I don't personally see why it matters.

 

Load of fuss over nothing arising from the Daily Mail sticking its nose into people's business under the guise of 'public service'.

I have to say I didn't know the law - and I bet there are thousands of people out there who employ cleaners, babysitters and suchlike and, if they checked at all in the first place, wouldn't have taken a copy of the documents in question.

If anything, £5,000.00 seems an awful lot of money for a pretty rubbish offence - if she was just a 'normal' member of the public I doubt any action would have been taken at all.

 

Depends. She may have a coke habit for all I know.

I don't see why employing an illegal immigrant is a massive crime and its no worse than all those MP's that got to keep their jobs despite being guilty of fraud.

 

I was waiting for that chestnut, oh HI! Agenda, nice to see you again!

 

As she was instrumental in drafting the law I am not entirely sure she will be able to use the "ignorance" angle. Having an Attorney General that has been found guilty of a law she brought through seems a bit odd but I can't really get all irate about it. Yet another nail in the "whiter than white" coffin though.

 

Your not even trying to dress up your racist views now are you?

Personally, I don't see what all the fuss is about. There's no argument over the steps she took to validate her housekeepers right to work, just that she forgot to take copies of the documentation. It hardly makes her position untenable. It's a technical breach not a moral one.

 

The whole post?

 

That's what the news reports say, all I can find is that she was Home Office minister when the law was passed

Seriously though, from what I've read the job was arranged by her PA, the woman was married to a UK National, she paid tax and national insurance, the cleaner presented a passport (later found to be forged) and she didn't take a copy.

Pth - total non-story - handy for those with an AGENDA though.

 

Technically you didn't as nowhere did you mention race, just location.

However given your posting history and your far right views it isn't hard to see why the above could be construed as racist.

 

you do understand of course that when she was born there it was actually a british colony, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_colony

i dont think that birthplace is a determining factor here but to me this shows 2 things...

1, she is good at a job because she made laws that even she fauls foul of

2, she is not very good at following the law and therefore may lack common sense...

 

Indeed.

 

i always thought in the eyes of the law that ignorance was no defence. as a result i fail to see why she still has a job even if she has been fined.

also the rules clearly say no personal insults which imo also includes calling someone racist. burnsy should know better. matters like this should be dealt with behind closed doors.