|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 1, 2024 13:10:13 GMT
Does anyone else think it's a bit convenient that all these migrants are being 'rounded up' for Rwanda, the day before local elections ..... LOL  I am not at all sure who is dumber. Sunak for thinking we will all fall for it. Or that portion of the population that will fall for it simply because a Tory said it. All The Best I think Sunak has played a blinder poor old Starmer must be gutted .... LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 1, 2024 13:17:04 GMT
You have to laugh really, the 'one' who went to Rwanda had a Boeing 747 all to himself, now he's there he'll be all alone in a hostel all to himself, that (should) house up to 5000 migrants, after tomorrow the 'one' will realise he's going to be on his own for a very very very long time. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 1, 2024 14:03:40 GMT
Oh in case I forget . The 747 costs roughly $25,000 per flight hour to operate.Add another £3000 on top of that for his spending money. FFS Roughly $27500 X 9 Hours to get rid of one migrant
Rwanda is 9 hours = £225,000 for one Migrant.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on May 1, 2024 15:33:17 GMT
Oh in case I forget . The 747 costs roughly $25,000 per flight hour to operate.Add another £3000 on top of that for his spending money. FFS Roughly $27500 X 9 Hours to get rid of one migrant
Rwanda is 9 hours = £225,000 for one Migrant.
Yep a bargain not mate. The prick will return by rubber boat and the cycle starts all over again. Why the fuck they have to use a 747 is only known to those who are pissing our taxes against the wall in the hope we will rejoice. |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on May 1, 2024 15:39:55 GMT
I thought the failed illegal was flown out on a regular commercial flight ? Thats what was earlier reported anyway
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on May 1, 2024 17:31:15 GMT
I thought the failed illegal was flown out on a regular commercial flight ? Thats what was earlier reported anyway He was. The posts above are incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on May 1, 2024 18:31:07 GMT
I thought the failed illegal was flown out on a regular commercial flight ? Thats what was earlier reported anyway He was. The posts above are incorrect. Thats a first then....
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on May 2, 2024 6:20:58 GMT
He was. The posts above are incorrect. Thats a first then....
Possibly and as we have seen with the civil service now delaying things forcing them onto planes is proving problematic |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 2, 2024 10:48:26 GMT
Possibly and as we have seen with the civil service now delaying things forcing them onto planes is proving problematic The Civil Service, like all employees for that matter, has the right to challenge, refuse, or seek review of any duties they are asked to undertake for their employer which they have reasonable grounds to believe my put them at risk of doing something illegal. The problematic element here is the Government unilaterally declaring something legal that they have been advised may be illegal, and then asking their employees to carry out these potentially illegal tasks. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 2, 2024 11:01:35 GMT
Possibly and as we have seen with the civil service now delaying things forcing them onto planes is proving problematic The Civil Service, like all employees for that matter, has the right to challenge, refuse, or seek review of any duties they are asked to undertake for their employer which they have reasonable grounds to believe my put them at risk of doing something illegal. The problematic element here is the Government unilaterally declaring something legal that they have been advised may be illegal, and then asking their employees to carry out these potentially illegal tasks. All The Best They are civil servants the clue is in the title, what other job do you know of that if employers 'refuse' to do what the employee tells them are not fired?
And if they don't agree with what they are being told do they have a option of leaving that post.
It's not up to the civil servants to say what's right and what's wrong, it's only civil courts and legal teams that tell them what's legal and what isn't, it's not up to public servants to decide what they want to implement and what they don't ........ get real.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 2, 2024 11:05:42 GMT
The Civil Service, like all employees for that matter, has the right to challenge, refuse, or seek review of any duties they are asked to undertake for their employer which they have reasonable grounds to believe my put them at risk of doing something illegal. The problematic element here is the Government unilaterally declaring something legal that they have been advised may be illegal, and then asking their employees to carry out these potentially illegal tasks. All The Best They are civil servants the clue is in the title, what other job do you know of that if employers 'refuse' to do what the employee tells them are not fired?
Any job where what the employers tells the employee to do is illegal. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 2, 2024 11:13:39 GMT
They are civil servants the clue is in the title, what other job do you know of that if employers 'refuse' to do what the employee tells them are not fired?
Any job where what the employers tells the employee to do is illegal. All The Best Since when have civil servants been lawyers?
No one in the legal profession has told them anything they are doing is illegal, they are just deciding it's illegal, because they are lefty woke snowflake diverse lefties.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 2, 2024 11:43:37 GMT
Any job where what the employers tells the employee to do is illegal. All The Best Since when have civil servants been lawyers?
No one in the legal profession has told them anything they are doing is illegal, they are just deciding it's illegal, because they are lefty woke snowflake diverse lefties.
They don't have to be lawyers. Just like under the Health & Safety at Work Act an employee does not have to be a registered H&S Inspector to be able to refuse to undertake any task that they have reasonable grounds to believe poses an immediate and credible threat to their health. However, some Civil Servants ARE Lawyers. They are deciding it MAY BE illegal because the Government IGNORED its own legal advised and unilaterally declared something as "legal" when previously it had been illegal; hence they are asking for it to be tested in a court of law. The issue here is, if they carry out these duties and those duties are subsequently found to be illegal they will be liable for prosecution because they did not challenge those instructions. The alternative would be for the Government to accept full legal liability and financial responsibility for any legal proceeding arising from those instructions. The Government won't do that however because they have already been given legal advice that those instruction may be illegal. It is a bit unfair to blame the Civil Service because the Government is intent on undertaking potentially illegal practices. The employees should be protected from legal incompetence of the employer. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 2, 2024 11:50:02 GMT
Since when have civil servants been lawyers?
No one in the legal profession has told them anything they are doing is illegal, they are just deciding it's illegal, because they are lefty woke snowflake diverse lefties.
They don't have to be lawyers. Just like under the Health & Safety at Work Act an employee does not have to be a registered H&S Inspector to be able to refuse to undertake any task that they have reasonable grounds to believe poses an immediate and credible threat to their health. However, some Civil Servants ARE Lawyers. They are deciding it MAY BE illegal because the Government IGNORED its own legal advised and unilaterally declared something as "legal" when previously it had been illegal; hence they are asking for it to be tested in a court of law. The issue here is, if they carry out these duties and those duties are subsequently found to be illegal they will be liable for prosecution because they did not challenge those instructions. The alternative would be for the Government to accept full legal liability and financial responsibility for any legal proceeding arising from those instructions. The Government won't do that however because they have already been given legal advice that those instruction may be illegal. It is a bit unfair to blame the Civil Service because the Government is intent on undertaking potentially illegal practices. The employees should be protected from legal incompetence of the employer. All The Best I'm responding to the most important and pivotal part of your post 'Maybe', the law doesn't deal with maybes it deals with fact, and the fact is Civil Servants are playing at being unofficial judge and jury, they all need firing. |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on May 2, 2024 12:00:06 GMT
Possibly and as we have seen with the civil service now delaying things forcing them onto planes is proving problematic The Civil Service, like all employees for that matter, has the right to challenge, refuse, or seek review of any duties they are asked to undertake for their employer which they have reasonable grounds to believe my put them at risk of doing something illegal. The problematic element here is the Government unilaterally declaring something legal that they have been advised may be illegal, and then asking their employees to carry out these potentially illegal tasks. All The Best My problem with the civil service isn't that they have enacted their rights but that they have known for some months even years what the government was planning . It becomes quite obvious that they have an agenda of disruption that they wait until the planes are on the runway before voicing their concerns . |
|
