Jump to content

Talk:Home Office

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Early comments

[edit]

Updated to give latest list of ministers, including removing Blunkett - position left "vacant"

-Tom— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.213.14 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 15 December 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Could the names and responsibilities of the leading civil servants in the department be listed as well? --Bonalaw 09:09, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't there be at least a mention of the scandals during the last two years and that it's currently shot to pieces---or in Dr Reid's own terms, "not fit for purpose"? 83.67.217.254 10:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A "large" department?

[edit]

Is this still true post-2007? 82.36.26.70 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 10:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Draconian Policies

[edit]

The Home Office recently announced its involvement and full support of the UK National Staff Dismissal Register, this is an Orwellian database of staff the company has dismissed and it plans to share this information with other companies to stop them being employed again. The register has no legal standing and can include names of anyone the company has employed and dismissed without fair hearing or criminal conviction. The Home Office continues through the National ID card, NSDR, National DNA databases of innocent people, fingerprinting of school children to destroy its and the police services relationship with the British public with these idiotic, wasteful and tyrannical projects and attempts to rule the country by decree.

No source reference, subjective viewpoint, should this be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SJRRoth (talk • contribs) 17:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above was added by an anonymous IP on 31 May - I've reveretd it back to the preceeding version. Nick Cooper (talk) 17:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This BBC News story (08/05/2008) referenced in the edit history by Ninetyone says:

The register is an initiative of Action Against Business Crime (AABC), which was established as a joint venture between the Home Office and the British Retail Consortium "to set up and maintain business crime reduction partnerships". The Home Office says it stopped funding the scheme last year, having granted it almost £1m during its first three years. A Home Office spokeswoman says the register is a "commercial scheme" and it was not consulted.

So it is something the Home Office was involved with, but not anymore, and it certainly doesn't have their "full support". Recommend removing it if it appears again. Annexed (talk) 10:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Allegations of discrimination" section

[edit]

User:Sansonic, may I just draw your attention to the text of WP:UNDUE, particularly the following: "generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all". The stated opinion of one LibDem MP is most definitely a tiny minority and as such does not merit inclusion in the article. ninety:one 18:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added the Home Office Drugs Inpectorate

[edit]

Should be there, I think, I will be expanding this 'stub'2829 VC 10:33, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication of list

[edit]

I note that another version of the list "Permanent Under Secretaries of State of the Home Office" exists in Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department under Permanent under-secretaries, 1782-present. The lists have been structured and updated differently. Maybe some bureaucrat would like to investigate this. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 01:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ID cards referred to in opening paragraph

[edit]

but UK doesn't really have an ID card system [at least for most citizens] and Gov has no plans to introduce one.

86.176.209.213 (talk) 09:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Woefully Inadequate Cyber-Security -Anonymous Attack 07/04/2012

[edit]

See BBC report <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17648852> titled Home Office website blocked; 'Anonymous' hackers blamed. The hacking group Anonymous is alleged to have blocked access to the Home Office website, apparently in response to government plans for e-mail surveillance. The website has been blocked; earlier a message was posted blaming a high volume of traffic. A message on Twitter claiming to be from Anonymous said it was responsible. The tweet said: For your draconian surveillance proposals! Earlier in the week the Home Office said it planned to "legislate as soon as parliamentary time allows" to bring in email surveillance measures. Ministers say change is needed to help fight crime and terrorism, but critics warn it is an attack on privacy. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said on Tuesday the government would not "ram legislation through Parliament" to increase monitoring of emails and web usage, Nick Clegg has said. A Home Office spokesman said: "We are aware of some reports that the Home Office website may be the subject of an online protest. We have put all potential measures in place and will be monitoring the situation very closely.If a successful denial of service attempt does occur tonight, we will liaise with the technical team and update as necessary," he added.

Somewhat worrying that security can be breached this easily - should be included in the main article under a 'controversies' section? 80.42.233.107 (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)cypherdelic80.42.233.107 (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC) More like a complete overreaction. Taking their website offline for a couple hours just has no significance in the history of the Home Office - which goes back hundreds of years. If you were charting a year-by-year history then it's noteworthy, but when you have a small section dating back to 1700's, and almost more mention of a website being unavailable for a few hours on 1 day....not forgetting that for 99.8% of it's history, the internet did not exist.[reply]

Brutalist architecture

[edit]
Your point apropos this page being? Nick Cooper (talk)

Withdrawn. Sca (talk) 13:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Remove part of history section

[edit]

Suggest removing the 'Anonymous attack' and 'Union Action' from the history section. In the almost 350 year history of the Home Office, some silly DDOS attack for a couple of hours on one day does not count a significant history. Neither does the PCS calling yet another strike, something they typically do multiple times each year - in this case it didn't even happen.

Anyone against this?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.229.184 (talk) 19:20, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Home Office. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:22, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Home Office. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:25, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Home Office. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Public Accounts Committee: Home Office 'bases immigration policies on anecdotes and prejudice'

[edit]

This seems important to include but not sure where

John Cummings (talk) 08:59, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changes I made to the 'Organisation' section

[edit]

Hi all, new editor here

I wanted to dust off this article and bring it up to date a bit, as I see that a lot of things are out of date. I've just published the following changes in my edit.

  • Added 'Organisational structure' to show the directorates the Home Office has - this was taken from the old 'Divisions' section and updated to include more up-to-date information
  • Added the 'Other related public bodies' header above the list of organisations (this was previously not there)
  • Updated list to official records in GOV.UK
  • Deleted 'Operations' section as it includes information about the very defunct National Policing Improvement Agency and the responsibilities that were handed over. This is now 12 year-old info and is not relevant to this section as much of it has now changed and might be better suited to the 'History' section. A lot of things have also now been taken over by the Police Digital Service.
  • Updated financials to the latest official info which is 2022-2023
  • Deleted 'Contractors' section after much deliberation, because the list is out-of-date and the Home Office has too many contractors to put in a list. I thought about putting the biggest contractors only but I'm not sure where to find this information

Let me know what you think, and any feedback is appreciated as this is my first non-minor edit :) Mogliw (talk) 01:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Home Office vs Department

[edit]

Given the Home Office is strictly and officially referred to as the Home Department (as specified in the article), I propose that the first sentence be altered to “The Home Department, also

known as the Home Office (HO)…” in order to better reflect this.


With respect to the page name, I do not propose it be changed given how widely used the ”Home Office” name is. ZElsb (talk) 19:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Home_Office&oldid=1232820209"