Illegal immigrants working as security guards

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by hong_kong_fuey, Nov 11, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Telegraph

    Quite unbelievable, really. Is this just systemic incompetence or part of something more sinister? Regardless, the consequences of this to the security of the nation could be catastrophic. Considering no-one has confidence in the government, why has a Motion of No Confidence not been brought by the Opposition? Politicians = amoral cowards. :x
     
  2. We should immediately give these illegal immigrant security guards compensation of around £500.000 i say.

    If we don't i will be mildly outraged.
     
  3. Put them on a tube and call for SO19!
     
  4. It is outrageously outrageous already.
     
  5. A few years back while working for the city council of a certain southern UK city I was one of the council officers responsible for licensing taxi drivers and bar premises (amongst a huge variety of other matters)....

    due to even earlier experience in the Civil Service as an Immigration Officer I pointed out, to the head of my department, that there were loopholes in the vetting for both security staff and taxi-drivers - meaning we could be granting licenses to illegals and also people that were criminals in their 'home' country. I drafted a proposal that we should liaise with the IND (Home Office) to get the matter sorted.

    I was told not to start 'rocking the boat' and that we didn't want to appear racist!! My proposal was consigned to File 13 at the bottom drawer of a dusty filing cabinet.

    :roll:
     
  6. And how long before one of these illegal immigrants employed at an airport manages to place a bomb or weapons on an aeroplane so his "brothers" can hijack it?.

    Thank god I don't have to fly from Brirish airports anymore.
     
  7. Unfortunately, no. I've a big bugbear with the Home Office; if there was ever a department that needed bulldozing in order to be rebuilt in a better organsiation - this is it.
    I thought with Dr Reid's admission of the HO not being fit for purpose would have been the moment this could have figuratively happened, but alas no.... :roll:
     
  8. Watch the news this Wednesday 14th November. You might just get your wish.

    On the other hand it could all be a meaningless piece of new labour spin.
     
  9. Well, you're right. It's not a surprise but it's still unbelievable that this continues to happen. What are the odds that any government 'attempt' to solve this issue will be blocked by the Courts under the Human Rights Act?

    Every effect has a cause. How much of an effect this calamity will have, we'll have to wait and see. But it doesn't bode well for the future that critical infrastructure has been compromised in this manner.

    This government is slowly grinding me down into despondency. Is that their plan?
     
  10. Becuase the opposition would lose such a vote - massively - and hand the Goverment a big boost in doing so.
     
  11. The angle of the story seems odd to me. I see nothing wrong with the SIA not checking on permissions to work. It is the responsibility of employers to check that it does not hire people with no permission to work. The SIA merely licences people to work as security guards.

    I wonder why the angle taken isn't that agencies, and security firms aren't discharging their reponsibilites.
     
  12. Oh yea, let's blame the HRA and the courts. I have it on good authority that the HRA is responsible for 9/11, MRSA, the fires in Californa, the New Orleans fiasco, bird flu, and ble tongue disease.
     

  13. Did I blame the HRA for the problem? No, is the answer. Ultimately, in this instance, the buck stops with the mandarins and politicians in Whitehall. This is an example of a failure in the execution of policy. I merely pointed out that any attempt to rectify the problem may face problems under the HRA in the courts. As for the rest of what you said....well, less said.
     
  14. Good point, considering Labour's majority in the Commons. I suppose I still live in the hopeless hope of there being some ethical rebels amongst the Labour backbenchers. But those days have gone, and Labour has been homogenised into a party of selfish, amoral and cynical career politicians.
     
  15. You suggested, in a flippant manner, that the HRA will block the government's attempt to rectify the problem. That is blaming the HRA. Whether or not that is what you meant is besides the point. I can only try to construe what you meant by what you wrote and I adopted a reasonable interpretation.

    Now that you have clarified you meant the HRA may pose a problem, I agree with you. However, I think in most cases, the HRA will not come into play at all. Further, the HRA does not actually stop the government from passing legislation to deport people. The courts are merely following what the HRA says so they do not come into the picture at all.