Borders chief quits saying
Discussion
Clear my name...Na..Gimme all your wonga instead............
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15648367
Says it all really.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15648367
Says it all really.
Mojooo said:
I agree that is is odd that he was blamed without giving his side - that said, why doesnt he just come out and give his side of the story unofficially before the investigation starts/finishes.
I would guess that as a serving civil servant (albeit suspended) he is still bound by the Official Secrets Act and so could not give details of what was said/written by who and when without being charged with further offences of breaching the Act, now he has resigned he would presumably be able to present his case at the constructive dismissal hearing.greygoose said:
Mojooo said:
I agree that is is odd that he was blamed without giving his side - that said, why doesnt he just come out and give his side of the story unofficially before the investigation starts/finishes.
I would guess that as a serving civil servant (albeit suspended) he is still bound by the Official Secrets Act and so could not give details of what was said/written by who and when without being charged with further offences of breaching the Act, now he has resigned he would presumably be able to present his case at the constructive dismissal hearing.Murph7355 said:
Theresa May should be the one resigning.
Initially she says he did this off his own back, then she back tracks?
If he wins, the payment should be docked from her wages before she's shown the door.
Which news have you been watching?Initially she says he did this off his own back, then she back tracks?
If he wins, the payment should be docked from her wages before she's shown the door.
All the news currently reporting that Therresa May commissioned a pilot scheme for EU members.
Brodie took it on his own back, and previously admitted to his boss this, that it wasn't ministerial directions.
This is entirely down to the guy who decided to try his own thing.
One way or the other it will come down to staff - or lack of staff
I reckon they didnt have enough staff to do the job with to start with - let alone to make the cuts with.
The purpose of the pilot was to utilise resources effectivley (fair enough) but accepting that many things will go unchecked - that is down to lack of staff and that issue is obviously down to the government.
the decision to do even less checks was down to someone - but again pushed on by a lack of staff.
I reckon they didnt have enough staff to do the job with to start with - let alone to make the cuts with.
The purpose of the pilot was to utilise resources effectivley (fair enough) but accepting that many things will go unchecked - that is down to lack of staff and that issue is obviously down to the government.
the decision to do even less checks was down to someone - but again pushed on by a lack of staff.
The biometric thing doesn't work anyway.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/aug/07/h...
Hackers figured out how to get round the system in months, and because it's an international standard it will take years to be updated. As a result ditching the biometric part of the passport check jeopardised absolutely nobody; the people of the Border Agency did what they always do, which is look for shifty people. Which always seems to be me, every time I go through Dover.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/aug/07/h...
Hackers figured out how to get round the system in months, and because it's an international standard it will take years to be updated. As a result ditching the biometric part of the passport check jeopardised absolutely nobody; the people of the Border Agency did what they always do, which is look for shifty people. Which always seems to be me, every time I go through Dover.
I love this fuss about checking passports at Calais. Typical modern idiocy, focussing on some point of detail while the real issue is somewhere else.
You can check passports until you're blue in the face but the question remains whether there's someone hiding under a blanket in the back of the car!!
You can check passports until you're blue in the face but the question remains whether there's someone hiding under a blanket in the back of the car!!
Ozzie Osmond said:
I love this fuss about checking passports at Calais. Typical modern idiocy, focussing on some point of detail while the real issue is somewhere else.
You can check passports until you're blue in the face but the question remains whether there's someone hiding under a blanket in the back of the car!!
Absolutely agree, really is a lack of resources, where successive governments have either made experience staff redundant or cut back on staff, and used “mobile” staff, being transported on a required basis from one port to another port.You can check passports until you're blue in the face but the question remains whether there's someone hiding under a blanket in the back of the car!!
At one South Wales sea port, it was well documented, that when customs were visibly seen to be on duty, haulage traffic dropped considerably.
Mojooo said:
One way or the other it will come down to staff - or lack of staff
I reckon they didnt have enough staff to do the job with to start with - let alone to make the cuts with.
The purpose of the pilot was to utilise resources effectivley (fair enough) but accepting that many things will go unchecked - that is down to lack of staff and that issue is obviously down to the government.
the decision to do even less checks was down to someone - but again pushed on by a lack of staff.
How many staff do you need?!I reckon they didnt have enough staff to do the job with to start with - let alone to make the cuts with.
The purpose of the pilot was to utilise resources effectivley (fair enough) but accepting that many things will go unchecked - that is down to lack of staff and that issue is obviously down to the government.
the decision to do even less checks was down to someone - but again pushed on by a lack of staff.
We have the highest numbers of staff for the number of people coming in for most of the western world.
Or do you mean a lack of competent staff?
elster said:
How many staff do you need?!
We have the highest numbers of staff for the number of people coming in for most of the western world.
Or do you mean a lack of competent staff?
Whatever you want to call them - the simple fact is most things like this are a numbers game - if you cannot fill up all the immigration desks then you will have delays because the volume of passengers at the big ports is that great.We have the highest numbers of staff for the number of people coming in for most of the western world.
Or do you mean a lack of competent staff?
Mojooo said:
Whatever you want to call them - the simple fact is most things like this are a numbers game - if you cannot fill up all the immigration desks then you will have delays because the volume of passengers at the big ports is that great.
This isn't correct. Getting rid of incomepetent staff, retraining and changing procedure is what it's all about. I was present at a talk by the most senior guy at a UK airport and they had massive, massive improvements after looking at this. No staff increase. 0a said:
This isn't correct. Getting rid of incomepetent staff, retraining and changing procedure is what it's all about. I was present at a talk by the most senior guy at a UK airport and they had massive, massive improvements after looking at this. No staff increase.
At a time when they are going through big cuts are they going to fire and hire new staff with all the associate costs?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff