history being tasked with analysis and segregation of our populations data.
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
CraigyMc said:
Unrelated: Is Max Mosely considered a conservative or a national socialist?
Asking for an unrelated friend.
A tad to the right me thinks. Asking for an unrelated friend.
However.
The Tories have been giving money to his Nephew and grandson of Oswald, who is the UK boss of Palantir. I can't think what controversy there is in the grandson of the most famous Nazi supporting fascist in this country's history being tasked with analysis and segregation of our populations data.
It's not always a nice thing when family businesses pass down the generations.
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
Absolutely a matter of record that he likes a bit of role play, that wasn't in dispute. It was disputed that it was a nazi theme. I'm sure if he paid the appropriate fee Priti could be nasty to him. Christ, if you work for her she does it for free.
Sooo, Mosely for undersecretary of state? 
If he displeases her does she withdraw the whip?
etc.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff