>> Ah, so this is like a couple of years ago when the cry to export
>> illegal immigrants was suspended long enough for a petition to prevent the removal of any
>> illegal immigrants who had auditioned on X- Factor?
Except that people treated as illegal immigrants were people here legally for 40+ years but who could not prove it and no more thought they'd need to than you or I do.
You know how it is when targets are set (or are believed to be set) - what gets counted gets done and low hanging fruit get picked first.
Rudd's offences are two fold:
Firstly a Guardian Reporter, Amelia Gentleman, has been publicising cases of people who came from Caribbean legally before restrictions. Because they'd never thought they'd need to, never had passports etc to prove their status. No proof of right to work/reside = loss of job and access to healthcare and benefits. Home Office response until last week was standard text about govt's aspiration to remove 'illegals' and need to take (unaffordable) legal advice etc.
Secondly Rudd, when asked about targets, denied their existence. Shown that was wrong she then tried to say they were only there because managers (by implication unofficially) set them for purpose of performance management. Now it seems there were formal targets and she knew of them.
|