Someone brought this job advert to my attention. It’s been fun writing this blog and representing immigrants and asylum seekers, but duty calls. You have to be part of it to change it, as Steve Cohen undoubtedly would not have said.
Free Movement, post recruitment
I’m confident I’ll get the job and very much look forward to working with ‘strategic policy colleagues and process owners to deliver efficiency improvements across the policy and operational policy environment in line with the UKBA Business Plan’. I already see the Refugee Convention and human rights as ‘products’, by which I assume it is meant to be bought, sold, withdrawn, exchanged or returned at will. I reckon I’m ‘able to manage change effectively, identifying resistance’ and all that (it’s futile, we’ve often found). Actually, I’ve often favourably compared the Home Office to The Borg. Favourably to The Borg, naturally.
I can certainly ‘build on Litigation and Appeals stakeholder engagement with the Judiciary, the MoJ, Legal Services Commissions, OISC and the AIT’. I’ll build on it, alright. I’ll make sure I have no overall idea of what I’m building, make it up as I go along, rush the whole thing through and construct the most hideously deformed, deranged legal architecture known to bureaucracy! It will be the legal equivalent of Milton Keynes.
Actually, there’s not much to do on that last front, it’s pretty much sorted already. All it needs is another Bill.
I’m already thoroughly familiar with and therefore ready to ‘implement and further refine the strategy to minimise the adverse impact of litigation across the Agency and deliver savings on litigation costs': ignore any adverse cases and do nothing. To be honest, though, I’m not sure this strategy can be any further refined, the Home Office is already flawless in its execution. I also know what they mean by ‘aligns policy and delivery with clear communications objectives': do what the spin doctors tell me then make up a spurious excuse for it afterwards.
There’s not much in the job description on upholding the rule of law, I noticed, though. Perhaps that means they’ve got an internal candidate in mind?
