My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

MNHQ have commented on this thread

AIBU?

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

792 replies

londonone · 24/11/2012 09:23

bbc

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

OP posts:
Report
tiggytape · 27/11/2012 18:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ElBurroSinNombre · 27/11/2012 19:13

I wish people would stop saying that we don't know the full story. Joyce Thacker of Rotherham Social Services has confirmed that the only reason that these children were removed is because the foster carers were members of UKIP. There is an interview on the BBC website that makes this very clear - please look at that before writing on here that 'we don't know the full story yet'. This sort of idle tittle tattling (which has no foundation) brings the reputation of the couple involved into question .
I have just watched an interview with the couple on TV. Apart from expressing shock and disbelief at the decision, they are most concerned with restoring their reputation - precisely because of the unsubstantiated innuendo like your message scottishmummy.

Report
tiggytape · 27/11/2012 19:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PessaryPam · 27/11/2012 19:39

On a lighter note, gallows humour maybe but....

Report
LineRunner · 27/11/2012 19:44

Why is Hitler funny?

Report
natation · 27/11/2012 19:54

Oh dear sense of humour failure?
The best way to counter evil is to make light of it. Several Jewish comedians post WW2 have done just that to great effect against the holocaust history.

Report
LineRunner · 27/11/2012 19:54

Not seeing much Syrian stand up tonight.

Report
scottishmummy · 27/11/2012 20:01

no I don't think we know all facts.at all
but some don't let that get in way of good speculation
least of all not mn or media

Report
MrsTerryPratchett · 27/11/2012 20:54

who wouldn't be outraged at it being publically implied that they're racist Who was it that went to the media, the SS dept or them? Becasue if SS went to the media and announced that the parents were racist and their FC were taken away for this reason, YANBU. If the FPs went and argued their case in the media, they get what they get. Is it a surprise to them that for some people UKIP = racist?

Report
PessaryPam · 27/11/2012 22:35

Linie, Downfall spoofs are all over the interweb. I think you have to possess a sense of humour though to enjoy them Grin

Report
LineRunner · 27/11/2012 22:37

Wow.

Report
LineRunner · 27/11/2012 22:42

(Don't mind me, I've gone all snippy. As you were etc.)

Report
edam · 27/11/2012 22:53

MrsTP, SS don't have to go on TV to damage your reputation. I'm sure there will have been talk locally about this couple when the children were removed. At the very least their reputation has been stained within the world of social care - where they work. Damaging someone's reputation in their field of work is a serious issue. It may sometimes be necessary where the welfare of a child is at stake but in this case it's the other way round - SS themselves were happy to harm the children's welfare by removing them from a stable, suitable placement with excellent foster carers AND separating the brother and sisters.

This couple have spoken out - responsibly, without naming the children - in order to right a wrong. In order to expose wrongdoing and to bring it to public attention that children's welfare is being damaged by wrong-headed and political decisions.

No doubt the authorities would rather the little people kept quiet and just put up with these kind of decisions. The authorities would always rather ordinary people kept quiet - that's why governments of all stripes are always trying to bring in secret courts (the present lot are doing it right now), to impose gagging orders on whistleblowers, to restrict access to justice, to restrict access to the media.

Report
scottishmummy · 27/11/2012 22:58

they're not quiet diffident peope,fp contacted media, have ukip support.this isnt the wee guy vs the system
imo,youre wilfully misrepresenting a lot of this and indulging in clichés of dark controlling council
the sw cannot speak out,they are held by code of practice and employment constraints. id expect a case review to elaborate and be more balanced than media or mn

Report
izzyishavingababyAGAIN · 27/11/2012 23:01

The Senior SW was clear - she used the words "there were no issues regarding the care of the children", this couple have done nothing wrong.

Id have gone to the press if I was them as well.

My experience of SS is that they are abysmally poor and judgemental.

Report
scottishmummy · 27/11/2012 23:06

i'll wait for fuller disclosure and rationale, read that
something must have triggered this be it attitudinal,observed behaviours,a precedent for these events
the sw staff directly involved have not spoken publicly.LA representatives have spoken

Report
edam · 27/11/2012 23:09

SM, several people have pointed out social services have spoken out. You keep claiming that SS are unable to make their case but they have, and it's there on BBC news for all to see. Which is largely why people are so appalled - it's clear from the interview that SS's concerns were solely about which political party this couple supported, not about their care of these children at all.

Report
edam · 27/11/2012 23:11

Scottish, SS have said it was a 'tip off' - a call from someone saying 'this couple are members of UKIP'.

Insisting that 'there must be more to it' is a slur on this couple. SS have said publicly there were NO concerns about the quality of care at all. It is purely about UKIP and SS's assumption that UKIP membership = racist.

Report
scottishmummy · 27/11/2012 23:18

do not paraphrase,or misquote me i have never said there must be more to it
there was tip off that was the soemthing,i so wonde if more disclsure to follow from either local authority of fp
i think potentially more info will follow, and id be interested to read it

Report
Latara · 28/11/2012 12:31

Interesting to see how unpleasantly UKIP supporters react when you disagree with them.

Report
Latara · 28/11/2012 12:35

I am not deluded, a lefty bleeding heart do-gooder, want children to not have a loving stable home etc etc.

I merely repeated what is on the UKIP's own election leaflet.
& concluded from the UKIPs own words that immigrant children are not suitable in a strongly UKIP supporting home (UKIP does not agree with immigration).

That's just my opinion.

The reactions to my comment & short opinion have been incredibly over the top.

I also agree with ScottishMummy - we don't know the full story here.

Report
TheOriginalSteamingNit · 28/11/2012 13:35

You can tell a rubbish effort at satire when it has to explain its play on words in brackets. Apart from that, yes, UKIP are exactly like the Jews in WWII. But exactly.

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

tiggytape · 28/11/2012 13:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

EIizaDay · 28/11/2012 13:55

Well I'm a UKIP supporter NOW (as of about a month ago). Was always a Tory but they've lost their backbone so there's no other choice really.

Report
joanbyers · 28/11/2012 13:58

There are racists in bigots in UKIP, but there are also racists and bigots in the Labour party, at least according to Gordon Brown....

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.