UKIP Foster Parents Screwed

Man of Honour
Joined
24 Sep 2005
Posts
34,158
Harsh or not?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20474120

I think it's really harsh and petty. If anything their political allegiance should be taken into account when determining suitability rather than being the deciding factor.

The council's reasoning seems terrible.

Bad times.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
27 Sep 2004
Posts
25,822
Location
Glasgow
I'd have thought that the most important thing was how they treated the children. If they were unwelcoming in any way or were trying to indoctrinate the children (for want of a better phrase) then absolutely they shouldn't have care of them but if it's a political viewpoint that didn't make any noticeable difference to how they treated the children then it seems an irrelevance at best.

As it's just a short news article and we don't have access to all points of consideration then it's possible that it was only one factor of many that led to this couple being judged unsuitable for these particular children. It may not seem likely given how it has been reported but as has been oft noted it's hard to make a fair judgement when you don't have all the facts.
 

wnb

wnb

Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2004
Posts
3,983
Harsh or not?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20474120

I think it's really harsh and petty. If anything their political allegiance should be taken into account when determining suitability rather than being the deciding factor.

The council's reasoning seems terrible.

Bad times.

Not surprised, i have to work with social workers and they are on another planet. At best they are bunch of idiots who have dar too much power.
 

One

One

Soldato
Joined
24 Aug 2011
Posts
6,162
Location
ABQ, NM
That's madness. Are they confusing UKIP with BNP or EDL? UKIP is not anti-immigrants, it's anti-immigration (or, the way it is currently) and anti-EU.

I can only assume this is another case of bad DM style reporting and their political allegiance with a factor of many about why they were unsuitable foster parents.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
9 Jan 2007
Posts
163,890
Location
Londinium
Very harsh but then what would you expect from some bigoted Labour party appointee who clearly has no idea about UKIP policies. I could understand if they were BNP supporters but this make no sense whatsoever.
 

v0n

v0n

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
8,130
Location
The Great Lines Of Defence
That's madness. Are they confusing UKIP with BNP or EDL? UKIP is not anti-immigrants, it's anti-immigration and anti-EU.

Is there a confusion though? UKIP might not have fighting squad like EDL or marching Basil Fawlty connotations of BNP but it is still separatist right wing party lobbying for nativism, with civic nationalist stance on immigration and openly anti multiculturalism agenda.

The children were "not indigenous". Hence the concern. Is it unreasonable?
 
Man of Honour
OP
Joined
24 Sep 2005
Posts
34,158
As it's just a short news article and we don't have access to all points of consideration then it's possible that it was only one factor of many that led to this couple being judged unsuitable for these particular children. It may not seem likely given how it has been reported but as has been oft noted it's hard to make a fair judgement when you don't have all the facts.

Watching the video seems to imply it was heavily to do with UKIP as opposed to any other factors, although as with anything reported you should read with scrutiny.
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
42,825
Location
Newcastle Upon Tyne
UKIP are racist because they want to close the flood gates and change to a better immigration system like australias that doesnt just let any trash in?

how is it racist? they wouldnt be filtering immigration applications by race......
 
Soldato
Joined
13 May 2003
Posts
7,992
Is there a confusion though? UKIP might not have fighting squad like EDL or marching Basil Fawlty connotations of BNP but it is still separatist right wing party lobbying for nativism, with civic nationalist stance on immigration and openly anti multiculturalism agenda.

The children were "not indigenous". Hence the concern. Is it unreasonable?

They are against the current open door policy on immigration and they are anti-EU but they are not anti foreigners. Also they are best described as centre right. I would imagine that if people bothered to read their manifesto they might find it to be no more contentious than those of the other major parties.

Farage himself speaks several languages and is married to a German he is no zenophobe.
 

One

One

Soldato
Joined
24 Aug 2011
Posts
6,162
Location
ABQ, NM
I know, it really frustrates me when people assume UKIP is in the same category as BNP or EDL.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
27 Sep 2004
Posts
25,822
Location
Glasgow
Watching the video seems to imply it was heavily to do with UKIP as opposed to any other factors, although as with anything reported you should read with scrutiny.

That might have been the main influencing factor or it could be simply the factor that the representative of the Council felt most at liberty to discuss. Alternatively it may be that the words were poorly chosen but that there was more to the decision than was shown.

It's perfectly possible that you're right and it's been influenced largely by the membership of UKIP but in the absence of full information that led to the decision it seems prudent not to rush to judgement.

UKIP are racist because they want to close the flood gates and change to a better immigration system like australias that doesnt just let any trash in?

how is it racist? they wouldnt be filtering immigration applications by race......

I'm not sure I'd hold Australia up as an ideal model for immigration but UKIP would need to get the UK out of the EU for its immigration policies to hold any chance of working.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Dec 2009
Posts
9,925
Seems fair enough. A couple who believe so strongly in "sending those foreigners back to where they come from" that they have joined UKIP, probably shouldnt be fostering kids from a migrant background. It doesnt seem in the best interest of the kids.

Would anyone object to a gay teen not being allowed to be fostered by someone who believes being gay is a mortal sin?

Just to point out that the abuse of kids in foster homes is a thing. Being a foster parent doesn't necessarily mean you have the interests of the children you foster in mind. It puts you in a position of authority over these vulnerable young kids.
 
Man of Honour
OP
Joined
24 Sep 2005
Posts
34,158
That might have been the main influencing factor or it could be simply the factor that the representative of the Council felt most at liberty to discuss. Alternatively it may be that the words were poorly chosen but that there was more to the decision than was shown.

It's perfectly possible that you're right and it's been influenced largely by the membership of UKIP but in the absence of full information that led to the decision it seems prudent not to rush to judgement.

The fact that they interviewed someone involved who had an alarmingly long time to stress the importance of other factors to be taken into account, yet said nothing along those lines, doesn't bode particularly well.

I'm not trying to awkward, I'm just saying there are reasons to not be unduly sceptical :p
 
Top Bottom