The Gurkhas had their 200th anniversary in 2015 serving in all the front lines of the British Army
The Gurkhas were always admired by the public for their
heroic efforts of always fighting in the front line and loyalties to Britain.
In the last decade their loyalty was very badly repaid. Their army was reduced and in view of being
far away from their homeland Nepal unquestioned loyalty it is a crime and
disrespect of the British Government.
Their troops are one of the hardest fighters in the British Army and won
many battles for Britain.
The Conservative Government had even extended the insult and
humiliation. They decided to use the Gurkhas to train the British soldiers for
deployment in Afghanistan. The very fact that this heroic army was assigned to
the private Serco must have been a deep humiliation. Serco won a £55million
Minister of Defence contract to train troops heading for Afghanistan.
Adding insult to insult 95 Gurkhas soldiers were made
redundant.
In the past there were scandalous reports that Gurkhas were
not able to receive a British Passport. In other words they were all right to
fight and lose their lives for this country but otherwise not to be known. How
low can politician sink? Surely even in politics there must some sort of
principles somewhere to be found.
Now comes the worst bit which made the Gurkhas of thinking
to strike and is against all their characteristics. The ruling came from the
firm Serco which has too many scandals by now and should have never received a
contract of that kind. The Gurkhas were
to put on a contract of zero-rating. In other words they will be employed if
they were needed and then paid according to the hours and if not well they just
sit about waiting.
This is such an insult to such a hard fighting, honourable and loyal regiment. It is unbelievable.
The Gurkhas supporting families back in Nepal which again
were denied to join the men in Britain. The undesirable from Europe waltzing in
and receive benefits and Home Secretary Theresa May dither to throw them out
spending hundreds of thousand of pounds on court cases is incredible especially
in view of the Gurkhas being treated
like that. Even hate preachers she and the government spent a fortune on them
until they almost willingly went back to their country. It makes you wonder
whether that ‘willingly’ was not more a deal than anything else.
Their union GMB stated that firm offered them a contract of
zero-hours and no guarantee of or when they will be needed again or how much
they will be paid. A typical nice dirty move from this Government to move the
Gurkhas out of their responsibility. They know that the public is admire and
respecting them and would be up in arms if they would have done this
themselves.
The Serco director of frontline defence services Karen Smart
said: “Redundancies on this contract were sadly inevitable as the UK’s military
commitment in Afghanistan will end in 2014.” We would like to know how much her
salary is to put out such a controversial statement. Furthermore, the army was not built around
Afghanistan it is therefore to defend Britain.
It also should never be send into Afghanistan. Therefore these points she is making or
trying to make are absolutely pointless, to put it politely.
A typical slippery statement from the MoD spokesman adds
more non-sense: “Serco are there to provide a contract". How they fulfil
the contract is up to them.”
Are there nothing but flat-heads in this Government? Do we
get the suspicion that MoD was privatised through the back-door? To a private company which had nothing but
scandals in the very recent past. Such as adding data to medical records in the
NHS so they met the Government target. This was broad day light fraud and they
should have closed down but nothing was done. Oh no it happened they got
another contract with the MoD. David Cameron seems to do nothing but creating
private companies and handing costly contracts out for shoddy work. Since he had a £55million available to give
to Serco why was it not spend on the equipping the army which seems to be
sadly lacking? It would have been far more cost effective.
No comments:
Post a Comment