Cameron's First Term: Part 2

Regarding your passport status, I'm not au fait with the current rulings, but if you genuinely feel that you have a case for a UK passport, then the best advice I can give you is to attend the next advice session of your local MP. At the very least he/she should be able to obtain upon your behalf, a written statement of your status from the Home Office.

Ok lets try and tweak out the salient facts here.

He was born to a British Army officer in pre-independence India. Unknown to him, this conferred a lesser form of British nationality known as a “British subject without citizenship”. He was, he says, never told about this status and was issued with a British passport in the normal way.

After a degree at Cambridge, postgraduate study at Sussex and a career in UK academia, Prof Tulloch took a job in Australia and was granted Australian citizenship. Unlike with a full British citizen, and again unknown to him, this automatically cancelled both his British nationality and his right to live in Britain. When he applied to renew his British passport, it was confiscated.

A UK Border Authority spokesman said: “It is the responsibility of an individual to check that they will not lose a previously acquired nationality or citizenship on acquiring an additional one.” However, Home Office sources said that it was still open to Prof Tulloch to apply for leave to remain in the country if he wished.

This seems to me to be yet another case where rules that might have been deemed appropriate over 60 years ago, are not fit for purpose in today's society. Controlling immigration is a complex minefield and too much of our legislation sometimes contradicts its intended benefits.

Before anyone shouts "jobsworths" Civil Servants are paid to interpret the rules as they stand, as best as they can, it isn't their remit to challenge the rules as such. But of course changes are suggested and recommendations for exemptions are made. In this case which has now been highlighted by the media, there is obviously something patently wrong which needs to be remedied in a common sense manner.

As I understand it the Home Office has the power to grant "Special Dispensation" to reside in the UK, and I sincerely hope they do so here.

But as he moves into semi-retirement, he has now been told that he can no longer permanently remain here and can only visit for brief periods as a tourist. The Home Office has also told him that he cannot apply for naturalisation.

Hi WK, I welcome your input.

That quote differs from a para further up the page;

As I understand it the Home Office has the power to grant "Special Dispensation" to reside in the UK, and I sincerely hope they do so here.

Hi WK, I welcome your input.

That quote differs from a para further up the page;

Yes it does, I spotted that as well. But that's by the Rules as they currently stand. Nevertheless ...

As I understand it the Home Office has the power to grant "Special Dispensation" to reside in the UK, and I sincerely hope they do so here.

It needs an act of parliament to change legislation, which needs to go through Committee stages and readings. But the Home Secretary has a certain power of over-rule or veto in the public interest. I would have thought that this applies here.

After some positive comments it would be a shame to step back into negativity.

We all know that the system isn't perfect, and needs overhauling, but it is the best we have for the moment. It is fair to say that the possession and ownership of a British passport, is arguably one of the most valuable documents in the world today. Consequently they are not given out without necessarily having the strictest of safeguards in place.

Having said that, those that are genuinely entitled to hold one should have one, without having to jump through unnecessary hoops and officialdom. Aren't we all on the same side?

Another good post, but however, lay off the "negativity".

It's not a question of negativity but the fact in pointing out: - stupidity/incompetence/negligence.

I personally have over 4 dozen letters on my system that I forwarded to civil servants praising their assistance & well timely intervention of some of their colleagues stupidity. To offset that, I have over 2000 documents that highlight said stupidity/incompetence/negligence, which to this day, is still occuring.

The problem with the civil service is that many of the good ones are trapped in that due to constant rules & regulations changing, it's almost impossible to keep abreast of those changes, & when they have used their common sense, actually get reprimanded which I have personally witnessed & felt genuinely sorry for the person geting reprimanded as it shouldn't have happened in public!

As already stated by myself, the major problem is not the civil servants themselves but the mandarins (as well as some "jobsworths" that slip through) that control them! This is what needs changing & reforming, not the civil service itself!

The other major problem that civil servants have to face on a daily basis is that too many people are abusive towards them & those very same abusive people do not know how to use two very important words in the English language: -

Those are: -

Thank You
____________

As already stated by myself, the major problem is not the civil servants themselves but the mandarins (as well as some "jobsworths" that slip through) that control them! This is what needs changing & reforming, not the civil service itself!

PM says "burglars" are cowards

"But I'm very clear; burglary is not bravery, burglary is cowardice, burglary is a hateful crime".

P WDL
13247

However, using the same link, it seems that betreger is correct....

It seems that the inmates are running the asylum.

Now that the "silly season" is, hopefully, over, we may see some genuine advancements.....

...can the wins overtake the losses? That is the Q!

UK Broadband aided by rule changes

P WDL
15348

No decision until after General election

Was that the reason why Justine Greening got demoted? Stumbling block to that 3rd runway?

P WDL
16349
____________

Removing planning rules about sites for Telecomms cabinets, may result in them being plonked just anywhere and becoming eyesores. I understand why this has been done, but I'll reserve my opinion on it.

As for the Heathrow situation, the issue is pretty clear. The UK desperately needs more runway capacity in the fairly near future to maintain its position as a main air hub, and to compete with Europe. If this isn't done then we risk letting other countries expanding their facilities to our detriment.

There are really only four practical possibilities to solve this problem.

1. Heathrow (LHR) runway 3
2. Expand Gatwick (LGW)
3. Expand regional airports
4. Boris Island in the Thames Estuary (LBI ???)

In scenario 1, I used to work at a large computer centre at Harmondsworth on the outskirts of Heathrow, and I can tell you from first hand knowledge, of the resistance from the local communities, including Sipson. Heathrow

As for option 2, I would suspect political opposition as much as anything else. Gatwick

Regarding option 3, the Environmentalists and Green lobbies would go into overdrive and effectively scupper most plans.

So, option 4 Boris Island. When I first heard of this, like most others I simply dismissed it as another typical Johnson election ploy. But the more I think about it, it may have some merit after all. Boris Island

But we have a major problem. Everybody agrees on the one hand that we need extra runway capacity, but on the other hand nobody wants it either! It's the NIMBY factor. What is patently wrong here is that the government have chosen to duck the issue, by deferring it until after 2015. If they get in again with a new 5 year mandate, they will simply force LHR runway 3 through, whether people like it or not.

If god forbid, Labour get in again, they will be faced with the same situation as the present Goverment and will probably come to the same conclusion. Then of course the Tories can sit back and say, don't blame us, we didn't do it! It's nothing less than political cowardice, a decision needs to be taken now, not in 3 years time. In this case I will not support the Governments stance.

As for Justine Greening, the press and others have jumped to the obvious conclusion that she was moved because of her open opposition to LHR RW3. That may or may be not true, I expect we will know one way or the other in time. It's not important anyway she is small fry.

Very good post...it would have received an "excellent" mark if not for this...

It's not important anyway she is small fry.

To be absolutely honest I have no sympathy for 98% of the people around Heathrow. As a kid in the early comet days I flew in and out of Heathrow when it was just starting to be an international airport.
There was nothing there except all the water treatment plants, a few farms and small villages. A few industrial buildings were being built on the fringe of the airport, probably for freight transport etc.

So all these people that complain about the noise are in housing built after the start of Heathrow.

I can see similar complaints coming from people near Gatwick, well just check the population change of Crawley. Thats in my patch, I remember it as a very small town, not somewhere the Ladies in your life would go to do their shopping. Our families women went to Brighton or Eastborne, maybe Lewis or just for a real change Tunbridge Wells.

I assume you are talking about Farnborough Hants. Farnborough Airport (FHB) Has a number of current uses, and some undocumented MOD ones. I doubt that it would be seriously considered.

The airfield is the home of the Farnborough Airshow which takes place on even numbered years. It is also home to the Air Accidents Investigation Branch, part of the Department for Transport.

Too late for Stanstead to act as a military airshow airfield, it's been too commercialised. However, since the A120 bypass was built, it has enough space to be developed as a large international airport - unless the local NIMBY's stick their oar in.

Like what happened at RAF Alconbury back in the 90's. The development laid out for that was superb as it was planned for an international regional airport as well as an Eastern Logistics distribution hub - however John Major & other "muppets" from Little Stukeley put a stop to those plans.

With larger & larger aircraft being built like the Airbus, many airports are going to have to move with the times regardless of NIMBY's, but unfortunately they are the ones with power & do not wish their idyllic homes destroyed by noise.
____________

Seems Farnborough is no longer MOD

The civil enclave was operated by Farnborough Business Aviation until 2003, when the Ministry of Defence stopped operations at Farnborough. All experimental aircraft were moved to MoD Boscombe Down; the airport was taken over by TAG. Commercial defence research continues to be carried out in the adjunct Cody Technology Park by research firm QinetiQ.Aviation.


____________

Looking at the map, gotta agree with you. However, I think the yuppies & nimbys might complain when they're playing golf at the Southwood golf course!
____________