Amber Rudd Is a liar -

[DaveB]

actually worth looking at the "who was on windrush" story it was quite interesting.

Rudd needs to grow a pair and say something like this.

1. Of course we have targets for voluntary repatriation of illegal immigrants, its part of the job muppets.
2. Why shouldn't we reward staff if they do a good job?
3. We don't have specific targets for forced deportation that would be tasteless. We do however have expectations based on facts.
4. Windrush is a cock up 50 years in the making, it just exploded on my watch and Labour are weaponising the people's suffering.

Except they do.

Quote from the Memo she was sent.

“[Immigration Enforcement] has set a target of achieving 12,800 enforced returns in 2017-18, aided by the redistribution of resources towards this area. This will move us along the path towards the 10% increased performance on enforced returns, which we promised the home secretary earlier this year.”

[vetran]

Except they do.

Quote from the Memo she was sent.

The department has “a target of achieving 12,800 enforced returns in 2017-18”

ah missed that, see it is possible to miss such things.

a little tasteless but if they aren't rewarded and that is in line with the number that exist what is the problem? Or should we not bother deporting illegal immigrants?

Now if they are enforcing returns on incorrect grounds that is a problem. In windrush it does seem they were trying to.

[DaveB]

ah missed that, see it is possible to miss such things.

a little tasteless but if they aren't rewarded and that is in line with the number that exist what is the problem? Or should we not bother deporting illegal immigrants?

Now if they are enforcing returns on incorrect grounds that is a problem. In windrush it does seem they were trying to.

Yes illegal immigrants should be deported, but by setting targets and driving those targets through performance reviews, and by other accounts large motivational posters in IE offices, you make hitting targets the priority, not doing the job properly. Thats how corners get cut and the wrong people get caught up in it. If you pick up an individual, push them through same day deportation and they don't understand their rights or have any form of representation, how do you ensure that you've got the right person or that they should actually be deported? Especially if they don't have documents to prove residence because the Home Office destroyed them. It becomes a case of "Get them processed and on a plane. We don't care who we deport as long as we hit the target".

Other sources in the department are also now saying "there were regular meeting between ministers and senior officials at which specific national targets were discussed, including details of how Home Office departments would achieve the 10% increase in the number of people being removed from the UK every year – a goal set by Rudd personally."

So she set the goal, reports on meeting that goal were provided to her and included statements that targets had been set in order to achieve that goal. She set policy, her department reported to her how they were going to implement that policy and she says she had no knowledge of it?

[darmstadt]

She's lucky to be in the job in the first place, I wonder how the people of Hastings see her now:

[SueEllen]

actually worth looking at the "who was on windrush" story it was quite interesting.

Rudd needs to grow a pair and say something like this.

1. Of course we have targets for voluntary repatriation of illegal immigrants, its part of the job muppets.
2. Why shouldn't we reward staff if they do a good job?
3. We don't have specific targets for forced deportation that would be tasteless. We do however have expectations based on facts.
4. Windrush is a cock up 50 years in the making, it just exploded on my watch and Labour are weaponising the people's suffering.

If you actually read the last thread I created about the Windrush you would see that the issue is not just the few British Citizens from the Commonwealth who came on that particular ship, but all those who came from Commonwealth countries which incidentally includes Canada and settled before 1973, and British colonies like St Kitts and Nevis which only became independent in 1983.

Unfortunately the BBC and other newspapers are behind the curve with this story as the investigation was done by a Guardian journalist who was notify months ago about the feck up the Home Office created.

[SueEllen]

She's lucky to be in the job in the first place, I wonder how the people of Hastings see her now:

Hopefully they will vote tactically and get rid. However with Corbyn at the head of the Labour party and his stupid stance in the last GE it is unlikely.

[SueEllen]

ah missed that, see it is possible to miss such things.

a little tasteless but if they aren't rewarded and that is in line with the number that exist what is the problem? Or should we not bother deporting illegal immigrants?

Now if they are enforcing returns on incorrect grounds that is a problem. In windrush it does seem they were trying to.

Example of someone from Canada the Home Office wants to chuck out - linky

[scooterscot]

So, a liar or incompetent, which is it?

[vetran]

If you actually read the last thread I created about the Windrush you would see that the issue is not just the few British Citizens from the Commonwealth who came on that particular ship, but all those who came from Commonwealth countries which incidentally includes Canada and settled before 1973, and British colonies like St Kitts and Nevis which only became independent in 1983.

Unfortunately the BBC and other newspapers are behind the curve with this story as the investigation was done by a Guardian journalist who was notify months ago about the feck up the Home Office created.

The "Windrush generation" is the phrase that is generally being used to cover this whole migration, they didn't all come on the one ship but listing the hundreds of ships and other routes would take a while.

its still a cock up. Its still 50 years old!

Now does anyone see the fact that these people managed to live 50 years in the country without being noticed by the authorities or being regularised as a scandal? I assume some were renting, borrowing or using the NHS. At that point when the papers didn't appear correct, someone in power should of said we need to fix this!

The government must have known that they needed the proper documentation otherwise this stuff would happen, so why in the last 50 years did they not fix it, these citizens ARE entitled to it?

Horrible as it is for the people affected can we see it as a success of the government policies that those without proper paperwork are now being identified? Even though when the home office finds them they cock it up. I do. I hope they sort out the legals from the illegals and treat both sides with fairness & decency.

[vetran]

Example of someone from Canada the Home Office wants to chuck out - linky

and it looks like they are entitled to stay. so hopefully it will end well.

Now if the government had regularised all these people & done the paperwork ages ago then it wouldn't be an issue.

this is all the result of lax migration practices over the years and a recent desperate attempt to decrease illegal migration. Both need fixing.