Rotherham Borough Council is in an apologetic mood at last. This story has caught the attention of a number of news sources.
Starting with the BBC:
Rotherham Council apologises over UKIP foster row
The Yorkshire Post:
Rotherham council ‘sorry’ over taking foster children from Ukip family
The Sun:
Council ‘sorry’ at race jibe parents
Last, but not least, Guido Fawkes’ contribution:
Rotherham’s UKIP Child Catchers Finally Say Sorry
See previously on Rotherham Politics:
Joyce Thacker’s priority? Find the whistle blower!
.
Was Richard Shaw onto something here last November:
Was Rotherham council’s political prejudice to blame for the persecution of Ukip foster parents?
An investigation should determine whether Rotherham Council played any role in the persecution of Ukip-supporting foster parents Read on….
Who can he be referring to when he wrote this, “f the social workers can prove that they were acting on instructions from higher up, the matter becomes far more serious?”
Rotherham Politics 
I understand that the Head of Children`s Services is still in her very highly paid job. At one time people used to resign out of embarrassment and shame. It seems that there are no courses at Rotherham on how to act in Public Office, LOL. Another thought could be that heads cannot role due to the fact a disgruntled person may “spill the beans” on others.
LikeLike
The beans are already spilt! Confirmation required, let us know. Rothpol or RikiLeaks
LikeLike
Joyce Thacker openly said in a statement to the press 2 days after this story came out that she removed the children based soley on the fact the foster couple was members of UKIP and it was based on our european policies (FACT)
Then RMBC said there was other issues then went silent for 7 months so they could dig around to try and find some other issues.( But to date havent come up with any)
Then 36 hours after my radio interview on radio sheffield when I said one of my councillor duties would be to look into this case and the child grooming silence.
Thats why the have only now come up with this so called appologie because I am now in a better position to question this is just a rouse on their part to divert attention and carry on hidding behind the old chesnut of cant comment because of legal actions
LikeLike
That doesn’t sound like an apology to me.
Sounds more like “Soz you mugs found out” in a muttering tone.
LikeLike
In order to effectively remove the UKIP candidates on a fanciful basis it was necessary for many to conspire and to lead beyond their authority, Recall that phrase ? Yes, Leading Beyond Authority is the clarion call of the faux-charity Common Purpose. Should you check the records, and, using Google, see their associations, it would be seen that the nulabor prospective candidates gave their electorate a choice of Common Purpose or Common Purpose ! Meanwhile, again using Google, see for yourself whether Joyce Thacker is associated with Common Purpose. Now we ARE into the child-grooming and paedophile territory.
LikeLike
To conspiracy theorist this will smell of a cover up. Why do RMBC always seem to hide behind ‘legal reasons’ for not telling us what happened? They can make a rational, factual report on events, without naming the children or the foster parents. Put simply, why was the decision made?
If they don’t tell it will inevitably generate conspiracy theories e.g. was it because someone was stupid enough to take the kids away because they were UKIP, then others realised the idiocy? In these circumstances it might best for the agency and foster parents to keep quiet, as after all the Council are their clients.
If the Council were more up front and clear then these theories might not take wing.
LikeLike