Category Archives: Children

UKIP, Red Herrings And How To Divert a Debate

The first speaker at the recent Together Against Grooming conference in Bradford almost derailed the event through her bias and political partisanship.

The conference topic was grooming gangs and child sexual exploitation. The event was run by and targeted at the Asian community, had over 400 attending, and was important because it was – according to the organisers – the UK’s first major Asian conference on grooming gangs and CSE.

The conference was entitled courageously “Feel the fear…and do it anyway”. I hoped it was a sign that the Islamic community is at last taking ownership of the appalling Muslim grooming gang phenomenon.

The Catholic Church had to be forced by outside secular authorities to cease its denial and acknowledge its paedophile priest scandal.

The BBC, having covered up years of allegations about Jimmy Savile’s paedophile activities on its premises, was forced to acknowledge them only after his death defused his celebrity power over sycophantic BBC senior staff, and freed his accusers from fear of sanction.

My question was: would the Muslim community do better than the church and the state broadcaster? Would its leaders face up to the paedophile gangs within their ranks voluntarily, without being compelled by outsider intervention? Conference publicity indicated that they might.

Dr Ella Cockbain

However the non-Asian opening speaker dashed all hopes. She was English academic Dr Ella Cockbain from University College London.

According to the conference blurb Dr Cockbain is an expert on serious and organised crime including sexual exploitation. She is also an independent expert reviewer for the Home Office and “the most qualified person in the country to talk about what is true and what is myth when it comes to the whole issue of ‘grooming gangs’”.

But instead of “dispelling the myths and providing the hard facts” as we were promised, Dr Cockbain launched an immediate attack on UKIP and the “far right” including Tommy Robinson. It was a rant and red-herring worthy of Hope Not Hate, and to ram home her point she even displayed a picture of UKIP rosettes on the big screen.

It was the old Leftist conjuring trick. Cockbain deflected attention from the primary issue of the Muslim grooming gangs – about which she was consistently insipid and circumspect – onto the secondary issue of those who, in view of local authorities’ culpable failure, want to expose and stop them.

It also was fear-mongering patronisingly designed by Cockburn to put the Muslim community back into the victim box from which they were falteringly trying to venture.

It, too, was the bog-standard smokescreen with which political and media virtue-signallers invariably blanket and hide the grooming gang issue.

This dangerous leftist drivel was seriously inappropriate for an academic and researcher who should instead pursue truth, clarify facts and follow evidence. What was worse, Cockburn scuttled away from the platform before we had a chance to challenge her.

I was subsequently joined at the conference by Stephen Place, chairman of UKIP Bradford branch. He was in time to hear Salma Yaqoob, former leader of George Galloway’s Respect Party, follow Dr Cockbain’s lead and lay into UKIP. When I challenged her from the floor, Ms Yaqoob promoted her usual line that Muslims are the eternal powerless victims, to some applause from the audience.

Ajmal Masroor – who I first crossed political swords with when he was a LibDem candidate in Newham, east London, where I live – gave a sanitised talk about Islamic teaching that failed to address the obvious issues that trouble many, such as the age of Muhammad’s child bride Aisha.

Others were more helpful. There were two heart-wrenching testimonies, one by the English mother of a grooming victim and the other by an Asian survivor of childhood domestic sexual abuse. Good discussion panels, masterful organisation and an interesting presentation by the Truth Project of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse completed an – in the end – instructive day.

But despite the conference organisers’ best efforts, we were no closer to the Muslim community acknowledging its grooming gang scandal.

The moral of the story? Beware patronising English ‘experts’ with PC agendas speaking at well-intentioned Muslim conferences. They are likely to dump the truth, divert the debate and wreck the real usefulness of the event.

This article was first published by Kipper Central on 14th April

Stop The Sex Education Runaway Train

The ‘Sex Education’ runaway train – driven by the liberal elite in Whitehall and Westminster and belching its pollutants into the classrooms of ever-younger children across the country – has hit a buffer at Parkfield Community School in Birmingham.

Up to 600 children aged between 4 and 11 – 80% of the school roll – have been withdrawn by parents who say the school has been “undermining parental rights and aggressively promoting homosexuality”.

It is unsurprising that a revolt against the state-sponsored sexualisation of pre-pubescent children should start at Parkfield with its overwhelmingly Muslim children and parents. The assistant headteacher is the LGBT activist Andrew Moffat who, in 2007, created the teaching resource Challenging Homophobia in Primary Schools (CHIPS).

In 2013 Moffat was forced to resign from another Birmingham primary school, Chilwell Croft Academy, when mainly Muslim parents objected to his pro-gay teaching.

His CHIPS programme is simply a surreptitious means of introducing young children to homosexuality under the guise of preventing ‘homophobic bullying’.

Of course it does not tackle the much more widespread forms of playground bullying such as ‘appearance bullying’. CHIPS is narrow, focused and age-inappropriate LGBT propaganda.

The programme includes using in class such colourful cartoon-illustrated story books as King and King and My Princess Boy. The purpose of these and other teaching aids is to “smash heteronormativity” as an associated website Educate and Celebrate says brutally, and to normalise homosexuality.

In the name of ‘inclusivity’, sex-education defenders claim that today’s primary school children must understand the diverse domestic lives of their classmates including those who come from same-sex homes. It is illuminating that they do not similarly claim that children should understand classmates who come from households where other adult pursuits take place, such as heavy drinking or smoking.

No, the priority is solely to promote homosexuality amongst pre-pubescent children. They have learnt well Aristotle’s maxim: “Give me a child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man.”

But the DfE programme for sexualising primary school children is not only about promoting the LGBT agenda, although that is a priority. Primary schools are currently showing the film Spring Fever to year 4 children. In this video, a naked opposite-sex couple are actively cuddling and kissing on a bed, and an erect penis is shown inserted into a vagina. The fact that the video is warm colourful animation seems to justify showing this graphic scene to innocent pre-pubescent children.

Like gay marriage and the transgender agenda, the sex-education syllabus for primary school children is also being forced on us top-down by the globalist liberal elite. So if we want to know what will be imposed on our children down the line, we should find out what currently is being promoted by the UN and international agencies.

The World Health Organisation’s European office based in Copenhagen, together with the German Federal Ministry of Health based in Cologne, have published ‘Standards for Sexuality in Europe’ which set out what European children of different ages should be taught.

Shockingly the ‘Standards’ include:

Age 0-4: explore nakedness and the body and gender identities. Learn ‘my body belongs to me’.

Age 4-6: name each body part – caregivers are instructed to ‘wash each body part’ and ‘talk about sexual matters in sexual language’. Children should be given information about enjoyment and sexual pleasure when touching one’s own body in early childhood masturbation.

Age 6-9: inform about menstruation and ejaculation, choices about pregnancy, different methods of contraception, sex in media, enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s body… Children should examine their body, use sexual language and accept diversity.

UKIP has tried to forestall these further horrors coming from Europe. Since 2015 it has been party policy to ban all sex education in primary schools.

But for now it is the Parkfield school buffers that have provided a welcome halt to the CHIPS and sex-education train that’s steaming through the UK’s primary schools and crushing childhood innocence on its way.

It remains to be seen whether this is a temporary stop before the downward drive is resumed, or a permanent crash that might cause a rethink and a new, more age-appropriate direction of travel.

 This article was first published by Politicalite on 25th March 

Child Abuse By Another Name

“That’s no surprise,” I reckoned when I saw the media headlines. “The Department for Education looks determined to extend its war on normal traditional families, normal healthy parenting and normal innocent children.” And, as I read the stories under the headlines, my heart sank. I was right.

With effect from September 2020 primary school children as young as five must be taught about gay and transgender relationships. And parents’ right to withdraw their children from inappropriate sex education is to be further reduced from the same date.

This is a nightmare of education that borders on child abuse. Only 2% of the UK population self-identify as gay and the Government Equalities Office reckons the trans population is under 0.08%. But instead of encouraging young children to relate well together when playing with their toys or chasing each other around the playground, the DfE wants to indoctrinate them with adult concepts about homosexuality and gender dysphoria.

“It’s not about sex,” argued a sex and relationships ‘expert’ who I debated on RT tv. “It’s about children accepting that today families come in different forms.”

“Really?” I replied. “It’s on the tin. The clue is in the name: homo-sex-ual.” It’s about same-sex sexual relationships. And teaching primary school children about homosexual relationships and about people changing their sex must inevitably sexualise them out of their childhood innocence.

Mind you, none of this is new. In 2010 Birmingham City Council sent to every primary school in the city a programme called Challenging Homophobia In Primary Schools (CHIPS). It was a “teaching resource aimed at children from Reception to Year 6” and, as intended, the programme necessarily had to educate the young children about homosexuality in order to then ‘challenge’ them about their supposed ‘homophobia’. Yet Reception children can be as young as four.

CHIPS was simply pro-gay propaganda, disguised as an anti-bullying programme, that was clearly intended to sexualise pre-pubescent children and promote homosexuality among them.

The Secretary of State for Education claims his new SRE regulations have a very different purpose. “They are mainly about teaching children kindness,” he is reported to have told a radio audience yesterday. If so, he cannot wonder why the public think politicians are liars and untrustworthy.

But all is not lost. As often, UKIP comes to the rescue. Every UKIP manifesto, from the much-lauded 2015 general election manifesto to Gerard Batten’s Interim Manifesto published last September, has pledged to completely ban sex/LGBT education in primary schools.

It’s yet another reason why UKIP is called the common sense party with common sense policies.

This article was first published by Kipper Central on 26th February

Rape Gangs: Labour’s Poisonous Cocktail

“He threatened… he would ‘bounce me from Rochdale to Westminster’,” Simon Danczuk, told the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse last October. The former Rochdale Labour MP was talking about  the current Rochdale Labour MP, Tony Lloyd.

At the time Tony Lloyd was Labour’s Police & Crime Commissioner for Manchester. So what had wrung this threat of violence from the city’s then senior representative of law and order?

“Tony did not want the abuse of children linking with the Asian Muslim community,” Danczuk continued, “because it could have an adverse electoral impact for him in the election for Police Commissioner and Labour more generally.”

85% of Muslims vote Labour, so the party’s fear of upsetting that community runs deep.

Jim Dobbin, the now deceased Labour MP for neighbouring Heywood & Middleton, promoted similar electoral self-interest according to Danczuk. “When the grooming scandal hit the town… (Dobbin) also told me not to link the issue to the Asian Muslim community because it would have an adverse electoral impact.”

This connection between Labour and the Muslim rape gangs, who for decades and with impunity have raped tens of thousands of under-age white girls, is apparent right across the North and Midlands. It is no coincidence that local authorities where notorious gangs have openly peddled their foul trade – Rochdale and Rotherham, Newcastle and Oxford, Bradford and Blackburn – are frequently Labour fiefdoms. For reasons of electoral expediency Labour simply denied what was happening under their noses and in plain sight.

This denial provokes a furious response when challenged. Sarah Champion, the courageous Labour MP for Rotherham since 2012, exposed the deception at the heart of her party last year when she wrote in a newspaper column that “Britain has a problem with British Pakistani men raping and exploiting white girls”. The response was swift and draconian from both the Corbynite Hard Left and the Labour-supporting Muslim community.

First she was forced to resign from Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow cabinet, with the party leader insisting “We are not going to blame… or demonise any particular group.”

Then she received death threats after a Leftist ‘racial justice’ organisation JUST Yorkshire claimed Muslims were being racially abused as a result of her remarks, and accused her of “inciting and inviting hatred against minorities”. Scotland Yard’s counter-terrorism unit increased her personal risk level and she was provided with extra police security.

And she is currently facing deselection by the Labour Party, as the Rotherham branch of Momentum and senior members of the town’s Council of Mosques have combined to get her removed as the party’s candidate for the next general election.

It isn’t only electoral self-interest that persuaded Labour to ignore or deny the abuse. Political correctness too was playing its malign part.

When Labour MP Anne Cryer first identified the grooming issue and approached the authorities that have a duty of care in her Keighley constituency – a town since dubbed the “grooming gang capital” of Britain – she found her party colleagues and Labour-supporting media like The Guardian viewed her actions as racist and wouldn’t back her. “At the time I was dealing with this, 2002-04, political correctness was playing a big part,” she said. “The Guardian at that time hardly mentioned these things… because it was so politically correct.”

The Labour MP for Rotherham until 2012, Denis MacShane, admitted there was “a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat”, and confessed that “as a true Guardian reader and liberal leftie” he himself didn’t want to investigate the issue either.

The sexualisation of children and normalisation of unlawful underage sex has been pushed and promoted for decades by ‘liberal lefties’ in the Labour Party and elsewhere, and has facilitated the rape gang atrocities too according to a number of Serious Case Reviews.

In the early eighties senior Labour figures – former deputy party leader Harriet Harman, current Shadow Minister for Work and Pensions Jack Dromey and minister in Tony Blair’s government Patricia Hewitt – all ran a civil liberties group, now called ‘Liberty’, that promoted its affiliate, the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange, which campaigned for the reduction or abolition of the age of consent. Hewitt herself proposed the age of consent should be reduced to 10 from the current 16. Harman even argued that sexually explicit child pornography should not be considered indecent unless it could be proved that the child had suffered harm.

Thirty years later Labour-run Birmingham City Council pioneered the introduction of the gay-propaganda CHIPS programme to pre-pubescent primary school children, in which children as young as five learnt about intimate same-sex relationships. This was soon followed by Labour-dominated Durham Council and others across the country.

Labour has not been alone in promoting the sexualisation of children and the normalisation of unlawful underage sex of course, but the party has been in the forefront of liberalising attitudes through, for instance, the Blair government’s strategy for tackling teenage pregnancies, 9% of which were attributed to girls under 16. Children were viewed as capable of taking their own lifestyle and life-changing decisions, parents were aggressively sidelined and sexual health centres together with school nurses freely provided condoms, sexual advice and even abortions to teens of all ages without judgement or question.

Following the 2013 Oxford rape gang convictions where seven Muslim men were found guilty of sexual violence, sadism, rape and assault on six white girls all of whom were underage, the key question arose: Why wasn’t something done by local agencies and authorities with a duty of care for the children; why didn’t they intervene to protect the children when they knew what was happening?

The Oxford Serious Case Review concluded:

“There was…an acceptance of a degree of underage sexual activity that reflects a wider societal reluctance to consider something ‘wrong’. This involves ascribing to young teenagers a degree of self-determining choice which should be respected. […] In a nutshell, a child may be judged mature enough to get contraceptives to have sex with an adult at an age when they are deemed in law unable to give consent to the sex itself. It is no wonder there was confusion and a lack of confidence in taking action.” 

In other words, when a vulnerable underage girl was known to be having unlawful sex with older men, the Oxford authorities did not intervene because they viewed her as exercising her free lifestyle choice.

Similar observations can be found in the 2013 Rochdale Serious Case Review. And the 2014 Rotherham Inquiry found bluntly that “children as young as 11 were deemed (by the authorities) to be having consensual intercourse when in fact they were being raped and abused by adults.”

It is no coincidence of course that Oxford City, Rochdale and Rotherham councils are all run by the same party.

Labour’s poisonous cocktail of electoral self-interest, political correctness and promotion of underage sex has facilitated the rape with impunity of many thousands of vulnerable girls across the country.

The victims should obtain justice and reparation from the Labour-run authorities for their culpable failure to protect them.

And UKIP must hold the Labour Party to account for its culpable failure at next May’s local elections.

This article was first published on 5th November by UKIP Daily and Kipper Central 

Rape Gangs: The Worst Social Crime For 200 Years

The decades-long and nationwide rape of many thousands of underage girls – and some boys – by brutal and depraved predominantly Muslim rape gangs is, in my view, the worst social crime for 200 years.

Decades-long?

Jayne Senior, the local whistle-blower who exposed the extent of child abuse in Rotherham, says that the gangs were certainly operating in the town in the 1990s.

Researcher and writer Peter McLoughlin – whose book Easy Meat is obligatory reading for those who want to understand the horror – reckons the first public reference to rape gang activity was in the Birmingham area in 1988, but he is confident that with further research grooming by Muslim men could be traced back even to the 70s.

Thanks to its Freedom of Information requests, the Sunday Mirror investigation into Telford child grooming obtained documents showing that the abuse epidemic was first recorded internally by the authorities as long ago as 1981.

So the rape gangs have existed in the UK, publicly unidentified and unacknowledged by the authorities, for up to four decades.

Nationwide?

It’s a mistake to think that the grooming gangs are restricted just to working-class northern towns like Rotherham, Rochdale, Bury, Newcastle and Bradford.

Telford in Shropshire has a massive ongoing grooming scandal and returns a Tory MP. Oxford, with its dreaming spires but also its infamous ‘shag wagon’ rape gang, is hardly a declining industrial city.

“Any area that says it does not have a problem with grooming gangs simply isn’t looking for it,” said the Chief Executive of Newcastle City Council in February following Northumbria Police’s extensive Operation Sanctuary investigation into child sexual abuse. Chief Constable Steve Ashman concurred: “There is every likelihood that this is happening in every town and city across the country,” he said.

Indeed it is. The cancer has spread countrywide. Even the quintessentially English south coast port of Plymouth, where Sir Francis Drake allegedly played bowls while the Spanish Armada approached, with its cobbled streets and famous Mayflower Steps from which Pilgrim Fathers set off for the new world in 1620, has suffered from grooming gang activities. Eight men were arrested on rape and drugs charges in December 2016: Salar Mohmood, Ibriam Ibryam, Samir Jewa, Mahmoud Kadar, Dana Rahem, Jasem Waly, Mozafar Kalepana and Xhimi Boko.

And the well-heeled and historic market town of Banbury in leafy Oxfordshire has had its own resident grooming gang too.

Many thousands of victims?

Sarah Champion, Rotherham’s MP since 2012, has labelled the rape gangs a “national disaster” and claimed there are “hundreds of thousands… up to a million victims of exploitation nationwide… girls in the process of being groomed.” She bases her calculations not only on her Rotherham experience but also from contacts she has had from across the country. As evidence she cited “four big cases each with a couple of thousand (girls)” that were occurring in the “smallest towns”.

In 2015 then Prime Minister David Cameron saw the issue as sufficiently serious and widespread to call it a “national threat” – although he did not publicly quantify that threat. 

Sampling can help us make reasonable estimates about the phenomenon:

In June 2017 police in the small mill town of Keighley announced they were investigating 179 new rape crimes, with 168 suspects and “more than 100 victims.” Keighley has a population of 51,000 and such an extensive track record of rape gang activity – publicly identified by the courageous Ann Cryer when she was local MP from 1997 to 2010 – that it caused the town to be named the nation’s “child grooming capital”. Extrapolating across the whole country solely, and therefore very conservatively, from the police’s 100 newly identified victims as a proportion of Keighley’s total population, there are at least 129,000 victims nationwide.

Oxford, has a population of 152,000 and 373 identified victims according to the Safeguarding Board’s Serious Case Review – but undoubtedly with many other hidden and unidentified children who have suffered too. Extrapolated across the UK, these cautious SCR figures indicate that there are at least 162,000 victims nationally.

Telford, has a population of 170,000 and, from the Sunday Mirror investigation, 1,000 victims. Extrapolated, this would imply 388,000 victims nationally.

Professor Jay’s Rotherham report “conservatively” identified 1,400 child abuse victims in the town during the period 1999 to 2013, out of a total population of around 255,000. Jayne Senior reckons the figure should be “at least 1,700… and could be up to 2,000 victims”. If we assume the real figure is Senior’s 1,700, then 0.07% of the total Rotherham population suffered at the hands of the rape gangs during those 14 years. More, of course, have suffered before and since.

Extrapolating the Rotherham figures across the UK, the national figure would be 440,000 victims.

From the above and other evidence it is reasonable to assume that there are now at least a quarter of a million (250,000) child victims of rape gangs across the UK – a national atrocity that is simply beyond words.

In a future article I intend to identify local authorities’ complicity in the atrocity, and how they sacrificed the nation’s children on the high altars of political correctness and electoral expediency.

This article was first published by UKIP Daily on 15 October and by Kipper Central on 16th October, 2018

Truth-telling About Rape Gang ‘Holocaust’, UKIP Conference 2018

In my capacity as UKIP Spokesperson for Families & Children, I gave a platform speech at the party’s annual conference in Birmingham on 21st/22nd September.

I focused on the largely unacknowledged and shameful rape gang scandal, which I referred to as a ‘holocaust of our daughters’.

The Daily Mirror said my comments were incendiary  while ITV’s report reckoned I was accused of being “alarmist“.

But in my view ‘holocaust’ is a valid description of the immense scale and violent depraved depths of the crime against under-age children across the country, and the UKIP audience seemed to agree.

If you wish you can make up your own mind by viewing the speech here .

CSA And Rape Gangs: Honour Survivors’ Courage

The two most electrifying speakers at the #SurvivorsFirst rally of child sexual abuse sufferers at Rochdale were both Scots.

Dave Sharp, one of the organisers, told how he had been raped, drugged, shut in coffins, hanged by the neck and trafficked to Ireland while at a Catholic boys’ residential school in Fife. After years of drug and alcohol abuse to numb the pain, he became a Christian, turned his life around and now seeks out and supports other victims of CSA through the organisation he founded, Seek And Find Everyone (SAFE).

I have heard Dave speak before. I was the more shocked when I heard Shazia Hobbs for the first time.

Shazia is the Glasgow-born daughter of a Pakistani immigrant father and a Scottish mother who was her father’s second wife. Brought up to go to mosque and, at 18, forced into marriage to a much older Muslim man who she met for the first time on her wedding night, she rebelled and left her Pakistani family and community to live amongst white Scottish Glaswegians.

Having seen the Pakistani Muslim community from the inside, she now speaks publicly about the physical and sexual abuse of women and children within it.

As she stood in the shadow of Rochdale’s renowned Victorian Gothic town hall with its massive clock tower, Shazia attacked Muslim female politicians Naz Shah, Labour MP for Bradford West, and former Tory party chairman Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, for complaining loudly about Islamophobia in the white community while being mute about the oppression of women and children in their own where, Shazia says, CSA and FGM are rife.

Truth hurts. Through her exposures she has upset some Muslims and their useful idiots on the Left, so she now has a panic button installed in her home and is under police protection. She lives in fear for her own safety but refuses to be silenced.

I admired her courage; it was a privilege to listen to her. Her speech was also a useful balance to the dominant Rochdale narrative about white English girls being raped by gangs of Pakistani Muslim men, for which the town has become notorious.

It was because of these infamous rape gangs that #SurvivorsFirst chose Rochdale for its first CSA survivors’ rally.

The #SurvivorsFirst movement is an umbrella body that comprises a number of grassroots CSA organisations such as SAFE, Shatterboys UK and Parents Against Grooming UK. It was launched in Hyde Park at the end of July where we heard heart-felt stories from sexually abused people who, with help from the organisations, had bravely moved on from seeing themselves as damaged ‘victims’ to identifying themselves as more hopeful ‘survivors’. The launch was an emotional experience.

On Saturday we marched through Rochdale town centre holding #SurvivorsFirst banners aloft. We stopped at the location of the notorious Smith Street toilets where boys in Council care in the 80s had been sexually exploited by paedophiles directly under the watch of Council child care officers. We threw roses into the River Roch in memory of abused children and those who have subsequently taken their own lives.

And we heard more compelling speeches from survivors and their help organisations.

UKIP was strongly represented. Katie Fanning from the NEC was everywhere chatting to survivors and putting photos up on Facebook. Members of UKIP Rochdale branch helped steward the rally. And I was welcomed onto the speakers’ platform as UKIP’s Families & Children spokesperson.

In my speech I insisted that, to help survivors get closure, rigorous justice should be both done and seen to be done. Those at senior level in large organisations like the BBC, the church and local authorities who have a duty of care towards children in their charge and who had deliberately turned a blind eye to CSA taking place, should be sacked, prosecuted and if appropriate jailed.

I also pledged UKIP would ensure that offending institutions would fund programmes of therapy, mentoring and medical help for their CSA victims, in order to help them recover from their trauma.

The commitments were well received and UKIP will be invited to the next rally. The organisers reckon that 200,000 people watched the event live on social media, which they reckon will help get the public behind their new movement.

The courage of the survivors in speaking up in public and working to get their lives back is impressive. They deserve UKIP’s full support.

This report was first published by UKIP Daily on 28th August and a similar report was published by Kipper Central on 27th  August

A Tale Of Two Judges

“If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, “the law is an ass – an idiot.”

Mr Bumble’s dismissal of the legal system in Charles Dickens’ story of Oliver Twist came immediately to mind – but with the word ‘law’ amended to ‘judge’ – when I read last week that Britain’s most senior family court judge has argued that we should celebrate the demise of the traditional family unit and the growth of alternative domestic arrangements.

Indeed, “callously asinine” and “heartlessly idiotic” are more accurate descriptions of the outspoken judge’s views.

Sir James Munby is not the first of the UK’s American-style politicised judges who in recent years have jettisoned judicial neutrality in favour of further promoting the prevailing liberal agenda.

Neither is he the first to reject the intact two-parent family and to celebrate new flexible forms of ‘family’ that have developed – or been imported – over the past half-century.

The modern family has been defined as ‘a group of people who share a fridge’. Certainly an array of relationships is now on offer as ‘family’ – single parents, gay couples, threesomes (or ‘thruples’), temporary marriages, open and monogamish marriages, group and polygamous marriages. In California unsurprisingly, a man married his dog.

The government helped the decline of traditional marriage when it announced during the 2013 gay marriage debate that adultery would no longer be grounds for divorce. Undermining the traditional promise of faithfulness ‘till death do us part’, Baroness Stowell told the House of Lords in effect that modern couples are welcome to ignore their marriage vows and to get out and play the field. Legally, adultery is not now an issue.

But research confirms what common sense indicates, that on average children do best – socially, educationally, and health-wise – when they are nurtured by both birth parents who are committed to each other by marriage. This is not to say that single parents, for instance, cannot do a good job; after WW2 many widows were forced to bring up their children alone.

But children flourish best where there is stability, commitment and the unique love-bond that only both birth parents can give. When parents split, and when new partners are introduced into the home, the adverse impact on children’s sense of security and wellbeing is immense.

Tellingly, a previous family court judge has come to exactly the opposite conclusions to Sir James, and was virtually forced off the judges’ bench for saying so:

Sir Paul Coleridge served on the Family Division bench for fourteen years, from where day by day he saw the misery of fractured families and broken relationships. Instead of celebrating the resulting new forms of family, he twice spoke out publicly about the tragic decline of marriage, the peripheral relevance of same-sex marriage and the scourge of family breakdown; and in 2013 he was disciplined by the Judicial Conduct Office for action “incompatible with his judicial responsibilities”.

He promptly resigned and set up the Marriage Foundation to tackle this “national tragedy” by promoting long-lasting stable relationships within marriage. The organisation now has growing influence as it publishes reliable research into the personal and social cost of fracturing families and the benefits of long-term stable marriages.

Sir James of course will not be disciplined by the JCO because, unlike Sir Paul, he speaks slickly into the prevailing politically-correct anti-marriage zeitgeist.

But two opposite-sex married parents who prioritise their children’s wellbeing has, for good reason, been the healthy norm for flourishing families and the bedrock of a successful society for millennia, at least in Britain.

If we listen to Sir James, children will continue to suffer and society will continue its descent into selfish, isolated and dystopian individualism.

If we listen to Sir Paul, we can rescue wholesome family life and produce healthy nurturing social relationships, through which the next and succeeding generations will prosper.

Guess which judge issues the better judgement…

This post was first published by Kipper Central on 7th June

Another night in Rochdale

It was a filthy wet evening in Rochdale.

I was concerned, as I had arranged for two key people in the growing grassroots anti-grooming movement to meet and to go out on patrol around the town centre.

One of them is Billy Howarth, Rochdale born and bred, a working class man and proud of it. When he discovered that his young daughter was being groomed and the authorities failed to act, he went ballistic. If they wouldn’t do something to protect his daughter and girls like her, he would; he promptly set up Parents Against Grooming UK.

One of PAGUK’s activities is to run parent patrols around the town to warn children and young teenagers about the sexual abusers that inhabit public places like the bus station. As I saw when he took me out on patrol before Christmas, he knows everyone in the town, has a good relationship with the youngsters, and on their behalf has become a sharp thorn in the side of authorities and perpetrators alike.

For instance former Islamic preacher Abdul Rauf is one of the nine infamous Rochdale groomers who were convicted in 2012. He has since been released from prison back into the community. When Billy saw Rauf waiting in a car outside a local school recently – the same school that two of Rauf’s victims had attended – he went up to the car, verbally accosted him, filmed him and forced him to move on.

The other is Mohan Singh, the formidable founder of the Sikh Awareness Society, which he set up to counter the grooming of Sikh girls who, like the English victims, are despised kuffar (non-believers) to the Muslim paedophiles. Mohan’s work was the subject of a BBC Inside Out documentary: “The hidden scandal of sexual grooming of young Sikh girls by Muslim men.” You can view it here.

I first met Mohan earlier this year at his Birmingham home. I straight away realised that he sees the grooming gang atrocities with a penetrating clarity. “It’s an Islamic issue that’s occurring on an industrial scale across the country,” he told me. “Politically-correct authorities won’t deal with it properly until middle England wakes up and forces them to.”

With his long beard, orange turban, chola (Sikh warrior dress) and kirpan (Sikh ceremonial knife), I knew Mohan would cut a colourful and imposing figure out on parent patrol around the grey wet streets of Rochdale. The purpose of the patrols is educational and peaceful so there is almost never trouble. But also, loitering paedophiles know not to mess with Billy. Neither, I knew, would they mess with Mohan.

I introduced the two men to each other in the car park of Rochdale’s world-renowned Victorian Gothic town hall under its massive clock tower. It was a first meeting between these key activists that should strengthen the growing grassroots anti-grooming movement and result in some fruitful cooperation.

As we sheltered from the sheeting rain in a nearby hostelry, others joined us: John Clynch from the Democratic Football Lads Alliance; Dan Wolstencroft from Shatter Boys UK, one of the few organisations that supports male sexual abuse survivors; Tricky Powell from the pioneering group Women Against Grooming; and Rob Mudd and Tommy Barnes from UKIP Rochdale branch who recently ran a hard-hitting local election campaign over Labour’s responsibility for the grooming scandal.

Vlogger Phil Davies, aka Red Pill Phil, came along to film the event too.

It was a useful gathering of grassroots anti-grooming groups; contacts were made and plans were laid for future initiatives together.

In the event, the foul weather was so bad that the street patrol itself was a damp squib. We set off around Rochdale’s empty streets, got wet, but saw few people.

But overall, participants were encouraged. “At last people are seeing through the political correctness that has hidden the grooming gang threat,” said UKIP’s Rob Mudd. “Parents and grandparents are increasingly worried about the safety of their children, but there’s hope for them in the growing grassroots movement here in Rochdale and across the country.”

This article was first published on 29th May by Kipper Central

Alfie – Owned By The State

The courageous parents of little Alfie, Tom Ward and Kate James, have discovered the totalitarian fact that their child belongs first to the State.

Silly us. We thought that we live in a democracy where the government and its minsters (note the word: to minister means ‘to support’, ‘to help’ or ‘to care for’) are elected by the people for the people; where public servants are employed to, er, serve the public; and where the publicly-funded State institutions like the Armed Services and the National Health Service are there to – well, the name is on the tin.

But no longer: in 2018 Britain the idiots run the asylum and the servants are now the masters.

It’s been a long time coming. Since WW2 the tentacles of the State have spread ever wider and deeper so that now, whatever the problem, the knee-jerk response is to call on the government to solve it and pay for it.

So when Labour MP Carolyn Harris tragically lost her eight year old son and found the burial expenses too demanding for her domestic budget, she naturally turned to the prime minister for help. Mrs May, being a compassionate if childless woman, opened her bottomless purse of public money to set up the Children’s Funeral Fund (CFF). Now no grieving parents – no matter how wealthy – will ever again have to pay to bury their child.

“In the raw pain of immediate loss, it cannot be right that grieving parents should have to worry about how to meet the funeral costs for a child they hoped to see grow into adulthood,” explained Tory Mrs May empathetically.

“This is a simple piece of dignity for bereaved families across the country,” agreed Jeremy Corbyn for Labour, offering words of care and compassion.

As a result the State further increases its involvement in the most unifying and private areas of family life. Whereas in an earlier age a wider circle of grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins would have rallied round, made sacrifices and together fulfilled family responsibilities towards the grieving parents, they no longer have to.

The government has taken over a natural function of the family, the fairy godmother in Downing Street has given away more tax-payers’ funds, and Uncle Bill and Aunt Mavis are free to put down the deposit on their flyaway holiday or new car.

But State generosity with our cash comes at a democratic price – and here’s the rub. State involvement invariably brings with it the power to regulate our decisions and control our lives. To qualify for the CFF grant, grieving parents are required to use only permitted funeral directors and proper places and forms of burial or cremation.

It cannot be otherwise; it is good government to direct and hold to account those who receive public funds.

But, at £10 million pay-out a year, the CFF is merely a gnat bite to both government and society.

The National Health Service is a different being and on a different planet. Although born through the same spirit of compassion and service – Lord Soper called the 1946 formation of the NHS “the noblest domestic act of government in the 20th century and one of the most transparently Christian political acts in British history”- and with the same need to demonstrate good government, it has now grown into a massive £125 billion a year State behemoth whose reach extends into all areas of society.

And as a result bureaucracy has taken over from compassion, efficiency of management has replaced vocation of service, and through the NHS there has been dramatic expansion in the State’s power to regulate our personal decisions and control our family lives.

Which is what baby Alfie’s dad and mum, Tom Ward and Kate James, discovered when they passed their sick baby into the arms of the Alder Hey Children’s Hospital & NHS Foundation Trust. The hospital management decided they knew what was best for the little boy – to let him die – so they closed ranks, exercised their court-backed authority and refused to release the child back to his desperate parents.

The private affair became a public battle as Tom, Kate and their legal advisers faced up to the full power of the State – the legal system as well as the hospital authorities – in front of local supporters and global media alike.

The Pope appealed on their behalf, the Italian government granted citizenship to Alfie, and a fully-equipped air ambulance was on stand-by to fly the lad to reputable hospitals in Rome or Genoa.

But the servants are the masters now. The hospital management morphed into a monster, refused under any circumstances to grant the parents’ wishes and did not consider themselves obliged to publicly explain their reasons further than claiming a vague “best interests of the child”.

Alfie manifestly belonged to the State.

In the end a crushed and defeated Tom and Kate threw in the towel. They appealed for supporters outside the hospital to go home and said they would instead work with the hospital team “to provide our boy with the dignity and comfort he needs.”

Tragically, Alfie has now passed away. Our hearts go out to Tom and Kate as they grieve their loss in private.

Ironically, to add insult to injury, the State will now give them cash for their baby’s burial by way of the newly-created Children’s Funeral Fund.

A few days ago former Steven Woolfe MEP launched an ‘Alfie’s Law’ initiative through which parents like Tom and Kate will be able to choose an independent qualified advocate to act on their behalf in order to correct the power imbalance between themselves and the State.

I understand too that, in the light of the similar Ashya King and Charlie Gard cases, Lord Alton is working on a comparable initiative in the House of Lords.

Tom and Kate have lost their battle with the authorities, but their heroic action must serve as a wake-up call to parents and to democrats everywhere.

It’s time to grab back our rights from an increasingly totalitarian State, and UKIP must be at the front of the fight.

This article was first published on 3rd May by UKIP Daily