The combined forces of Doncaster Social Services and Ed Balls are conspiring to keep the truth from us, but for once the BBC has acted as whistleblower. You didn’t notice? Ah! It was buried deep in their web site, but Ms Raccoon has ferreted out the information.
The first hint that the BBC knew more than the judge in the case came on Friday night, when Gavin Esler, the Newsnight presenter, read out some of the findings of the version which was leaked to the BBC, and contrasted them with those of the summary. Even he was reticent about the full details.
Some of the details have been quoted and re-quoted, the ‘toxic’ home life – take note of that term, its relevance will become clearer later – the exposure to pornography; well even our famed ex-Home Secretary’s home life apparently includes an exposure to pornography, at tax payers expense no less, and so far as I know, her children have not taken to lassoing other children across a river to engage in ‘sex games’, so that cannot be the whole reason these children were so damaged.
This ‘toxic’ home life also included an exposure to ‘drinking’, as does the home life of every child in France, and probably most of Britain too, and whilst drinking is the new target of the Puritans, it does seem unfair to imply that exposure to it should result in children turning into psychopaths.
But what is this buried at the end of the BBC report? A tiny and not insignificant detail omitted from every other newspaper article that I have managed to find, which could only have come from the report that the BBC has in its possession…….or could it be that someone, deep in the bowels of the BBC took the opportunity to ‘sex up’ this report and insert their own personal obsession?
The judge was told about years of domestic violence and how one of the boys was exposed to horror videos, pornography, drinking, drugs and cigarettes.
Yes, one of the boys was exposed to cigarettes! What were Doncaster Social Services thinking of? Did none of the council bin inspectors ever report that there were discarded Golden Virginia wrappers in the bins? Did CCTV never reveal that one of the parents was seen to stub out a cigarette on the back doorstep? A ‘toxic’ home life indeed, the victims of passive smoking, that child may even have tasted a cigarette themselves, no wonder they dare not reveal the full report. Cigarettes, the new cause of psychopathic tendencies in the feral underclass.
So the spotlight is turned away from the perpetrators of this hideous affair, to the parents. Mum was quick to absolve herself – ‘it’s nothing to do with me’, she said.
And why should she not think so? Nine agencies over 14 years had poked their nose into that foetid home, and found no reason to intervene. The state had made it quite plain to these parents that the parents were not responsible for their children, and that the state was quite content with the way in which the parents were bringing them up on the state’s behalf.
Little wonder that the state was so ineffective. The Times managed to track down the CV of one Mark Hodson who was in charge of running the children’s services at Doncaster. It seems his main area of expertise was in ensuring the efficient running of a production line of sausages and meat pies before being handed the task of safeguarding these vulnerable children – you couldn’t make it up! The names of the people who sat on a panel and decided that extruding minced pork into plastic casings was the ideal background for making sensitive decisions on diverse family backgrounds – and worth £103,000 a year – should be paraded before us for all to see. How much do they earn? How can they possibly justify such an obtuse decision?
Yet now that it has all gone horribly wrong, and there is a danger of the state’s inertia when faced with two children on the child protection register and who had both been expelled from school, being found lacking, we are told that the report must be kept confidential – and that the parents may face prosecution!
The Independent consulted Graham Wood QC on the subject of prosecution of the parents.
“I haven’t come across a prosecution of parents for cruelty which is the result of child offences. It would be breaking new ground legally. It would be a very difficult prosecution to bring. The only real offence which they could be charged with is cruelty under the Children and Young Person’s Act. In this context, they would have to prove some sort of mental instability had been caused by it. If the kids were exposed to violence or pornography, there could be a tenuous link.”
Doncaster Council is reported to have spent £30,000 in an attempt to get an injunction that would stop the publication of the report. Action for Children, which provided “parental support” to the family for six months following a referral from social services, and which is named in the report, is also against its publication. Elsewhere we are told that it will cost the tax payer £5 million in round-the-clock care to rehabilitate these children.
Because the state assumed responsibility for those children, a responsibility it failed to discharge, and now it wishes to remain anonymous and prosecute the parents? The state would like us to believe that evil parents create evil children. Then should we not be prosecuting the parents of the parents, or the grandparents, where do you stop apportioning blame? The state would like us to believe that only the state can do a good job of protecting children from evil adults.
In which case we should be prosecuting the state for landing us with a massive bill to rehabilitate two feral individuals that they had assumed responsibility for – and let the parents remain anonymous, they were obviously damaged as children themselves…..
Unless of course, the state would care to back out of its current obsession with social engineering, and let us go back to the old ways of a clip round the ear from the local policeman as a way of reminding young people that whatever they encounter at home, they are responsible for their own behaviour out in the adult world.
Ed Balls-up can’t have it both ways. The horrors inflicted in Edlington don’t stand testament to a ‘broken Britain’, they stand testament to a government that seeks to take control of our children, and is now seeking to hide the report which shows what a lousy job they make of it.