David Blunkett's recent media coverage

K2004 · Post by **K2004** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 1:45 pm

one thing confuses me that all the media stated that David Blunkett has speeded the VISA application, but it is actually an ILR application.. my question : is the ILR is a VISA???

tvt · Post by **tvt** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:02 pm

The media is superficial as it needs to produce and distribute quick and readily available news. Most people have never heard the term "Leave to Remain" or "Indefinite Leave to Remain". They however heard the term "visa"; That is the reason for its use.

The media also deals extensively with the allegation that Mr Blunkett "fast tracked" the visa. It should instead concentracte on the allegation that Mr Blunkett granted ILR outside the rules to his ex-lover's nanny. The nanny got her ILR after spending substantially less time as a domestic worker than required by the Immigration rules (4 years).

K2004 · Post by **K2004** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:19 pm

it will be interesting to know on what basis she was staying in UK, it sounds strange that she came to UK as a Work permit holder as a nanny..

also I wonder why she applied to ILR so early ? was she under threat of being deported? normally if you have a work permit you are safe...no need to rush..unless she knew about DB relationship and she wanted to make use of it.

f2k · Post by **f2k** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:55 pm

Well apparantely her employer (DB's girlfriend) allegedly applied on her behalf because they wanted go for a holiday in Ireland (thats even more puzzling cause if she was on WP on any permit really even visitors visa or they would have to do was to apply for an Irish visa). she probably knew about the 'fast tracking'

tvt · Post by **tvt** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:30 pm

THe nanny's stay in the UK was under the "Domestic Worker" immigration category not under the "Work Permit" category.

Chess · Post by **Chess** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 8:39 am

tvt wrote:THe nanny's stay in the UK was under the "Domestic Worker" immigration category not under the "Work Permit" category.

Whichever way you look at it - the Home Secretary has a right to bend the rules depending on circumstances....the only problem this time is that he bent the rules in his own favour.......

...this is the same guy who at one time said that "The UK is being swamped by assylum seekers who are taking up all places at schools blah blah blah blah blah...."

If Sir Budd's review is thorough then the guyz job is at stake!

Kayalami · Post by **Kayalami** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:43 pm

Checkmate wrote:If Sir Budd's review is thorough then the guyz job is at stake!

Nothing will happen here due to political realities and the opposition making capital - Home Office is vital and with elections coming up. Also things must appear steady what with the extensive legislation being introduced from Asylum (public misconception means this a vote winner) to ID Cards and Draconian Police Powers (the right to access confidentially client/ lawyer correspondence/files - unheard of in any 'civilised' country) which the typical 'citizen' voter is blissfully unaware off

Chess · Post by **Chess** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:52 pm

Checkmate wrote:
If Sir Budd's review is thorough then the guyz job is at stake!

Hmmmmmmmmmmm, I told you so

Anyhow it is sad that 2 home office ministers have resigned within 12months cause of immigration issues

Kayalami · Post by **Kayalami** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:38 pm

Checkmate wrote:Hmmmmmmmmmmm, I told you so

Indeed - time for me to swallow some humble pie. Shocking move though given there was no distinct requirement for approval but rather for a decision (+/-) to be made. The phrase 'Given Indefinite Leave To Enter/ Remain in the United Kingdom' has never before claimed so many ministerial scalps...one would have thought the government would have learnt from the former Trade and Industry Minister's misfortunes with the 2 sets of 'steel trading' brothers.

K2004 · Post by **K2004** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:48 pm

I dont understand, it seems to me here that the only "winner" was the nanny, - One for getting her ILR, Two for getting paid to publish her story.. and who know what Three will be !!!...

EdgeHillMole · Post by **EdgeHillMole** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 3:01 am

I dont understand, it seems to me here that the only "winner" was the nanny

You understand well enough. The nanny wins. Everyone else loses. Welcome to the Real World......

MWazir · Post by **MWazir** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:02 am

K2004 wrote:I dont understand, it seems to me here that the only "winner" was the nanny, - One for getting her ILR, Two for getting paid to publish her story.. and who know what Three will be !!!...

David Blunkett is in a court battle with his ex-lover over access rights to the child he thinks is his. He belives that his ex-lover leaked the information to the press about the nanny's ILR being fast tracked in retaliation. If you are to believe him, then Nanny is only the small pawn in the whole story.
In political life there will always be many who will benefit from someone's downfall. Charles Clarke is certainly not complaining.

ND · Post by ND » Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:15 am

David Blunkett resigned yesterday afternoon ...

tvt · Post by **tvt** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:12 pm

Poor man.

Chess · Post by **Chess** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 2:34 pm

The Budd Report in the 'Nannygate' scandal has been released today. It gives a bit of an insight in how immigration caseworker operate generally

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/p ... 4_budd.pdf

Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

David Blunkett's recent media coverage

David Blunkett's recent media coverage