another abuse gang

[rover 623gsi]

Concerns about a girl repeatedly abused by a gang of men in Buckinghamshire were raised by a charity several years before the perpetrators were arrested, it has emerged.

Barnardo's told the BBC it had worked with the ring's two victims in 2008 and referred the case of one to the local authority and other relevant agencies.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-he...

awful state of affairs

[Transmitter Man]

An easy solution but only in my dreams.

The government needs to introduce a zero tolerance Ray Mallon type in charge of the CSA with the power to take back the passport where necessary and export said peado (after a long prison sentence).

If they were born here then you go for chemical castration + 20 years prison or however long it takes for senility to takeover.

Playing with underage children would be reduced by circa 90% overnight.

However, the liberal Guardian reading human rights activists may have something to say about this idea.

Phil

[grumbledoak]

vonuber said:

Given the swingeing cuts to local government (and by extension child protection) this is only going to reoccur in the future.

How do you work that out? These girls were put into these taxis by complicit local government staff for decades. Swingeing cuts would probably improve things.

[Mojocvh]

rover 623gsi said:

Concerns about a girl repeatedly abused by a gang of men in Buckinghamshire were raised by a charity several years before the perpetrators were arrested, it has emerged.

Barnardo's told the BBC it had worked with the ring's two victims in 2008 and referred the case of one to the local authority and other relevant agencies.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-he...

awful state of affairs

bernardo TV advert from 2008.

GO FIGURE!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E1b_s9irUw

[vonuber]

grumbledoak said:

How do you work that out? These girls were put into these taxis by complicit local government staff for decades. Swingeing cuts would probably improve things.

My stepmum before she retired a few years back was on the child protection team where we lived as a qualified social worker. Some nights (especially over Christmas) she was the only one on duty for half the county as that is all there was in the budget.
One social worker handling every single call over one of the busiest periods possible.

So yes, having heard of first hand experience what is was like before more funding was cut, I think it is right to wonder about these things. Unlike a lot of you on here, I at least have some knowledge of what actually goes on in this area. Yes like any profession there are some who do not do their jobs properly and that is abhorrent, but the vast majority try their best under absolutely horrendous circumstances - and for st pay and a situation where the media will blame them for everything regardless.

[eccles]

vonuber said:

grumbledoak said:

How do you work that out? These girls were put into these taxis by complicit local government staff for decades. Swingeing cuts would probably improve things.

My stepmum before she retired a few years back was on the child protection team where we lived as a qualified social worker. Some nights (especially over Christmas) she was the only one on duty for half the county as that is all there was in the budget.
One social worker handling every single call over one of the busiest periods possible.

So yes, having heard of first hand experience what is was like before more funding was cut, I think it is right to wonder about these things. Unlike a lot of you on here, I at least have some knowledge of what actually goes on in this area. Yes like any profession there are some who do not do their jobs properly and that is abhorrent, but the vast majority try their best under absolutely horrendous circumstances - and for st pay and a situation where the media will blame them for everything regardless.

Sadly social workers are caught between a rock and a hard place. Huge case loads, long hours, and low staff numbers. If they do their job and put a kid in care it's all over the press and they get a roasting, they don't put a kid in care they get a roasting! They really can't win whatever they do.

[grumbledoak]

vonuber said:

Unlike a lot of you on here, I at least have some knowledge of what actually goes on in this area. Yes like any profession there are some who do not do their jobs properly and that is abhorrent, but the vast majority try their best under absolutely horrendous circumstances - and for st pay and a situation where the media will blame them for everything regardless.

So, sticking with the under-resourced "thin white line" angle, then?

Won't wash. It just isn't true in these cases. Maybe in individual child protection cases. And yes they can be damned if they do and damned if they don't there too. But not these cases. Local government staff en masse were complicit in the industrial scale gang rape of children. And not a peep out of the people who should have been screaming it from the rooftops. This was not because they did not have enough resources. This was not because there were not enough of them.

You are just making up excuses for the inexcusable. Lies upon lies, because reality and your political views are in disagreement and one of those is more precious to you than the other.

[vonuber]

You clearly have no bloody idea do you? I give you a real world example of what actually is happening (under resourcing for years under both labour and the coalition) and you come up with that load of guff - and then have the gall to accuse me of being blinkered by politics.

Yet another self appointed ph expert who when confronted with facts they don't like still argue with bks.

[grumbledoak]

Not facts as such, was it? Just more excuses in the form of another claim of how hard working these people are.

[carinaman]

I may have to bring some politics into it.

Years ago, not quite a decade ago yet, BBC Radio 4 did a piece on the grooming of girls in Rochdale. It could seem that now the Beeb is a bit shy of such stuff considering how they broadcast that a few years before that was big news.

On a follow up programme they discussed how childrens care homes are now run by private companies for councils. Property prices are cheaper in Rochdale so firms buy properties there to warehouse kids in care and other Councils from other places in the country send the kids that they have 'in care' to these childrens homes in Rochdale.

Some quite big organisations are investing in these companies running childrens homes for councils.

Are companies running children's homes to turn a profit on the money they get paid from Councils to warehouse kids that interested in keeping paedophiles from their doors, or will such activities dent the bottom line?


I don't think it's about cuts. Wasn't this case in Aylesbury on the radar in 2008? Cuts may have been in progress then. We have cuts now and the police federation campaigning on it, but police seem to have a lot of time for junkets for senior officers and bigging up the police brand on social media.

Edited by carinaman on Sunday 26th July 10:45

[carinaman]

Politics? Rotherham? Labour? Council? Councillors? Common Purpose? Vested interests? Police & Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright? Taxi Drivers? Taxi licencing? Friends and family?

No politics there whatsoever is there.

Not their kids getting raped was it so why should they have cared?

Hasn't whether being a parent is important or not been bought into the Labour leadership debate?

So how many of the police and social workers in Rotherham that looked the other way have kids of their own?

Edited by carinaman on Sunday 26th July 10:43

[vonuber]

grumbledoak said:

Not facts as such, was it? Just more excuses in the form of another claim of how hard working these people are.

The fact that you think they are not says more about you to be honest.
Tell you what - go on a dawn raid with police into house which is occupied by known violent offenders in nothing but your ordinary clothes (whilst all the police have stab proof vests etc) and grab a young child away from it's mother for its own protection (while under the very real risk of assault) and do that for usually less than 30k a year.

Then come back and say you don't work hard. You know fk all about the reality.

[carinaman]

Public Sector Cuts don't explain why the resources were there to raid Risky Business in Rotherham and remove evidence.

[grumbledoak]

vonuber said:

Tell you what - go on a dawn raid with police into house which is occupied by known violent offenders in nothing but your ordinary clothes (whilst all the police have stab proof vests etc) and grab a young child away from it's mother for its own protection (while under the very real risk of assault) and do that for usually less than 30k a year.

What has any of this got to do with the discussion at hand? The two situations could not be more different. In these cases care workers were handing the kids to the taxi drivers for a weekend of organised rape. How would more resources 'help' in these cases? The actions of the council staff, from top to bottom, was the problem. More of that would be worse, not better.

And yes I am, and you should be, more cynical about the pattern of creating a 'service' that the taxpayer must pay for, which spends all the budget achieving only the bare minimum to justify it's existence, all the while covering for their own and each others incompetence. And always falling back on the claim that more taxpayers' money would magically fix everything. Every aspect of the public service works this way and has for as long as anyone can remember.

[eccles]

carinaman said:

Politics? Rotherham? Labour? Council? Councillors? Common Purpose? Vested interests? Police & Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright? Taxi Drivers? Taxi licencing? Friends and family?

No politics there whatsoever is there.

Not their kids getting raped was it so why should they have cared?

Hasn't whether being a parent is important or not been bought into the Labour leadership debate?

So how many of the police and social workers in Rotherham that looked the other way have kids of their own?

Edited by carinaman on Sunday 26th July 10:43

Bucks county council is solidly Tory.

[W124]

grumbledoak said:

vonuber said:

Tell you what - go on a dawn raid with police into house which is occupied by known violent offenders in nothing but your ordinary clothes (whilst all the police have stab proof vests etc) and grab a young child away from it's mother for its own protection (while under the very real risk of assault) and do that for usually less than 30k a year.

What has any of this got to do with the discussion at hand? The two situations could not be more different. In these cases care workers were handing the kids to the taxi drivers for a weekend of organised rape. How would more resources 'help' in these cases? The actions of the council staff, from top to bottom, was the problem. More of that would be worse, not better.

And yes I am, and you should be, more cynical about the pattern of creating a 'service' that the taxpayer must pay for, which spends all the budget achieving only the bare minimum to justify it's existence, all the while covering for their own and each others incompetence. And always falling back on the claim that more taxpayers' money would magically fix everything. Every aspect of the public service works this way and has for as long as anyone can remember.

In this case, surely more resources would enable the council to deal with moving the girls from place to place. Without entrusting them to the hands of a bunch of liabilities. There you are. More resources would directly improve the problem. I have no axe to grind really but if you can't see a relationship between cutting services and a reduction in services you are taking too much acid. You see, when you cut services you don't stop the waste. The bds and their little kingdoms continue. What you do is you cut the easily available budget for those actually doing the job. Those people are in plain sight and easy to get to. You hammer them. And this is what you get.

[carinaman]

eccles said:

Bucks county council is solidly Tory.

I wasn't playing party politics.

So when Conservative and Labour Councils are equally as adept at ignoring sexual child abuse and interracial grooming it's just further proof that there's no difference between them and neither of them are working for the public good.

I have a Tory MP. I know them to be bent. My Labour candidate is a fraud too.

[freakybacon]

Chuck a few million at the problem.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshi...

[FiF]

But hang on a minute, according to various posters lessons have been learnt, now SYP is performing and has made massive improvement under a different CC, various council officials have resigned / taken early retirement / massive payoffs, the PCC has resigned bla bla bla.

But let's say this initiative is welcome and needed, which frankly it is. So that's Rotherham, now what about <insert namet of any other city and town>.

Is there going to be an admission of the wider problem and nail those responsible?

[carinaman]

https://rotherhampolitics.wordpress.com/2015/08/05...

Seems 2/3rds of those sexually abusing kids in Rotherham aren't Asian.