Baroness Scotland makes light of £5,000 fine for employing illegal immigrant

DarkJediDarkJedi Posts: 321
Forum Member
It's like driving into the City and not paying the congestion charge. It's not a criminal offence,' she told Sky News.
Pull the other one. It's nothing like not paying congestion charge. There are signs all over. Why did she not get the sack. :mad:

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,185
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    She saw her "papers" and thought she was legal.

    Though, she has been hoisted by her own petard (or what ever the saying is), and has been fined even though she didn't know, but that was the law she brought in.

    Not a sacking offence.
  • SystemSystem Posts: 2,096,970
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    People who make the law should be expected to get it right. No excuses
  • WokStationWokStation Posts: 23,112
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    She saw her "papers" and thought she was legal.

    Correction: She says she saw the papers. The only relevant document the police found at the immigrant's house was a passport. Baroness Scotland has no evidence to prove she ever saw them, we only have her word. She never made copies of these documents she supposedly saw, as she was legally obliged to do.

    And no-one would ever lie about such a thing to stay out of trouble, would they?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 10,559
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    WokStation wrote: »
    Correction: She says she saw the papers. The only relevant document the police found at the immigrant's house was a passport. Baroness Scotland has no evidence to prove she ever saw them, we only have her word. She never made copies of these documents she supposedly saw, as she was legally obliged to do.

    And no-one would ever lie about such a thing to stay out of trouble, would they?

    That's the part that sounds dodgy to me. The fact that UKBA are willing, without any evidence, to take her word for it that she checked the documents is grossly unfair to other employers who aren't afforded the same privilege.
  • LurkalotLurkalot Posts: 1,563
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    So a 5 grand fine to her is nothing more than an annoyance, she can probably claim it on the exes, oh what a life they lead, doubles all round.
  • ianradioianianradioian Posts: 74,539
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Typical of Britain today.
  • WhovianWhovian Posts: 852
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    An utter disgrace and typical of the contempt Labour show for the laws they introduce themselves with no intention of following while they persecute law abiding citizens for minor offences like leaving their dustbins out too long. The sooner this lot of contemptible idiots go the better.
  • Super FrogSuper Frog Posts: 11,480
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Oh no it's BROKEN BRITAIN :eek:

    Hide!
  • WokStationWokStation Posts: 23,112
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That's the part that sounds dodgy to me. The fact that UKBA are willing, without any evidence, to take her word for it that she checked the documents is grossly unfair to other employers who aren't afforded the same privilege.

    I suspect they'll see a large increase in The Baroness Scotland Defence in future cases, and they'll have little grounds to refuse such a defence given their willingness to accept it from her.
  • nafanny29nafanny29 Posts: 1,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If she herself can fall foul of the law, even though she maintains she did a lot of checks, then the law is WRONG.

    In the case of illegal workers, THEY are the ones committing the offense by working illegally, but every employer is now proxy policeman having to check their worker's legality. And its now obvious that checking is not easy, or clear.

    Another bad law by a bad government.
  • hatpeghatpeg Posts: 3,213
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    £5,000 is nothing to her.

    She can take it out of the £160,000 she received for her "second home" and she is still £155,000 to the good.
  • culturemancultureman Posts: 11,700
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Did Baroness tell the truth? Housekeeper 'denies showing Attorney General her passport'

    Political gossip websites suggested she had never produced her Tongan passport, directly contradicting Lady Scotland's claims to have gone to great lengths to verify her right to work in Britain.........

    ....... 'It does seem to me that there is a big question mark about how the Home Office can have concluded matters without having spoken to the housekeeper herself.

    'Now that she has been arrested she has to be questioned about all relevant matters, including exactly which documents she provided for Baroness Scotland.'

    The Attorney General claims to have seen several documents, including Miss Tapui's passport.
    But she has consistently refused to answer detailed questions about the status of the passport and any visas it might contain, prompting speculation that some documents could have expired.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

    Well have to admit this was my first thought immediately upon first hearing Baroness Scotland's claim she had, "forgotten to photocopy her housekeeper's passport".
Sign In or Register to comment.