Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent posts
Recent comments
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Unthreaded

Mar 30, 2018 at 5:25 PM | tomo

And thus she proves herself guilty of prejudice and discrimination, unfitting for someone to be paid by the Taxpayer to act as judge, jury and executioner and make decisions that effect others. How did she rise so high?

Mar 30, 2018 at 5:47 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

@gc

If I recall correctly it was the self same Joyce Thacker that first came to public prominence trying simultaneously smear and disqualify foster carers for being UKIP members? I wonder if she's found another "progressive in crowd" sinecure where she can indulge her prejudices?

Mar 30, 2018 at 5:25 PM | Registered Commentertomo

Supertroll

what's that oleagenous self serving slime got to do with it?

Mar 30, 2018 at 5:21 PM | Registered Commentertomo

tomo. Bullying by Kieth Vaz?
Just asking.

Mar 30, 2018 at 4:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

tomo, do you mean this Joyce Thacker?
"Joyce Thacker: former strategic director of children and young people’s services at Rotherham MBC. She was a project advisor for a pilot programme run by Common Purpose that was concerned with community cohesion and diversity issues in West Yorkshire. Thacker was until recently a member of the Health & Wellbeing Board where she sat alongside Martin Kimber, COE Rotherham MBC (Common Purpose), Janet Wheatley, CEO Voluntary Action Rotherham (Common Purpose) and Carol Stubley, Director of Finance, South Yorkshire & Bassetlaw Area Team, NHS England (Common Purpose).

In the Health & Wellbeing Board Register of Members interests, dated 15th May 2013, Joyce Thacker failed to declare any interests with Common Purpose."

https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/rotherham-common-purpose-effect

Are there links with Oxford and Telford incompetents?

Abuse of vulnerable children, teenagers and adults has always occurred, and more stories of abuse by Christian organisations, going back over a hundred years ago are coming to light. Social Workers are the prosecution, judge and jury in most of these matters, and the public are legally excluded.

Recent cases involving "Asian Men" who are not white or Christian, are just the most recent evidence of incompetence by the "experts", that have been covered up for too long.

Mar 30, 2018 at 4:30 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

@gc 3:26pm

Joyce Thacker .... just saying

Mar 30, 2018 at 3:38 PM | Registered Commentertomo

At my local hospital there are now signs warning patients that this abuse will no longer be tolerated - what a state of affairs.

Mar 30, 2018 at 2:33 PM | Supertroll

At mine, security guards are NHS employees, and quite busy on Friday/Saturday nights.

You mention Social Services and Social Workers. Good ones do good work, and the public never notices.

"Baby P" triggered a huge increase (50%?) in children being taken into care, fostered placed in childrens homes etc, and in many cases, rightly so. With Courts that never question the judgment of Social Workers, those taken incorrectly by Social Workers have little chance of justice or reconciliation. Social Services deem parents Guilty until they can prove themselves innocent.

There have been prosecutions over the last 5 years of Asian gangs grooming vulnerable children. Many of these children were already within the care system supervised by Social Workers/Services. As experts, how did they not know what was going on? Or were they intimidated into closing their own ears and eyes, when they were facilitating the abuse?

I have encountered the consequences of some excellent, and some appalling "Social Workers". The good ones go unrecognised, the bad/corrupt/incompetent ones, carry on, rewarded and unpunished.

Mar 30, 2018 at 3:26 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

a bit of distraction

A whoah! weather photo

Mar 30, 2018 at 3:23 PM | Registered Commentertomo

I checked Blacks statement
"Surveys show that only 2-3% oppose windfarms"

Link to spread sheets
(he misses some wording 2% STRONGLY OPPOSE, whilst 6% oppose )
support is 49%, + strongly 25% = 74%
Overall say 8% oppose to 74% support , Wave23 Nov 2017, wave 24 no data
"Q13) Generally speaking, do you support or oppose the use of the following renewable energy developments:"

Those opposition figures seem quite low . Around here people tend to know that the rich landowners are being fed a subsidy so it's easy to find people who oppose them eg my mother & father
Can city support really be almost 100% ?

Mar 30, 2018 at 3:17 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Supertroll

I stand corrected - apols for the mis-rep - I'm not convinced about the going rate thing though.

It certainly doesn't seem to apply here to a local hospice that survived successfully for 20+ years employing nurses, carers and cleaners on "going rates" with little if any sign of a "CEO" - has now acquired one - the rest you can perhaps guess....

Mar 30, 2018 at 3:00 PM | Registered Commentertomo

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>