Foster Children removed from couple for UKIP membership
Discussion
Digga said:
hidetheelephants said:
martin84 said:
Speaking of the stonefaced cow, jesus christ these council people are the most ernest, personality devoid people in the world aren't they?
Evidently 
mattnunn said:
Andy Zarse said:
Terrible answer. I asked you what you were going to do about those who come here for a free ride off the backs of those who work and pay tax often on very low wages. You say you'd provide help, well what help? Would you agree it's best not to allow the situation to arise in the first place?
People who come along for a free ride, whether home grown or external are as inevitable in a society, we all know them, free riding is a well researched and studied part of social philosophy and is no doubt high on the agenda of policy makers and our countries greatest thinkers.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem
Dividing free riders into categories based on their ethnicity, parentage or birth place is simply racist. Suggesting that our native free riders be treated differently from imported free riders is unfathomable.
98elise said:
People born outside of the EU can't work here without a visa. Is that racist? I'm not able to join the us green card lottery because I'm English, is that racist?
Even that's not strictly true because people born outside the EU can work here without a visa if they manage to get an EU passport. Italy has a tendancy to give anyone who's ever bought a Gucci handbag a passport and many Eastern European members have ties with even poorer non-EU members who used to be part of their country. You're right though. If I want to work in America I have to prove I have something to offer them and I have to apply for a work permit. When the length of said permit is up - I leave. Very simple.
Why can we not do that for people outside the UK?
martin84 said:
As a result of being banned for no good reason I have been unable to partake in this discussion. I haven't read the thread but I doubt I have much to say which hasn't already been said. All I would say is the whole story is extremely weird and I can't help but think there's one component of it that we don't know, for instance the stonefaced woman in charge of childrens services didn't answer clearly how their UKIP membership became known to them.
Speaking of the stonefaced cow, jesus christ these council people are the most ernest, personality devoid people in the world aren't they?
Welcome backSpeaking of the stonefaced cow, jesus christ these council people are the most ernest, personality devoid people in the world aren't they?
I think there is even more than that that we don't know, mainly why hasn't somebody been sacked yet? why have the children still not been re-united and returned.
NoNeed said:
Welcome back
I think there is even more than that that we don't know, mainly why hasn't somebody been sacked yet? why have the children still not been re-united and returned.
I know one person who was brought up in foster care and from the little I know they never give children back to a previous foster family, it's just standard policy. In this case they were only meant to be with this family short term but the council decided to make that even shorter due to their membership of the UK's third biggest party.I think there is even more than that that we don't know, mainly why hasn't somebody been sacked yet? why have the children still not been re-united and returned.
As for why no sacking well that's tricky. Obviously you've got the fact it's the public sector where people are 're-trained' and moved to other departments for what we'd deem sackable offences but this one is even more complex. A judge had criticised this council for not considering 'ethnic needs' enough in the past and the stonefaced cow in question could claim she was only doing her job.
Grounds for sacking are wobbly at best and you can be certain she'd challenge it in court.
NoNeed said:
Surely the needs of children are paramount.
Yes and that would also be her case when she takes her employers to court after getting the sack. This is not cut and dried from a legal perspective. Don't forget the doctor who overlooked Baby P was only sacked because Ed Balls wanted to appease some public anger - and then she got a big compensation payout.martin84 said:
Yes and that would also be her case when she takes her employers to court after getting the sack. This is not cut and dried from a legal perspective. Don't forget the doctor who overlooked Baby P was only sacked because Ed Balls wanted to appease some public anger - and then she got a big compensation payout.
This. Oh, welcome back Martin84.
FiF said:
They are probably working out her severance package.fido said:
FiF said:
They are probably working out her severance package.That's the way it is done with Council directors.
Whilst I don't agree in any way with what this council has done, I can't help thinking social services are caught between a rock and a hard place. Rarely are these cases black and white (no pun intended!), and they get castigated if they don't take action, and then when they do take action they get ripped to pieces.
It seems to be a thankless job with very high case loads not enough staff or funding, and we never seem to hear about the many good jobs they've done, only these odd anomalies that hit the headlines.
It seems to be a thankless job with very high case loads not enough staff or funding, and we never seem to hear about the many good jobs they've done, only these odd anomalies that hit the headlines.
eccles said:
Whilst I don't agree in any way with what this council has done, I can't help thinking social services are caught between a rock and a hard place. Rarely are these cases black and white (no pun intended!), and they get castigated if they don't take action, and then when they do take action they get ripped to pieces.
It seems to be a thankless job with very high case loads not enough staff or funding, and we never seem to hear about the many good jobs they've done, only these odd anomalies that hit the headlines.
They're just a bunch of inept box tickers these days. No longer fit for purpose.It seems to be a thankless job with very high case loads not enough staff or funding, and we never seem to hear about the many good jobs they've done, only these odd anomalies that hit the headlines.
eccles said:
Whilst I don't agree in any way with what this council has done, I can't help thinking social services are caught between a rock and a hard place. Rarely are these cases black and white (no pun intended!), and they get castigated if they don't take action, and then when they do take action they get ripped to pieces.
It seems to be a thankless job with very high case loads not enough staff or funding, and we never seem to hear about the many good jobs they've done, only these odd anomalies that hit the headlines.
This Thacker woman is one of the people who think that teenage girls in the care of the state being groomed by gangs, plied with drugs and alcohol and then repeatedly raped is 'a lifestyle choice'. A kick in the sponge is the least she deserves, along with her receipt of a P45 and tarring and feathering.It seems to be a thankless job with very high case loads not enough staff or funding, and we never seem to hear about the many good jobs they've done, only these odd anomalies that hit the headlines.
eccles said:
I can't help thinking social services are caught between a rock and a hard place.
Perhaps they do have a tough job, but this argument goes against what they have done [allegedly] ..i.e. gone out of their way to 1. find out if the parents are UKIP members 2. remove these children. And let's not forget that this council c*w is on £130k a year - she's paid alot of money not to do get stuck between rocks and hard places.
BliarOut said:
eccles said:
Whilst I don't agree in any way with what this council has done, I can't help thinking social services are caught between a rock and a hard place. Rarely are these cases black and white (no pun intended!), and they get castigated if they don't take action, and then when they do take action they get ripped to pieces.
It seems to be a thankless job with very high case loads not enough staff or funding, and we never seem to hear about the many good jobs they've done, only these odd anomalies that hit the headlines.
They're just a bunch of inept box tickers these days. No longer fit for purpose.It seems to be a thankless job with very high case loads not enough staff or funding, and we never seem to hear about the many good jobs they've done, only these odd anomalies that hit the headlines.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff