X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Coffee House

The prejudice on display in Rotherham

24 November 2012

3:44 PM

24 November 2012

3:44 PM

There are some stories that become more shocking the more you think about them. The case of the Rotherham foster parents who have had the children they were caring for taken away from them for being members of UKIP is one of these. It is hard to imagine the distress that must have been caused to them by this arrogant, ill-thought out decision.

First, UKIP is not a racist party: none of its policy positions could be called racist in any meaningful definition of this term. I’m sure there are some racists who are members of UKIP, just as there are — I suspect — some Labour, Liberal Democrat, Tory and Green members who are racist.

[Alt-Text]


Now, UKIP does take a harder line on EU immigration than the three main parties: the explanation given for why the children were taken away. But this hardly makes it—or, its members—bigoted. To take these children away just because the parents are members of UKIP is prejudice, pure and simple.

The next worrying thing is that Rotherham council’s Strategic Director of Children and Young People’s Services, Joyce Thacker still doesn’t seem to grasp why the decision was so seriously wrong even, though, she acknowledges that there was no issue with the quality of care these foster parents were providing. Even more worryingly the decision seems to have followed the council seeking legal advice.

By coincidence, there’s a by-election in Rotherham on Thursday following Denis MacShane quitting over his expenses. It’ll be intriguing to see what effect this has on the contest there given that UKIP was already expected to do well.

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close