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.

Tiggytape- The UKIP blame multiculturalism for splitting our society. What do they mean by this exactly? Do they intend for us to become a segregated society with only British people allowed and others on the outside? If so then this is racism. British society was never been made up of purely British people in the first place and it is completely unreasonable to blame mulitculturism on anything.

Edam have you read anything on the UKIP site at all?

latara people want to see what they want to see.. UKIP has made it's views well known. BNP lite. People don't want to accept it. the bang on and on about immigrants while generally not knowing any, and then buy a house in spain where they can't be arsed to learn Spanish and say they are doing the local economy a world of good while eating a full English.

The only thing that added 'complexity' to this case, was that the officials involved were caught out, treating people with different political views to theirs, with absolute contempt.

I understood that UKIP considered ethnic minorities with british passports to be british. They are not against multi-culturalism. They just consider that current immigration, needs to be reduced, particularly with regard to EU / eastern europe. In addition to this, UKIP want a referendum on belonging to EU.

I think the council were completely in the wrong, removing the children, due to the foster parents belonging to UKIP. It's the children's happiness that is important.

The UKIP ought to get someone to write more concisely and clearly on their site as it smacks of the BNP in a diluted format to my mind. I have read everything on there today. They seem to have the kind of attitude of we support blah blah BUT.... That's my opinion of them.

Immigration issues have been addressed by all major normal parties.. when you only care about immigration.. it kinds of seems a bit

I never said I think people who worry about immigration are racist. It concerns me when the use of the words ' multiculturalism ' and 'British' are deemed problematic when put together and mainly by people who hold rather extreme views.

Exactly Halloween

Oh the UKIP care about many other things too

Couldn't have put it better myself tiggytape. Very well said.
Many people I meet are privately concerned about immigration, but just avoid giving an opinion as they are affraid of being percieved as racist.

Or maybe Halloween, they feel regarding Europe the main parties are moving in the opposite direction that they would like?
There are only two realistic choices to vote for in this country and on Europe, there isn't a great deal of difference between them.

Has anyone read up on the history of the UKIP? It makes for very interesting reading, especially if you are interested in how their current ideals came about and have been possibly distorted over the years by party members perception of what makes a good society. Concerns regarding immigration do not make people racist, it is how you tackle those concerns and the way policies could be put into practice which can be potentially harmful.

Please link to an unbiased site that details this history mincy.

exactly Willowberry. Alot of people have private views on things in all public areas and it doesn't impact on their jobs.

I think Rotherham council taking the children back into care are more likely to destabilise them than staying with the FP's surely. They look for problems when there are none IMO. What is the worse thing that could happen anyway. look what happens in everyday families. Have we never said the wrong thing.

Thanks Halloween & MincyPie - at least you get where i'm coming from on this.

Yes, i sadly conclude that UKIP are definitely BNP / EDL lite for the middle classes.

No, UKIP supporters are NOT suitable to foster immigrants, end of.

When people stop looking at my name badge at work & asking loudly ''are you English with a name like that??'' (yes i am ffs not that it should matter!) - that's when i may start feeling less annoyed about the issue of thinly veiled racism.

It's great for SWs. Family loudly protests and talks to the press. SWs, bound by confidentiality, can't say anything and end up looking bad.

Just because it's racism lite, doesn't mean it's not racism. I'm an immigrant in another country, granddaughter of immigrants in the UK.

Exactly MrsTP, i was a little nervous of saying racism; but yes, i felt uncomfortable when i read the UKIP's local election leaflet.

It was also weird that unlike the other candidates there were no contact numbers or email addresses on that leaflet; or invitations to discuss views.

A message from my daughter: (we have been reading this thread together she wanted to post )

Just a reminder about the case, and to clarify.
As of yet, it is still a very private case and the social workers involved have to abide to confidentiality and protecting the children involved. It has been said in many articles, BBC, Telegraph, The Guardian and even tabloids that it is an ongoing case, that their council are still currently investigating, there is an external investigation running alongside and that they will be as transparent as possible but that there is still an investigation in place (BBC).

We are currently seeing mainly the side of the foster parents, and have been given the information that it was due to their UKIP political siding. However, the social workers involved were quoted to say that they were concerned for the welfare of the children due to their cultural and ethnic needs (the telegraph) , the social workers themselves have not said that the children were taken away due to the couples UKIP links.

A source made social workers aware of their UKIP political beliefs, but the social workers have released what they can so far regarding the case and that is that they are concerned about the children's welfare for the above mentioned reasons.

There will be much the public can not be aware of as of yet and I am sure the story will all come out soon, just remember this story is very one sided for UKIP and the foster parents so far. They have a voice, the social workers and children do not yet.

There is not a simple answer to this topic, as there is not enough fair, released evidence for the other side, that being the social workers.
I am more concerned that we are all jumping to quick conclusions about the social workers who are protecting the children's rights and correctly following procedure, the children are safe and protected and being well looked after. (the BBC)
Let the social workers do their jobs is what I say!
Multiculturalism and immigration aside. (Also reading this thread, it seems that multiculturalism, immigration and racism is all being lumped into the same meaning by some posters on here. Different topic from me!)

Sorry for the essay, Jay.

You 3 are deluded and have no evidence to back it up. I've had enough of this now so goodnight.

Nice one lefty do-gooders! looks like the kids have now been split up:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2238955/Children-UKIP-foster-row-split-Decision-sparks-criticism-Rotherham-council.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

this is seriously fucked up

Haven't read the whole thread but surely people can vote and support a party with ought believing everything that party stands for. It happens all the time with every party. like Catholics, just because you are a catholic - doesn't mean you agree with every ruling from the Vatican, many try and change things. Has it been proven that these people are racist or have ill feeling towards immigrants? As the SW's can't divulge their side, it's hard to really know what the reasons are for their actions.

Mincy Pie obviously chooses to ignore the words of Joyce Thacker, head of Children's Services, interviewed on camera by the BBC. Social Services HAVE confirmed the children were removed because of membership of UKIP and HAVE confirmed they were were happy with the care the children were receiving. Ignore the admissions of Social Services head who speaks on behalf of the social workers.