• The post you are reporting:
   
  Barry
  Thank you for your posting.
  
  May I answer your question of whether "heads should roll" etc this way.In my previous employment if I made an error of judgement that resulted in someone being unfairly removed or refused entry to the UK the enquiry process that would entail would be a lengthy Home Office led investigation(complaint file) being raised,I would have to sit through various interrogations and interviews and basically prove my 'innocence' that it merely was not an error of judgement or a misinterpretation of facts given to me by the passenger and/ or sponsors.This enquiry could take weeks to conduct and conclude and could result, if proved against me,dismissal or a transfer out of the service ie counting paper clips in stores for the rest of my career.The main point would be that I would be seen to be guilty until proven otherwise.
  
  What is going to happen to a) those at the DDC that made the decision to invest and b) to the financial institution that advised the council to invest in this bank?.
  
  The least we deserve is an enquiry to ascertain if there had been any negligence upon their behalf and secondly were they aware of Dartfords decision to withdraw their council money from these banks a few weeks earlier because of their concerns and if DDC were warned about the state of the Icelandic economy why did they decide to ignore that advice.
  
  Before any heads roll we should have a public enquiry to answer the above.That is the least that we deserve in order to reach a fair conclusion.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason