That’s champion! But 1400 wrongs don’t make a Wright

Sarah Champion’s most recent resignation appears to have upset some people, who are seemingly wondering why she couldn’t have just let sleeping dogs lie. You see, Jay and Casey said it first, but Champion got there in the end, and was bang on the money when she spoke of the need for a debate around the relationship between ethnicity and the on-street model of child sexual exploitation.

Champion was also absolutely right to suggest that she would be branded a racist for her words. Because sadly, Rotherham Labour has a little bit of form when it comes to that sort of thing as Andrew Norfolk’s piece ‘Councillor who stifled talks on child abuse faces inquiry’, (The Times, February 6th2015), candidly revealed. But let’s not forget that even in these supposedly more enlightened times Boston Castle Councillor Taiba Yasseen has, so it’s been said, quietly policed Labour Group with her inability to string a sentence together that doesn’t contain some combination of the words ethnic, hate crime, minority and outraged. Which is all rather ironic given that so many suspect her elevation to Cabinet was the consequence of a spectacularly naïve act of positive discrimination in the first place!

But if you listen very carefully, you can hear the quiet rustling of an old narrative being revived. ‘CSE is an issue in lots of towns,’ it is said, ‘nothing special about Rotherham, move along now.’ Even taking aside (for a moment) the allegations of corruption, collusion and cover up, this is a thoroughly wrong-headed viewpoint, because if two wrongs don’t make a right, Fourteen hundred wrongs certainly can’t be erased by reference to other scandals, and other court cases elsewhere. Some might even suggest that this points to the culture of denial being back in town.

Sadly, this is the same twisted logic supposedly employed by Roger Stone when he allegedly appealed for support against the commissioning of an inquiry into child sexual exploitation by Labour Group way back in 2013. I’m reliably informed that he made the argument to a meeting of the Group that RMBC should not be the first council to draw attention to the problem of CSE, because it was happening all over. CSE, he is said to have revealed, was as bad in other places, maybe worse. Now some have suggested that this might, perhaps, indicate that Stone knew rather more about CSE in Rotherham, and elsewhere, than he claimed at the time. Maybe that’s why there were also rumours that Stone received behind the scenes advice from a former Sheffield MP when he appeared in front of the House of Commons Select Committee?

Now, the fact that the inquiry, which ultimately led to the Jay Report, was commissioned by Labour Group against Stone’s advice, is testament to the fact that there were, perhaps, more people in attendance at the aforementioned meeting who actually did want an inquiry to shine a light into dark places. And so a key question for those now interested in such matters might be who voted against the commissioning of an inquiry in that meeting? After all the exposure given to the matter by Andrew Norfolk’s articles in The Times, who were those Labour Councillors who voted to turn a blind eye, and to keep the issue of CSE under cover?

Of course, all of the above needs to be seen within the context of another persistent rumour about who knew what: A rumour which suggests that before the trial in which a former Mayor of Rotherham was found innocent of the charge of indecently assaulting a thirteen year old girl, the accused uncharacteristically got a little bit tipsy in the East Dene Club one evening and started sounding off. If the tittle tattle is true, the former Mayor was heard to say that if he went down, he’d take all the rest with him. Because there were eleven people who knew all about the CSE.

The former Mayor was declared innocent by the jury as we know, but quite a few folks were wondering whether eleven arses were squeaking in the run up to the verdict and whether sighs of relief could be heard in quiet living rooms across town, as well as in a villa by the Mediterranean when it was delivered. And some also wondered whether those eleven arses were beginning to squeak again when the IPCC announced that it was to finally begin its investigation into whether Shaun Wright committed perjury whilst giving evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee. Few of the whisperers had any sympathy for Wright, but there was some speculation about whether he might be having similar thoughts to those supposedly expressed by the former Mayor in the East Dene Club.  Dominoes anyone?

Carborundum.

21 thoughts on “That’s champion! But 1400 wrongs don’t make a Wright

  1. I think Rotherham council have lost the reason why we voted them in, bags full of naam breads that are being dumped on st Ann’s roundabout, bringing rats and other vermin. When asked environment health to put signs up to stop this, there response was ” we can only put signs up in English in case we offend non British people, just another way the council is victimising white British over non British guests.

    Like

  2. Its interesting. I wonder whether the writer would like to reflect on what is currently happening. Labour councillors colluding with the council to bully people andnhush them up about CSE.

    You keep the same people, you get the same problems.

    Need to clear out completely, root and branch.

    Like

  3. When Louise Casey publicly named and shamed Rotherham councillors and the corporate body as ‘Not Fit for Purpose’ most right thinking people would have expected to see new faces and bodies as councillors to replace the previous cabal who were outed as not good enough to protect young people from sexual predators or represent the people of Rotherham. How wrong can you be?
    A mass resignation of councillors followed by mass reappointments-with several councillors given new roles-and promises of ‘A new start’. 😦
    We are three years on from the Jay and Casey investigations and so far we are expected to believe that RMBC Labour councillors have been collectively struck deaf and dumb and are also suffering from amnesia.

    The power and influence of propaganda has enabled Labour councillors to retain control of Rotherham but most voters don’t really give a tinkers cuss about CSE in Rotherham.

    Like

  4. ‘Champion got there in the end, and was bang on the money when she spoke of the need for a debate around the relationship between ethnicity and the on-street model of child sexual exploitation’.

    The debate, what kind of debate, with the larger community supposedly embroiled in failures in their name, by the same people who not failed the victims but all the wider communities.

    The debate that some people want is probably more likely to be, couldn’t you find any ‘easy meat’ from your own kind.

    I find it appalling that anyone could use ‘easy meat’ to explain away vulnerable children, and the notion that any such is only available in white.

    Whatever methodology Jay uses in her report, the facts about the ethnicity of the exploited children are consistently the same as the ethnic demographics of Rotherham. To keep peddling on this forum that it was only white girls that make up the 1400 children, we the wider community are doing a disservice to the smaller numbers of victims from ethnic minority groups.

    The methodology behind the Jay Report also includes in the 1400 children to be around 10% boys, are we going to debate with them perpetrators too.

    So let’s debate the actual size of the CSE ‘Asian’ grooming model of majority Pakistani heritage male perpetrators. How conveniently Jay reported ‘nobody knows the true scale of the problem’.

    Sorry jury’s out, this particular debate as Sarah has imagined maybe a great idea, maybe will resound with disenfranchised voters but could be detrimental to cases yet to be brought before the courts.

    Like

    • Jury isn’t out Hotspot. Risky Business gave 400 plus names or nicknames of the abusers of 1700 victims. Almost all were Mirpuri and gang related. Re the Asian victims, they are certainly legion but we have ample evidence of the targeting of white/non Muslim girls as white non/Muslim girls. A survivor of the Oxford gangs was ordered to target white girls only. One of those recently convicted made clear that white women are only good for one thing. Notwithstanding the failure to prosecute these cases as hate crimes survivors have offered plenty of evidence of the role played by religious and racial hatred. Asian girls are targeted on other grounds, eg a Droit de seigneur arising from a blood tie (in which case the victim is raped anally to preserve virginity), or a perceived breach of the code of modesty. As to the role of the local Mirpuri community you will know if you are a member that the racket was organised by key community leaders with the widespread knowledge of the men in the community, at least those living in Eastwood or working in the taxi trade. The situation parallels that of the Italian American community in the heyday of the Mafia, by no means all, or even most were Mafia, but those who were not sure as hell didn’t grass up those who were. The best way to defuse resentment against the community is for the many members who know the truth is to face down the threats of ex councillor X and start to come clean. I say this as a friend, not an enemy.

      Like

      • Jay reported ‘nobody knows the true scale of the problem’

        Hers is a conservative estimate (from case files 988 victims and possibly 5% weren’t), 1700 victims on the other hand is another ball game altogether, maybe the jury is too far out.

        400 names of perpetrators, problem solved then, or is it the same names over and over again (I’d check with the number of people who’ve been locked up over the last couple of years, and the number of victims and offences they have been locked up for).

        If Risky business gave out these figures, why was Andrew Norfolk only expecting Jay to publish in her report a few hundred girls, and why was Risky business also mortified at the sheer number. After all Andrew Norfolk was in contact with the chief whistleblower.

        But thank you Giles.

        Like

  5. To the former Mayor, the NCA have info in their inbox relating to the blackmail of which you were a victim. Cut a deal now while you can. Turn QE, you don’t owe the others anything! Its all coming tumbling down. Save yourself and do the town a favour at the same time. And while you are at it tell them what the Imams really said at that meeting. If someone else turns first you will be hung out to dry.

    Like

  6. Those who knew were identified. They are protected by the leadership, some sort of perceived loyalty, using the excuse they can’t remember. Until they are finally purged this will not go away, but as stated Rotherham folk keep voting for them. So who is worse?
    The problem for the public is they can’t see it unlike not having the grass cut or the bin emptied.

    Like

  7. Pingback: The Week That Was – Last Weeks Top Ten 26th August 2017 | Rotherham Politics

  8. Pingback: The Week That Was – Last Weeks Top Ten 18th November 2017 | Rotherham Politics

  9. Pingback: The Year That Was 2017 Top twenty | Rotherham Politics

Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.