to think Rotherham council have lost the plot over UKIP foster-carers?

[londonone]

bbc

I really really hope there is more to this than is being reported, otherwise I am utterly speechless.

I'm wondering where this ends. If the couple can't foster because they belong to a political party which Rotherham council deems "racist", then does Rotherham Council apply the same standards to religious foster parents, for example, a very religious Muslim couple fostering a baby born to a lesbian mother or fostering a gay teenager? Surely they would have to remove the child in both cases as the couples religious beliefs would be incompatible with the child's welfare? Or what about a couple who are members of the Socialist Workers Party fostering a child whose parents were Conservative voters/had conservative beliefs? Would Rotherham Council be as quick to remove them?

It's no coincidence that the decision was taken by the same bunch of right-on fuckwits who turned a blind eye to te sexual abuse of teenage girls in care for fear of being seen as racist.

The common theme is a fear of being seen to discriminate, leading to a complete lack of judgement.

I think Cameron is deliberately calling UKIP racist because he knows they are taking away a lot of Conservative voters (and because he reneged on his commitment to offer a referendum on Europe which is at the forefront of the UKIP manifesto). He is trying to scare Conservative voters who are thinking of voting for UKIP away from them with the whole "if you don't embrace multiculturalism you must be a racist" diatribe and surely there is nothing worse than being called a "racist" in the politically correct UK.

I haven't read all the other posts so sorry if I'm repeating someone else.

These are my thoughts.

Just because you agree with stopping immigration, I don't believe that makes you racist (I actually believe this is a fact, it not just my opinion. Very few people hold the view that they believe immigration should be outlawed, but only for black people or people of Asian decent. They believe it should be stopped full stop. I can't see how that is racist).

Very few people believe with 100% of the platform of any political party, even if they are paid up members.

I think this is potentially dangerous... You can adopt, but only if you believe to political party x, y or z. Like it or not, UKIP is considered a mainstream political party, not like the BNP.

I don't believe in Father Christmas. It doesn't mean I won't convince my children to believe in him while they're young. Not sure that it follows that you can't promote a belief in something even if you don't fully believe in it yourself.

Most of all I believe that what the press knows/is reporting is only a fraction of the full story and yet people will jump to form an opinion whether in possession of all the facts or not. Just like the Marines who were recently arrested... People running around calling for them to be freed while knowing c0ck all about what actually happened.

Sometimes people should just shush rather than rush so quickly to get offended on behalf of other people.

God, I wish this site had an edit function... Foster, not adopt.

Even I don't trust what Cameron says mystery cat and he has a vested interest in keeping his supporters from voting UKIP instead of for a party that promised to hold a referendum on Europe.

Orwellian,

That may be true but ukip do have multiple connections with the far right (VPN, national front etc.) in their members, candidates and activities in the eu.

They are a threat to far right conservatives, but Cameron is correct to call them closet racists.

Isn't the leader of UKIP married to a German lady? How does that work then?

Mystery - just because Cameron says UKIP are closet racists (and please link to where he has said that - not that I disbelieve you but I'd like to see it ) doesn't make it so.

I don't vote UKIP, btw. And I know people from all parties and none who think there should be a controlled immigration and no longer an open door. Damn. I seem to have a lot of friends who must, therefore, be racist.

So when did cameron say that then, cos at the moment, it looks like his party are ordering a separate enquiry into the whole debacle and are outraged. No talk of 'closet racists' there
if that really is a quote from 2006, how is it relevant at all?
Do we think rotherham social services bases its opinions on the views of opposition mp's from the last decade?

Vpn! Bnp I meant!

Plus it's a tricky line to walk between making Tory supporters who have switched to UKip feel worried that they've joined a racist party, or insulted that they've been called racists and even more determined not to vote Tory again. Cameron will want to keep the door open to woo them back, not alienate them altogether.

I am actually pretty left wing by most people's standards and I am still not convinced that the right call has been made here for those children. Surely it would have been best to leave them where they were for now and put all efforts into finding them a long term placement that suited their heritage, rather than upset them further by imposing another placement and separating them to boot?

Farage set up UKIP to argue for leaving the EU. Even if we did leave, we would still be members of the Council of Europe (and bound by the European Court of Human Rights), n'est pas?

I think all Councils' social services departments are trying to do what the Family Courts expect them to do. Because that's where the decisions on care are suggested, challenged and made - in the courts.

It's relevant because it's his view.

It's certainly a view that a lawyer would be able to bring up in court.

Well as I can't be arsed googling, I shall take tiggytapes word as gospel
So, in the last decade, cameron called another opposition party 'closet racists'. Have you ever listened to what political parties call each other all the time? Funnily enough, they quite often slag each other off. It's not even necessarily what they actually believe because often politics involves lying.
Since then, he's retracted and said not all ukip members are closet racists. Good for him. It would be a bit 'pot kettle' to do otherwise, his own supporters are sometimes more out and out racist than closet

Now, more to the point, he is calling for an investigation into this debacle, as are Labour. So in essence, no major political parties support the decision of rotherham social services.

TheMysteryCat - Yes and Labour and Respect political parties both have members and supporters who have expressed virulent antiSemitism (a form of racism). But I am sure Rotherham would have no problem with parents who belonged to either of these parties.

Hilarious
I'm so surprised you didn't include the whole quote, themysterycat
'Fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists'

Sound well-reasoned argument, I call that

:)

SpiritedWolf

Can and/or will this matter now be passed to a family court to determine the issues.
It seems the most sensible option to me.

Yes, the family court will have to agree (or will already have agreed) the new placement(s).

It was a conservative councillor on the news defending the decision made. Why is this being seen as a labour issue? Personally given UKIP's immigration policy, I think it was the right call - they are probably fantastic foster parents, but they weren't right for these children. Would we allow someone who had strong homophobic opinions foster a gay teenager?