Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

tomandlu

Immigration Minister Mark Harper Quits Over Cleaner's Visa

Recommended Posts

Are we supposed to believe MP's cleaners are not security checked in any way whatsoever?? really?

Surely even a cursory criminal records check would've brought this to light straight away?

is he sugesting the original records which he says were conveniently 'lost' were fakes? or what else could this mean:

"It added there was "no suggestion" the 43-year-old Conservative MP for the Forest of Dean had "knowingly employed an illegal immigrant".

Well I'd say there is every suggestion he didn't check the persons work status, nor did he keep the records he was legally required to - will he be fining himself £10000 (lol - I think we know the answer there!)

"He also explained in the letter that he had made checks when he first employed the cleaner at his London flat in 2007.

A year later, he said, he talked a lot about employers and landlords carrying out "reasonable checks" on workers.

Given this focus, he said, he thought it "prudent to check that all my documents were in order for my cleaner".

"I undertook an extensive search to locate the copies of documents I had taken but unfortunately I was unable to locate them," he wrote."

So is he saying this all came to light in 2008 and has been covered up since then? or that the person was employed without a visa since 2008?? typically unclear unquestioning BBC reporting - massive holes in the story totally ignored. What 'checks' were made in 2007? when did this come to light? did the immigration status of the cleaner change? why is there 'no suggestion' he did anything wrong? (WTF!)

hmmm...whatever something doesn't seem right here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a government minister with all the resources at his disposal can't determine the immigration status of his own employee- but he expects the woman who runs the local baker shop or some boso who rents out their spare room to do exactly this?

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is he saying this all came to light in 2008 and has been covered up since then? or that the person was employed without a visa since 2008?? typically unclear unquestioning BBC reporting - massive holes in the story totally ignored. What 'checks' were made in 2007? when did this come to light? did the immigration status of the cleaner change? why is there 'no suggestion' he did anything wrong? (WTF!)

hmmm...whatever something doesn't seem right here.

That was very much my impression when I caught the article on the news. There was some woman (another MP I think) blathering on about how he 'had gone above and beyond the call of duty' by apparently having conducted multiple unsuccessful/inconclusive (Huh? What's that about???) checks on her since 2008 ...

That's not above the call of duty - that's insufficient according to the mantra he was imposing on other employers. He should have waited until he determined the cleaner's legal status before employing them.

Lots of other MPs going on about what a great chap he is too and the PM apparently very sad to reluctantly accept his resignation, a sure sign he'll be back in the fold as soon as the fuss dies down and the actual facts are covered up safely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It needs saying:

We're all in this together :rolleyes:

"Two wrongs don't make a right!"

Anyway all he does to do is resign and say sorry and that is the end of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit that the "whiff of porkies" angle struck me, too. The fact that he couldn't find the photocopy of the passport and Home Office letter five years later rang alarm bells. If the events really did happen as he claims, then the cleaner had a forged passport. Even the government's proposed new legislation only requires employers to detect "very obvious" (or some such wording) forgeries. If his version of events is true, no-one could credibly call it a resignation issue; and given Labour's hypocrisy track record, I doubt if they'd have made a serious attempt to.

I suspect what really happened is that he hired this woman when he was an unknown junior MP, without giving a four-x about her immigration status. Then came the election, then he was promoted to the government, and then he started to make hardline anti-immigration statements. At that point he realised that he needed to make sure that his own house was in order (literally, given the employee at issue's occupation!) and check his cleaner's immigration status, or else somebody else, e.g. a leftie journalist, would do it for him. So he did, found out that she was illegal, and decided that he would go now with a lie that was unlikely to be investigated, keep a low profile for a couple of years and try to come back again, rather than try to brazen it out and become the subject of a prolonged media trainwreck. Or maybe it was someone else who discovered the cleaner's illegality, and he paid them off. Who knows. All I know is that I detect the whiff of porkies, too.

If the cleaner goes to The Guardian or the BBC and claims that her employer never asked for any documents back in 2007, he's buggered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit that the "whiff of porkies" angle struck me, too. The fact that he couldn't find the photocopy of the passport and Home Office letter five years later rang alarm bells. If the events really did happen as he claims, then the cleaner had a forged passport. Even the government's proposed new legislation only requires employers to detect "very obvious" (or some such wording) forgeries. If his version of events is true, no-one could credibly call it a resignation issue; and given Labour's hypocrisy track record, I doubt if they'd have made a serious attempt to.

I suspect what really happened is that he hired this woman when he was an unknown junior MP, without giving a four-x about her immigration status. Then came the election, then he was promoted to the government, and then he started to make hardline anti-immigration statements. At that point he realised that he needed to make sure that his own house was in order (literally, given the employee at issue's occupation!) and check his cleaner's immigration status, or else somebody else, e.g. a leftie journalist, would do it for him. So he did, found out that she was illegal, and decided that he would go now with a lie that was unlikely to be investigated, keep a low profile for a couple of years and try to come back again, rather than try to brazen it out and become the subject of a prolonged media trainwreck. Or maybe it was someone else who discovered the cleaner's illegality, and he paid them off. Who knows. All I know is that I detect the whiff of porkies, too.

If the cleaner goes to The Guardian or the BBC and claims that her employer never asked for any documents back in 2007, he's buggered.

Not necessarily: one could argue that she has her own VI in denying that she showed him false documents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Two wrongs don't make a right!"

Anyway all he does to do is resign and say sorry and that is the end of it.

I didn't say they did.

Indeed there is that saying about two wrongs.

Two wrongs don't make a right is a very popular idiom. It means that if someone wrongs you, it won't make anything better for you to wrong them back. You would still be doing something wrong.

although I'm not sure that it's entirely relevant in the context of the (apparent) visa scandal.

It's the hypocrisy of it all with all the pronouncements by those governing about things that they themselves are doing - apparently. All in it together.

Then.

http://

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Harper

Resignation as Minister Of Immigration

Harper resigned as Immigration Minister on 8 February 2014, after he discovered that his self employed cleaner did not have permission to work in the UK. Harper had first made checks on his cleaner in 2007, 2010, and again in 2012. After launching a campaign to get employers and landlords to carry out "reasonable checks" on workers, he checked the cleaners paperwork again. After his private office checked her details with immigration officials, it was found she did not have indefinite leave to stay in the UK. After being told on Thursday 6 February, he immediately told Home Secretary Theresa May, and then after notifying Prime Minister David Cameron, he resigned. He was immediately replaced by James Brokenshire

It's not clear for example whether the visa had just expired etc. As usual there are lots of unanswered questions in the article - and the apparent loss of the checking documents doesn't help matters.

Under the circumstances it wouldn't have been unreasonable for him to say that more detailed checks had revealed fresh information and the cleaner now no longer worked for him etc - without resigning.

It's possible that he wasn't entirely comfortable in the role as immigration minister (there had been lots of criticism of it) and it offered an excuse to leave hoping for a different less controversial role some time in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Politicians and bankers make 'mistakes'.

Everyone else commits 'crimes'.

Yes, it's odd how the definition of criminal activity blurs as you move up the social/wealth ladder. The BBC consistently refers to the latest city frauds (Libor, PPI, Interest rate swaps, insider trading, forex manipulation) as either being 'scandals' or 'misdemeanors' the actual word 'fraud' seems to have been eliminated from their lexicon in relation to the finance sector.

They do however rediscover the term when reporting on benefit claimants discovered moonlighting in the local chip shop- then the 'big guns' of social opprobrium are wheeled out.

All rather pathetic. But to be fair the BBC are after all a state broadcaster- so is it really that surprising that they should in the last analysis seek to obfuscate the crimes of the governing elites and their allies while reinforcing the social controls required to keep the plebs in their place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cases like this make me wonder just to what level of magnitude immigration into this country is underestimated, and reinforces the fact that there is clearly no desire from Labour, Conservative or Liberal to lower it, in fact they actively show that they think the opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily: one could argue that she has her own VI in denying that she showed him false documents.

Who is the public going to believe (especially if the cleaner gets a Max Clifford type to orchestrate the story)? A sleazy, wealthy "nasty party" MP or a cleaner on the minimum wage? Just look at the Strauss-Kahn case. The woman who claimed he raped her was later revealed to be a serial liar, and her boyfriend a career criminal, including an impressive track record for blackmail. But by the time this emerged, he'd already been tried, convicted and guillotined in the court of public opinion, and those final revelations only just made the inside pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is the public going to believe (especially if the cleaner gets a Max Clifford type to orchestrate the story)? A sleazy, wealthy "nasty party" MP or a cleaner on the minimum wage? Just look at the Strauss-Kahn case. The woman who claimed he raped her was later revealed to be a serial liar, and her boyfriend a career criminal, including an impressive track record for blackmail. But by the time this emerged, he'd already been tried, convicted and guillotined in the court of public opinion, and those final revelations only just made the inside pages.

Compare with Plebgate. Who did the public rather believe? I think they trusted the policeman more, but now so much has come out to incriminate him/them that Mitchell is no longer tarred for life.

Plus which of these two do you think more likely to be able to hire MC?

But Harper's done well to defuse much of the risk by resigning so promptly. Consequences aren't going to be so bad for him now whatever happens....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cleaner is probably a greater asset to the UK than the Tory MP. Can we not deport him somewhere, maybe the Isle of Man or something

or do we not do that sort of thing anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compare with Plebgate. Who did the public rather believe? I think they trusted the policeman more, but now so much has come out to incriminate him/them that Mitchell is no longer tarred for life.

Plebgate was a fantastic example of how those up the ladder of wealth/power can get 'justice' rather more readily than your average, er, pleb.

Typical plebeian: Get gunned down - no hope of seeing justice done on those who pulled the trigger, inquest or enquiry largely brushes things under the carpet.

Establishment crony: Get accused of swearing - have the officers and force excoriated by courts and media in very short order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plebgate was a fantastic example of how those up the ladder of wealth/power can get 'justice' rather more readily than your average, er, pleb.

Typical plebeian: Get gunned down - no hope of seeing justice done on those who pulled the trigger, inquest or enquiry largely brushes things under the carpet.

Establishment crony: Get accused of swearing - have the officers and force excoriated by courts and media in very short order.

And he did swear at them. Still no action taken.

Might go out tonight and swear at the first copper I see. I wonder what will happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   220 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.