Baroness Scotland

[woofmarkthedog]

Stay or go ?

I think she should regrettably go, after all she drafted the very piece of legislation that caught her out. I know Brown is keen to keep her there (& that in it's self is a kiss of death) but she knew the law and by staying she compromises the position & office of the attorney general.

W**F

[SeanMacGabhann]

Does EVERYTHING have to be a sacking/resignation offence these days?

A five grand fine seems like fair enough punishment to me

[Brendan]

I don?t know in this case Sean, do you want an Attorney General (legal advisor to the crown) who has little mind for obeying the law?

[SeanMacGabhann]

Did she deliberately break the law or was it a technical oversight?

Putting a process in place to vet every single employee for immigration status is one thing - but the country would grind to a halt if those checks were run every single time. And I'm not that bothered about it anyway - I bet a lot if not most of the cleaners in a lot of Dulwich homes aren't strictly above board. Is she differenet because she is responsible? Depends wether such checks are a sop to a rabid press or not - I really don't see her as some villain, She didn't break or disregard the law - a minor step in a process was overlooked - she is holding her hands up and accepting the punishment.

[*Bob*]

She should at least be demoted.

To say, Baroness Wales. Or Baroness Birmingham maybe.

[woofmarkthedog]

Or exiled as Baroness Coventry ?

[*Bob*]

It's all very confusing.

If I was called 'Pat Scotland' and was told I was going to be made a Baroness (of somewhere in England) then I like to think I'd have the decency to change my surname - so common folk might at least know wtf was going on.

[EDKiwi]

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don?t know in this case Sean, do you want an

> Attorney General (legal advisor to the crown) who

> has little mind for obeying the law?

Isn't that a prerequisite to be a politician tho??

[Marmora Man]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Did she deliberately break the law or was it a

> technical oversight?

>

> Putting a process in place to vet every single

> employee for immigration status is one thing - but

> the country would grind to a halt if those checks

> were run every single time. And I'm not that

> bothered about it anyway - I bet a lot if not most

> of the cleaners in a lot of Dulwich homes aren't

> strictly above board. Is she differenet because

> she is responsible? Depends wether such checks are

> a sop to a rabid press or not - I really don't see

> her as some villain, She didn't break or disregard

> the law - a minor step in a process was overlooked

> - she is holding her hands up and accepting the

> punishment.

She put the law in place by leading it through Parliament. She has created a law that, as she has discovered, is difficult to follow. Just how many people were aware of all the additional regulation the law created? Clearly not Baroness Scotland.

She should resign - not for failing to obey the regulations but for failing to think clearly about legislation and introducing an almost unworkable law.

All too often governments, and this Labour government has been by far the worst offender, believe that by simply passing a law behaviour will change. Wrong! Laws seldom change anything - changing behaviour requires more coherent thinking and a raft of different actions.

[louisiana]

Never have I agreed with you more, MM :))

[SeanMacGabhann]

I don't really disagree with you MM - apart from the resignation bit. I'm minded to believe that people can learn from mistakes and discarding them everytime they are proven fallible seems counter-productive.

I'm talking about the individual in question here, not this Labour Government... as a group they are entirely guilty as charged and will be sacked properly at the next election. Which I'll be happy about. I'll be less happy with their replacements tho

[womanofdulwich]

Basically they are a bunch of career politicians who have never had a job in the real world and rely on civil servants ( who want to create work for themselves and keep a job)to steer them through their political life. They have no idea of life and practicalities of legislation. You should not be allowed to hold these offices unless you have had experience of working elsewhere for 10 years minimum,.

[Moos]

For the record (although I appreciate that womanofdulwich is probably talking about the Gov in general), Baroness Scotland had a career in family and public law at the Bar before she went into government, and was the first black woman to be made a QC, which was also at the very young age of 35.

[Brendan]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Did she deliberately break the law or was it a

> technical oversight?

>

> Putting a process in place to vet every single

> employee for immigration status is one thing - but

> the country would grind to a halt if those checks

> were run every single time.

Well if we go down that line of argument perhaps she should be fired for wasting public time and funds by putting unworkable legislation in place.

[SteveT]

It was once a long time ago when politicians lead by example, now it seems they do as they please being above the law as they are.

This woman must have a brass neck to have the nerve to stay in that post, she should go!

[SeanMacGabhann]

SteveT - nonsense

Brendan - is the offence that bad? Can a government say publicly - "employ who you like, no vetting required?" That wouldn't bother me so much but the press, the phone-ins and the pub conversations would go nuts

It sounds like the woman is being hounded out of a job for the pettiest of reasons. Yeah you can get all indignant about her position, the legislation but so what? Are peolpe around the country being criminalised and fined for employing illegal staff? I'm not sure they are... as a piece of legislation it's a sop, surely?

[Brendan]

You make a point that you then go and contradict in your last sentence Sean.

[bigbadwolf]

Sean.

I can't help but ask and I'm sure a lot of others are asking themselves exactly the same question since you seem to really empathise with the peer in question.

Do you currently have illegal domestic staff in your direct employ and if so, do you beat them?

[*Bob*]

SteveT Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It was once a long time ago when politicians lead

> by example

Absolute cobblers!

Up until not very long ago, politicians were almost exclusively drawn from the ranks of the rich and/or powerful (either through inheritance or industry) and their personal lives were shielded from a cap-doffing public.

But you can be sure they were as mired in dung as any of the current crop.

[*Bob*]

And far worse dung than any minor infringement of some pencil-pushing civil law or other.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Which bit am I contradicting Brendan? I've reread it and not spotted it. I think the legislation is a sop, and just because she has had to enact it doesn't make her less-human and prone to the same as the rest of us. If teh government was enforcing this law with vigour then yeah, she would be in a stickier position

BBW - I can assue you that I have never had any domestic staff, Any empathy with the Barnoness is entirely due to a distaste for mobs, coupled with a "sacking for everything" culture which seems to be afoot

[Brendan]

So what is the point of her position if she isn?t culpable for enacting legislation?

[*Bob*]

Dear forum members.

I feel it is my duty to report that - through wilfull neglect for which I must take full responsibility - a fork was put into the compartment of the kitchen drawer which is reserved for knives.

It is therefore with deepest regret that I tender my resignation.

[Moos]

See ya

[Brendan]

That?ll learn yah for being the person who made the rule in the first place.