What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
Braverman's top priority in the Home Office is to get the tabloids to replace the shorthand of ‘Asian grooming gangs’ with 'British Pakistani grooming gangs'.
Well it would
1. Be more accurate
and
2. Be less unfair to "Asian males" - from China, Japan, Taiwan, etc etc - who have never been convicted of this crime
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
Nobody of sound mind and good character will be replying to this.
OMG you know the answer, don't you?
I’ve never forgotten your description of that bar in Bangkok with the glass ceiling, where Japanese tourists stare upwards at young Thai women, dancing around with no knickers, while dressed as schoolgirls.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
Sounds like a job for AI.
Would help process and prioritise the issues, but if it follow up resources aren't there, they're not there.
Like the Laughing Gas Ban, this is another "Bad things (prevention by saying so)" law.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since September, especially about mental health (in particular overtly and age inappropriate sexual conversation). They're still on waiting lists for even preliminary assessment appointments.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
Sounds like a job for AI.
Would help process and prioritise the issues, but if it follow up resources aren't there, they're not there.
Like the Laughing Gas Ban, this is another "Bad things (prevention by saying so)" law.
If only it were so easy.
Mandatory reporting under legal sanction is standard, in financial services. For stuff involving just money.
Why not the same rules for other crimes, in other places?
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
In Rotherham, on one occasion, the Police caught a gang in the act. Literally.
They arrested the girl for being drunk in a public place, IIRC
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since September, especially about mental health (in particular overtly and age inappropriate sexual conversation). They're still on waiting lists for even preliminary assessment appointments.
I don't know about your local authority but I have direct involvement in this area and I can tell you this that every single incident which has been flagged gets followed up and checked. And this is not in a well-funded authority.
I suspect it's more about attitude than resources.
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
Not a single person has responded positively to my suggestion about dealing with gentrification - get out there, sell some drugs, rob some people.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
Is it only 80 miles from Glasgow to Dundee? If asked I'd have guessed much further.
Why isn’t Glasgow closer to Dundee after 16 years of SNP misrule? Humza must explain.
In some respects they are close:
Dundee City had the highest age-standardised drug misuse death rate of all local authority areas (45.2 per 100,000 population for the 5-year period 2017-2021), followed by Glasgow City (44.4)
Presumably only to the voters of Scotland rather than the residents of distant tax havens?
Oh do keep up - I’ve been living in the U.K. for 18 months. Is that the best you’ve got?
Apologies, not been keeping up with your whereabouts, that would be a bit weird and stalky. Still not a voter in Scotland though, despite your torrential posting on your second favourite subject?
Also, "I've been a tax evader for all but the last 18 months" doesn't quite work as a chat line, does it?
Actually, one of the many tedious Yoon bleats regards the generous taxation outwith the Scottish Soviet, so technically rUK could be described as a tax haven. I’m sure there’ll always be a spare room for Roddy Dunlop QC at Schloss Carlotta.
You seem to be in a relentlessly bad mood these last weeks. Weird
Oh dear, my reputation as PB’s Pollyanna at risk?
Istr acerbic was an adjective you once applied to me, in amongst the Nit, anti English, racist, paedo patter. Nothing has changed in that regard.
You've never been a ray of sunshine, more a Scotsman with a grievance, and I have always found it easy to distinguish between these two thing, however you used to leaven the remorseless bitterness and Anglophobic inferiority complex with wry anecdotes, stories of your past, stuff about selling hats to Geo Galloway, which I rather enjoyed. These seem to have disappeared of late
Also, you have a mordant wit, which you unfortunately hiding. I trust it will return
There was a chat not so long ago about female sports pundits and commentators. I said I didn't think most of them were any good, but singled out Alison Mitchell from TMS for high praise
I'd like to add Vicki Sparks to that (still short) list
I had R5 on in the van yesterday and heard some of her commentary of the Chelsea Villa game. I hadn't realised quite how good she is
She's as fluent, knowledgeable and passionate as any of the other commentators
She could host MOTD
She makes my ears bleed. I’ve never heard such a terrible voice and at such volume - she clearly knows her stuff but when radio is a medium that relies on sound only it’s impossible to listen to.
I think she has lovely and very clear voice
She's very shouty and over excitable. A sort of lady football version of Ian Robertson.
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
Railway carriage?
Railway carriage?!
I'll accept "sheltered life" and "embittered commuter" as answers, but...
Railway? Carriage?
Yes
"Catering to all fetishes, each of the 22 rooms were inspired by a different time and place. A pirate room featured a mechanical boat swing and water jets that sprayed clients and courtesans as they did the dirty. An Orient Express room allowed patrons to live out their fantasies of sex on a train inside a replica of a bouncing carriage with a railway soundtrack."
I once wrote a Gazette article about the great Paris brothels of the Belle Epoque and spent a week doing research in the City of Love. I even tracked down King Edwards's Notorious Three Way love seat - I found the last auctioneer to sell it in the 1990s, to a "private buyer", and he was tempted to introduce me to the owner so I could see it.... but in the end he said No. However when I asked if "the seat is still being used" he smiled and said "Oui, naturellement"
True story
Mentioned in last night's Edward VII documentary on Channel 5, I think.
Braverman's top priority in the Home Office is to get the tabloids to replace the shorthand of ‘Asian grooming gangs’ with 'British Pakistani grooming gangs'.
Well it would
1. Be more accurate
and
2. Be less unfair to "Asian males" - from China, Japan, Taiwan, etc etc - who have never been convicted of this crime
India, Sri Lanka, Thailand as well.
Yes, Braverman is just stating uncomfortable facts. This problem is rooted in (but not entirely limited to) gangs of British Pakistani Muslim males. That is simply the case. And there are elements of racism and misogyny at work. Calling the girls "white whores", "kaffir slags", "white meat". This is all in the various reports. No one is making this up
Moreover, it is estimated that TENS of thousands of girls - maybe more than a hundred thousand - have been abused, raped, tortured, even occasionally murdered. It is absolutely the greatest social scandal of British post war history.
I hope that future generations will look back at our feeble cowardice and grotesque complacency, our total inability to confront the issue head on, with brutal contempt. We will deserve it
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
You write with great and authentic authority. Thank you.
It's a long, long, long while since I frequented the late YabYum club in Amsterdam, so I know not of such affairs.
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
Railway carriage?
Railway carriage?!
I'll accept "sheltered life" and "embittered commuter" as answers, but...
Railway? Carriage?
Yes
"Catering to all fetishes, each of the 22 rooms were inspired by a different time and place. A pirate room featured a mechanical boat swing and water jets that sprayed clients and courtesans as they did the dirty. An Orient Express room allowed patrons to live out their fantasies of sex on a train inside a replica of a bouncing carriage with a railway soundtrack."
I once wrote a Gazette article about the great Paris brothels of the Belle Epoque and spent a week doing research in the City of Love. I even tracked down King Edwards's Notorious Three Way love seat - I found the last auctioneer to sell it in the 1990s, to a "private buyer", and he was tempted to introduce me to the owner so I could see it.... but in the end he said No. However when I asked if "the seat is still being used" he smiled and said "Oui, naturellement"
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Interesting juxtaposition of enthusing over brothels, which we all know are full of trafficked young girls often of different cultures, whilst condemning Grooming gangs.
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
There is a further level of gentrification when an area gets so wealthy the local landlords drive away all the chain coffee shops, and bring in bespoke Amish jewellers and independent sherry sellers and specialists in Greek cheeses and the like
It's happened in Marylebone High Street (the De Walden Estate) and I see it has also happened in Store Street Bloomsbury (the Russell Estate)
Perhaps it could be called Maryleboning
"Ah, I see your high street has been Maryleboned. Lucky you"
Is it only 80 miles from Glasgow to Dundee? If asked I'd have guessed much further.
Why isn’t Glasgow closer to Dundee after 16 years of SNP misrule? Humza must explain.
In some respects they are close:
Dundee City had the highest age-standardised drug misuse death rate of all local authority areas (45.2 per 100,000 population for the 5-year period 2017-2021), followed by Glasgow City (44.4)
Presumably only to the voters of Scotland rather than the residents of distant tax havens?
Oh do keep up - I’ve been living in the U.K. for 18 months. Is that the best you’ve got?
Apologies, not been keeping up with your whereabouts, that would be a bit weird and stalky. Still not a voter in Scotland though, despite your torrential posting on your second favourite subject?
Also, "I've been a tax evader for all but the last 18 months" doesn't quite work as a chat line, does it?
Actually, one of the many tedious Yoon bleats regards the generous taxation outwith the Scottish Soviet, so technically rUK could be described as a tax haven. I’m sure there’ll always be a spare room for Roddy Dunlop QC at Schloss Carlotta.
You seem to be in a relentlessly bad mood these last weeks. Weird
Oh dear, my reputation as PB’s Pollyanna at risk?
Istr acerbic was an adjective you once applied to me, in amongst the Nit, anti English, racist, paedo patter. Nothing has changed in that regard.
You've never been a ray of sunshine, more a Scotsman with a grievance, and I have always found it easy to distinguish between these two thing, however you used to leaven the remorseless bitterness and Anglophobic inferiority complex with wry anecdotes, stories of your past, stuff about selling hats to Geo Galloway, which I rather enjoyed. These seem to have disappeared of late
Also, you have a mordant wit, which you unfortunately hiding. I trust it will return
Well, you used to be ***** and ****** and ******* and *****, and are still also ******. Things change but mysteriously stay the same.
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
Railway carriage?
Railway carriage?!
I'll accept "sheltered life" and "embittered commuter" as answers, but...
Railway? Carriage?
Yes
"Catering to all fetishes, each of the 22 rooms were inspired by a different time and place. A pirate room featured a mechanical boat swing and water jets that sprayed clients and courtesans as they did the dirty. An Orient Express room allowed patrons to live out their fantasies of sex on a train inside a replica of a bouncing carriage with a railway soundtrack."
I once wrote a Gazette article about the great Paris brothels of the Belle Epoque and spent a week doing research in the City of Love. I even tracked down King Edwards's Notorious Three Way love seat - I found the last auctioneer to sell it in the 1990s, to a "private buyer", and he was tempted to introduce me to the owner so I could see it.... but in the end he said No. However when I asked if "the seat is still being used" he smiled and said "Oui, naturellement"
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Interesting juxtaposition of enthusing over brothels, which we all know are full of trafficked young girls often of different cultures, whilst condemning Grooming gangs.
Interesting how you focus on my historical knowledge of the famous Tolerated Houses of pre-WW2 Paris, while completely ignoring the rape and abuse of maybe 100,000 girls in the UK, happening right now, mainly by British Pakistani Muslim males
I watched Treasures of the World last night with Bettany Hughes. It featured one of my favourite places - Oman. I was aware of the frankincense trade and the fabulous geology but I did not know of its historic role in the development of copper. Furthermore they have a rock type that absorbs carbon dioxide and are planning a project that will take out the equivalent of the annual output of Germany and France combined. Hope it works.
I watched Treasures of the World last night with Bettany Hughes. It featured one of my favourite places - Oman. I was aware of the frankincense trade and the fabulous geology but I did not know of its historic role in the development of copper. Furthermore they have a rock type that absorbs carbon dioxide and are planning a project that will take out the equivalent of the annual output of Germany and France combined. Hope it works.
I have personally gathered frankincense - which is just dried resin - from the gnarled trees of the Empty Quarter in Oman, under the burning Arabian sun
It sounds much more exciting than it is. You drive ten hours to get there, see some fucked up old trees, drive back. They don't call it the Empty Quarter for nothing
"Russian channels are saying there was an explosion in a cafe in St. Petersburg where well-known Russian mil blogger/combatant Vladlen Tatarsky was holding an event. There are reports that he was killed. "
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
There is a further level of gentrification when an area gets so wealthy the local landlords drive away all the chain coffee shops, and bring in bespoke Amish jewellers and independent sherry sellers and specialists in Greek cheeses and the like
It's happened in Marylebone High Street (the De Walden Estate) and I see it has also happened in Store Street Bloomsbury (the Russell Estate)
Perhaps it could be called Maryleboning
"Ah, I see your high street has been Maryleboned. Lucky you"
Surely, the critical point is where Guardian journalists can’t afford it.
"Russian channels are saying there was an explosion in a cafe in St. Petersburg where well-known Russian mil blogger/combatant Vladlen Tatarsky was holding an event. There are reports that he was killed. "
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
As suggested years ago, they should tackle the gangs for whatever they can get them for, like Al Capone's income tax. Note that in your linked report, these cases have been reported to the police, so the government mandating reporting (subject to consultation) is neither here nor there.
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
Not a single person has responded positively to my suggestion about dealing with gentrification - get out there, sell some drugs, rob some people.
Is it something I said?
Many years ago when I first moved here it was a very pleasing mix of drug users and IRA pubs. And just a week or two ago a 'Kimchi and Poetry Library' opened up.
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
Railway carriage?
Railway carriage?!
I'll accept "sheltered life" and "embittered commuter" as answers, but...
Railway? Carriage?
Yes
"Catering to all fetishes, each of the 22 rooms were inspired by a different time and place. A pirate room featured a mechanical boat swing and water jets that sprayed clients and courtesans as they did the dirty. An Orient Express room allowed patrons to live out their fantasies of sex on a train inside a replica of a bouncing carriage with a railway soundtrack."
I once wrote a Gazette article about the great Paris brothels of the Belle Epoque and spent a week doing research in the City of Love. I even tracked down King Edwards's Notorious Three Way love seat - I found the last auctioneer to sell it in the 1990s, to a "private buyer", and he was tempted to introduce me to the owner so I could see it.... but in the end he said No. However when I asked if "the seat is still being used" he smiled and said "Oui, naturellement"
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Interesting juxtaposition of enthusing over brothels, which we all know are full of trafficked young girls often of different cultures, whilst condemning Grooming gangs.
I expect that there was not much trafficking in the high class places. These were well-paid courtesans.
In general, I think the medieval Church was right to treat prostitution as a necessary evil, and to regulate it.
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
Railway carriage?
Railway carriage?!
I'll accept "sheltered life" and "embittered commuter" as answers, but...
Railway? Carriage?
Yes
"Catering to all fetishes, each of the 22 rooms were inspired by a different time and place. A pirate room featured a mechanical boat swing and water jets that sprayed clients and courtesans as they did the dirty. An Orient Express room allowed patrons to live out their fantasies of sex on a train inside a replica of a bouncing carriage with a railway soundtrack."
I once wrote a Gazette article about the great Paris brothels of the Belle Epoque and spent a week doing research in the City of Love. I even tracked down King Edwards's Notorious Three Way love seat - I found the last auctioneer to sell it in the 1990s, to a "private buyer", and he was tempted to introduce me to the owner so I could see it.... but in the end he said No. However when I asked if "the seat is still being used" he smiled and said "Oui, naturellement"
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Interesting juxtaposition of enthusing over brothels, which we all know are full of trafficked young girls often of different cultures, whilst condemning Grooming gangs.
I expect that there was not much trafficking in the high class places. These were well-paid courtesans.
In general, I think the medieval Church was right to treat prostitution as a necessary evil, and to regulate it.
Yes, posh people's brothels are obviously fine and dandy places staffed after adverts on LinkedIn and rigorous background checks. Completely different to downmarket ones.
"Russian channels are saying there was an explosion in a cafe in St. Petersburg where well-known Russian mil blogger/combatant Vladlen Tatarsky was holding an event. There are reports that he was killed. "
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
Not a single person has responded positively to my suggestion about dealing with gentrification - get out there, sell some drugs, rob some people.
Is it something I said?
Many years ago when I first moved here it was a very pleasing mix of drug users and IRA pubs. And just a week or two ago a 'Kimchi and Poetry Library' opened up.
The place has gone to the dogs I tell you.
IRA pubs - ha, you urban hippy.
We drank in an authentic Loyalist bar (including in our group some actual Irish Catholics). This provided endless fun. Especially when the American Plastic Paddy put a bunch of money in the collecting tin. She had managed not to notice it was all a bit Protestant…
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Far, far from it. You think I don't know there are grooming gangs active and want to pretend otherwise? Why the fuck would I do that? What would be my motivation? I actually have worked in this area. I've read the reports. Not just the conclusions. Rotherham was some time ago. All procedures have been changed. That's why we know about so much of this. More abuse still takes place within families. Often nice, white middle class ones. The question is what do we do about it? The government's mandatory reporting is about 15 years overdue. And is still as good as useless if there aren't the resources to follow it up.
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
There is a further level of gentrification when an area gets so wealthy the local landlords drive away all the chain coffee shops, and bring in bespoke Amish jewellers and independent sherry sellers and specialists in Greek cheeses and the like
It's happened in Marylebone High Street (the De Walden Estate) and I see it has also happened in Store Street Bloomsbury (the Russell Estate)
Perhaps it could be called Maryleboning
"Ah, I see your high street has been Maryleboned. Lucky you"
Surely, the critical point is where Guardian journalists can’t afford it.
“I hear the high street is Post Guardian”
“Yup”
Better or worse than when Sunday Times journos can't afford it?
It was when my friends and I began composing a simpering personal statement just to rent a flat that it finally clicked for me: Britain’s rental market is broken. “Hello! We are Laura, Matt and Katie, three professional sharers all working in the media,” we told the landlord, after a prompt from the estate agent that we needed to stand out from the competition with a Ucas-style covering letter...
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since September, especially about mental health (in particular overtly and age inappropriate sexual conversation). They're still on waiting lists for even preliminary assessment appointments.
My wife is fairly recently retired, but that sounds pretty similar to her experience in a large primary school in a quite socially deprived area.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Far, far from it. You think I don't know there are grooming gangs active and want to pretend otherwise? Why the fuck would I do that? What would be my motivation? I actually have worked in this area. I've read the reports. Not just the conclusions. Rotherham was some time ago. All procedures have been changed. That's why we know about so much of this. More abuse still takes place within families. Often nice, white middle class ones. The question is what do we do about it? The government's mandatory reporting is about 15 years overdue. And is still as good as useless if there aren't the resources to follow it up.
"It was quite some time ago" was just an unfortunate phrase, then. Hmm. Fair enough
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
Railway carriage?
Railway carriage?!
I'll accept "sheltered life" and "embittered commuter" as answers, but...
Railway? Carriage?
Yes
"Catering to all fetishes, each of the 22 rooms were inspired by a different time and place. A pirate room featured a mechanical boat swing and water jets that sprayed clients and courtesans as they did the dirty. An Orient Express room allowed patrons to live out their fantasies of sex on a train inside a replica of a bouncing carriage with a railway soundtrack."
I once wrote a Gazette article about the great Paris brothels of the Belle Epoque and spent a week doing research in the City of Love. I even tracked down King Edwards's Notorious Three Way love seat - I found the last auctioneer to sell it in the 1990s, to a "private buyer", and he was tempted to introduce me to the owner so I could see it.... but in the end he said No. However when I asked if "the seat is still being used" he smiled and said "Oui, naturellement"
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Interesting juxtaposition of enthusing over brothels, which we all know are full of trafficked young girls often of different cultures, whilst condemning Grooming gangs.
I expect that there was not much trafficking in the high class places. These were well-paid courtesans.
In general, I think the medieval Church was right to treat prostitution as a necessary evil, and to regulate it.
Yes, posh people's brothels are obviously fine and dandy places staffed after adverts on LinkedIn and rigorous background checks. Completely different to downmarket ones.
Who is naked Tory MP referred to in @mailonsunday who was stuck in a brothel at 4am with no clothes. There is lurid speculation and its def’ not Boris. .
Massage parlours, aye. Houses divided into apartments for, ahem, single ladies in Warren Street or Bayswater or maybe even Shepherd's Market
Flat sharing Romanian girls in Wood Green. Yup. Saunas? Yup
But proper rococo-and-champagne, dungeon chamber and pretend railway carriage, chaise-longue, caviar, asparagus-soup and Edwardian kingly three way fellatio love seat brothels??
None, that I know of
Railway carriage?
Railway carriage?!
I'll accept "sheltered life" and "embittered commuter" as answers, but...
Railway? Carriage?
Yes
"Catering to all fetishes, each of the 22 rooms were inspired by a different time and place. A pirate room featured a mechanical boat swing and water jets that sprayed clients and courtesans as they did the dirty. An Orient Express room allowed patrons to live out their fantasies of sex on a train inside a replica of a bouncing carriage with a railway soundtrack."
I once wrote a Gazette article about the great Paris brothels of the Belle Epoque and spent a week doing research in the City of Love. I even tracked down King Edwards's Notorious Three Way love seat - I found the last auctioneer to sell it in the 1990s, to a "private buyer", and he was tempted to introduce me to the owner so I could see it.... but in the end he said No. However when I asked if "the seat is still being used" he smiled and said "Oui, naturellement"
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Interesting juxtaposition of enthusing over brothels, which we all know are full of trafficked young girls often of different cultures, whilst condemning Grooming gangs.
I expect that there was not much trafficking in the high class places. These were well-paid courtesans.
In general, I think the medieval Church was right to treat prostitution as a necessary evil, and to regulate it.
Yes, posh people's brothels are obviously fine and dandy places staffed after adverts on LinkedIn and rigorous background checks. Completely different to downmarket ones.
Have you ever been in a brothel??
No, but we're awaiting your review of the top 5 in next week's Spectator.
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
There is a further level of gentrification when an area gets so wealthy the local landlords drive away all the chain coffee shops, and bring in bespoke Amish jewellers and independent sherry sellers and specialists in Greek cheeses and the like
It's happened in Marylebone High Street (the De Walden Estate) and I see it has also happened in Store Street Bloomsbury (the Russell Estate)
Perhaps it could be called Maryleboning
"Ah, I see your high street has been Maryleboned. Lucky you"
Surely, the critical point is where Guardian journalists can’t afford it.
“I hear the high street is Post Guardian”
“Yup”
Better or worse than when Sunday Times journos can't afford it?
It was when my friends and I began composing a simpering personal statement just to rent a flat that it finally clicked for me: Britain’s rental market is broken. “Hello! We are Laura, Matt and Katie, three professional sharers all working in the media,” we told the landlord, after a prompt from the estate agent that we needed to stand out from the competition with a Ucas-style covering letter...
Seeing as we are talking about our favourite drinks, can I just recommend the Marks and Spencer own brand (but actually Lustau: a great sherrymaker) Palo Cortado sherry
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Far, far from it. You think I don't know there are grooming gangs active and want to pretend otherwise? Why the fuck would I do that? What would be my motivation? I actually have worked in this area. I've read the reports. Not just the conclusions. Rotherham was some time ago. All procedures have been changed. That's why we know about so much of this. More abuse still takes place within families. Often nice, white middle class ones. The question is what do we do about it? The government's mandatory reporting is about 15 years overdue. And is still as good as useless if there aren't the resources to follow it up.
"It was quite some time ago" was just an unfortunate phrase, then. Hmm. Fair enough
Perhaps it was in hindsight. It wasn't meant to minimise any of it at all. But to emphasise that all training and procedures are now seen through the prism of Rotherham. That's why so many more grooming gangs are now being uncovered. I'm going to stop talking about this topic now. I've never mentioned it on this forum before, as it's a bit too close to the bone for me, and I didn't think I could keep my emotions in check and would start rowing with folk. And so I have. So I'll cut it out now and re-impose silence.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Far, far from it. You think I don't know there are grooming gangs active and want to pretend otherwise? Why the fuck would I do that? What would be my motivation? I actually have worked in this area. I've read the reports. Not just the conclusions. Rotherham was some time ago. All procedures have been changed. That's why we know about so much of this. More abuse still takes place within families. Often nice, white middle class ones. The question is what do we do about it? The government's mandatory reporting is about 15 years overdue. And is still as good as useless if there aren't the resources to follow it up.
"It was quite some time ago" was just an unfortunate phrase, then. Hmm. Fair enough
Perhaps it was in hindsight. It wasn't meant to minimise any of it at all. But to emphasise that all training and procedures are now seen through the prism of Rotherham. That's why so many more grooming gangs are now being uncovered. I'm going to stop talking about this topic now. I've never mentioned it on this forum before, as it's a bit too close to the bone for me, and I didn't think I could keep my emotions in check and would start rowing with folk. And so I have. So I'll cut it out now and re-impose silence.
I sensed personal anguish which I why I said Fair Enough. It was just the wrong phrase: understood
You do sound quite stressed and I have sympathy for anyone in education dealing with the huge overhang of nightmares produced by covid/lockdown etc
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
There is a further level of gentrification when an area gets so wealthy the local landlords drive away all the chain coffee shops, and bring in bespoke Amish jewellers and independent sherry sellers and specialists in Greek cheeses and the like
It's happened in Marylebone High Street (the De Walden Estate) and I see it has also happened in Store Street Bloomsbury (the Russell Estate)
Perhaps it could be called Maryleboning
"Ah, I see your high street has been Maryleboned. Lucky you"
Surely, the critical point is where Guardian journalists can’t afford it.
“I hear the high street is Post Guardian”
“Yup”
Better or worse than when Sunday Times journos can't afford it?
It was when my friends and I began composing a simpering personal statement just to rent a flat that it finally clicked for me: Britain’s rental market is broken. “Hello! We are Laura, Matt and Katie, three professional sharers all working in the media,” we told the landlord, after a prompt from the estate agent that we needed to stand out from the competition with a Ucas-style covering letter...
We’ve identified on here 2 different trajectories for gentrification: the independent shopsy one when an area becomes trendy, and the chain cafes when an area becomes more regularly visited but not so trendy.
I’d posit it’s to do with the relative levels of business letting costs and rates on the one hand, and housing on the other.
When house prices rise to posh levels but footfall on the high street / suburban centre remains limited and commercial rents low, you get the trendy independent shops. As seen in Brockley or Nunhead around here.
When commercial rents rise due to increased footfall while housing remains somewhat affordable, you get the chains coming in. See Lewisham town centre or Woolwich.
Finally when both housing and shop rents become very expensive you get the posh but less trendy independents and the expensive mini chains. High end fashion shops, caviar outlets, Michelin star chasing restaurants. Dulwich village our closest example.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Far, far from it. You think I don't know there are grooming gangs active and want to pretend otherwise? Why the fuck would I do that? What would be my motivation? I actually have worked in this area. I've read the reports. Not just the conclusions. Rotherham was some time ago. All procedures have been changed. That's why we know about so much of this. More abuse still takes place within families. Often nice, white middle class ones. The question is what do we do about it? The government's mandatory reporting is about 15 years overdue. And is still as good as useless if there aren't the resources to follow it up.
"It was quite some time ago" was just an unfortunate phrase, then. Hmm. Fair enough
Perhaps it was in hindsight. It wasn't meant to minimise any of it at all. But to emphasise that all training and procedures are now seen through the prism of Rotherham. That's why so many more grooming gangs are now being uncovered. I'm going to stop talking about this topic now. I've never mentioned it on this forum before, as it's a bit too close to the bone for me, and I didn't think I could keep my emotions in check and would start rowing with folk. And so I have. So I'll cut it out now and re-impose silence.
I sensed personal anguish which I why I said Fair Enough. It was just the wrong phrase: understood
You do sound quite stressed and I have sympathy for anyone in education dealing with the huge overhang of nightmares produced by covid/lockdown etc
Good luck
Cheers. I got back into frontline education, which I originally came from, as I thought it would be less stressful than child protection. It is. But not by the amount I'd imagined. Just can't not know what you already know you see.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Far, far from it. You think I don't know there are grooming gangs active and want to pretend otherwise? Why the fuck would I do that? What would be my motivation? I actually have worked in this area. I've read the reports. Not just the conclusions. Rotherham was some time ago. All procedures have been changed. That's why we know about so much of this. More abuse still takes place within families. Often nice, white middle class ones. The question is what do we do about it? The government's mandatory reporting is about 15 years overdue. And is still as good as useless if there aren't the resources to follow it up.
"It was quite some time ago" was just an unfortunate phrase, then. Hmm. Fair enough
Perhaps it was in hindsight. It wasn't meant to minimise any of it at all. But to emphasise that all training and procedures are now seen through the prism of Rotherham. That's why so many more grooming gangs are now being uncovered. I'm going to stop talking about this topic now. I've never mentioned it on this forum before, as it's a bit too close to the bone for me, and I didn't think I could keep my emotions in check and would start rowing with folk. And so I have. So I'll cut it out now and re-impose silence.
Seeing as we are talking about our favourite drinks, can I just recommend the Marks and Spencer own brand (but actually Lustau: a great sherrymaker) Palo Cortado sherry
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
Sherry has been the biggest bargain in the Wine world since it became unfashionable in the US and UK in about 1990. It is also largely unfashionable in Spain, drunk little outside its area of production.
A white burgundy or claret of the same general quality as a £30 sherry would be £150.
Of course, none of this is any use unless you happen to like the stuff.
Jerez is pleasant, if rather obviously run down these days. Worth a stop on the way from Seville to Cadiz.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all. For the record I support mandatory reporting. It already exists in practice. I spend more time on CPOMS than on marking.
In Rotherham the social services boasted, in internal emails, of destroying evidence, so they would face no action.
Yes but. That was years ago. If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out. Also. Who exactly are "social services"? You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
See the police - the “wrong” facts don’t get reported. Entering a report in the system against the wishes of management would be an outright declaration of war.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Absolutely nobody checks what I enter into the system. That's the problem. We've been raising causes for concerns about children since
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
It will be interesting to see what Labour does on the proposed Bill.
There is, as you say, the dog whistle about British-Pakistani gangs. How does Labour react to that? Factually - when it comes to grooming gangs as opposed to child abuse in general - the evidence is there. Does Labour accuse the Government of racism? Probably not going to well received in the towns involved. I suspect Labour will make muted criticism but make clear to the British-Pakistani communities (which are key to its vote in many seats eg Batley and Spen) that it will be amended if they win power.
However, there is another angle here. Where this Bill is really targeted at is Labour's middle class public sector block - the social workers, teachers and those who deal with children in related areas. What it's threatening to do is target directly this very influential part of Labour's voting bloc by threatening them with the sack or prison.
From a policy standpoint, it's actually good that people who kept silent because they were more concerned about being accused of racism and / or their political views now run personal risk. From a political viewpoint, it could be quite successful.
Threatening social workers and teachers with the sack or prison? Is that the free market response to desperately short staffed professions? Still. Anything to get the Tories re-elected is far more important than the welfare of children after all.
If you deliberately turn your eyes away from a child being abused for whatever reason, then you shouldn't be in the job. I would have thought that would be quite easy to understand.
It is. And it doesn't happen. What happens is stuff is reported endlessly and then there isn't the staffing, funding or will to prioritise anything. Nor even for anyone to read the entirety of CPOMS and join the dots. Because everyone's caseloads are way too high. I am on CPOMS reporting concerns every single day. Does anyone read them? Not until after a catastrophic event. Because the government isn't prepared to pay for it.
It is not a resource issue, it's the fact that managers in Rotherham deliberately ignored, and actually destroyed, evidence so they wouldn't have to deal with the issue. They had the information there, they could have acted on it and they chose not to.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
Sorry. But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation. Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago. Sorry I don't agree with you. If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
It is not "quite some time ago"
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
Far, far from it. You think I don't know there are grooming gangs active and want to pretend otherwise? Why the fuck would I do that? What would be my motivation? I actually have worked in this area. I've read the reports. Not just the conclusions. Rotherham was some time ago. All procedures have been changed. That's why we know about so much of this. More abuse still takes place within families. Often nice, white middle class ones. The question is what do we do about it? The government's mandatory reporting is about 15 years overdue. And is still as good as useless if there aren't the resources to follow it up.
"It was quite some time ago" was just an unfortunate phrase, then. Hmm. Fair enough
Perhaps it was in hindsight. It wasn't meant to minimise any of it at all. But to emphasise that all training and procedures are now seen through the prism of Rotherham. That's why so many more grooming gangs are now being uncovered. I'm going to stop talking about this topic now. I've never mentioned it on this forum before, as it's a bit too close to the bone for me, and I didn't think I could keep my emotions in check and would start rowing with folk. And so I have. So I'll cut it out now and re-impose silence.
I sensed personal anguish which I why I said Fair Enough. It was just the wrong phrase: understood
You do sound quite stressed and I have sympathy for anyone in education dealing with the huge overhang of nightmares produced by covid/lockdown etc
Good luck
I don't have any sympathy for anyone playing down an issue which has caused the sexual abuse of tens of thousands of children. Especially because the political elite appear to be happy to just let the media move on without addressing the problem. Where are the reforms? Where have the heads rolled? By any sensible logic, this should have been the biggest political issue of all over the last decade, but it has just been quickly swept under the carpet. It makes me seriously believe the people involved are being protected from high places.
Seeing as we are talking about our favourite drinks, can I just recommend the Marks and Spencer own brand (but actually Lustau: a great sherrymaker) Palo Cortado sherry
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
Sherry has been the biggest bargain in the Wine world since it became unfashionable in the US and UK in about 1990. It is also largely unfashionable in Spain, drunk little outside its area of production.
A white burgundy or claret of the same general quality as a £30 sherry would be £150.
Of course, none of this is any use unless you happen to like the stuff.
Jerez is pleasant, if rather obviously run down these days. Worth a stop on the way from Seville to Cadiz.
Seeing as we are talking about our favourite drinks, can I just recommend the Marks and Spencer own brand (but actually Lustau: a great sherrymaker) Palo Cortado sherry
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
Sherry has been the biggest bargain in the Wine world since it became unfashionable in the US and UK in about 1990. It is also largely unfashionable in Spain, drunk little outside its area of production.
A white burgundy or claret of the same general quality as a £30 sherry would be £150.
Of course, none of this is any use unless you happen to like the stuff.
Jerez is pleasant, if rather obviously run down these days. Worth a stop on the way from Seville to Cadiz.
Don’t forget my advice to drop the tiniest bit of dry sherry (ideally fino) into a bottle of cheap sparkling to give it a faux vintage champagne flavour.
This evening I’m returning to my favourite pre dinner rapid-impact drink, a basic freezing cold gin martini. Almost perfect for the chilly sunshine outside but the vermouth I got at Lidl is a little bit too sweet.
It would be fascinating to examine the global spread of languages in, say, the year 2500 (assuming the human race survives).
If there's an apocalyptic breakdown of technological civilisation there will be an ever-increasing myriad of languages, but if civilisation continues there will be just one global language - a variant of English.
Seeing as we are talking about our favourite drinks, can I just recommend the Marks and Spencer own brand (but actually Lustau: a great sherrymaker) Palo Cortado sherry
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
Sherry has been the biggest bargain in the Wine world since it became unfashionable in the US and UK in about 1990. It is also largely unfashionable in Spain, drunk little outside its area of production.
A white burgundy or claret of the same general quality as a £30 sherry would be £150.
Of course, none of this is any use unless you happen to like the stuff.
Jerez is pleasant, if rather obviously run down these days. Worth a stop on the way from Seville to Cadiz.
Sherry is totally a bargain. I entirely agree. I’m becoming slightly obsessed with finding the best (at the best price)
Also sweet wines. Last week as I sat in my family’s dynastic kitchen listening to my father dying upstairs I drank a smallish bottle of the marvellous Royal Tokaji Blue Label Puttonyas sweet wine. Magnificent
It was also exactly the right wine for the occasion. Such a Victorian scene
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
Braverman is a Trump understudy, alright.
What exactly is Trumpian about it?
Bad Facts
Ok, I'm going to have to ask: by 'Bad Facts' do you mean 'facts we don't want to hear' or 'falsehoods'. If the latter, Bad Facts is poor description - they are not facts at all but lies.
Seeing as we are talking about our favourite drinks, can I just recommend the Marks and Spencer own brand (but actually Lustau: a great sherrymaker) Palo Cortado sherry
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
Sherry has been the biggest bargain in the Wine world since it became unfashionable in the US and UK in about 1990. It is also largely unfashionable in Spain, drunk little outside its area of production.
A white burgundy or claret of the same general quality as a £30 sherry would be £150.
Of course, none of this is any use unless you happen to like the stuff.
Jerez is pleasant, if rather obviously run down these days. Worth a stop on the way from Seville to Cadiz.
You're right of course. There's become almost no choice or variation. I think the same is true of port, and Madeira has been astonishingly out of fashion for decades.
It's a dark thing though. If you want to buy good Port or Madeira it'll cost you as many arms and legs as you have. I don't know who's buying it.
It would be fascinating to examine the global spread of languages in, say, the year 2500 (assuming the human race survives).
If there's an apocalyptic breakdown of technological civilisation there will be an ever-increasing myriad of languages, but if civilisation continues there will be just one global language - a variant of English.
FFS.... How small-minded would it be for the UK to say we aren't going to use any words of Latin derivation because, well, we are no longer part of the Roman Empire...?
In the last election Finns Party rose two points when the election day votes were counted, this could be very close.
The polls have been calling a dead heat between the three leading parties for a while with all three around 20%. Last time they were split by less than 1%.
Not looking a good result for the Greens and Centre down a fraction.
I love listicles so I just asked ChatGPT to give me the 100 most important people of the 20th century.
The response is quite eccentric. Includes Sting, Greta Thunberg, and Isaac Bashevis Singer.
When did 'eccentric' become a synonym for 'shite'?
I buy into much of the hype about AI, but I confess to being a bit disappointed. I couldn’t use this list.
Another list of most important British politicians gave me Andrew Bonar Law twice, and when I pointed it out, ChatGPT just kind of went, “oh yeah”. (The list was also deficient in other, qualitative respects).
It’s definitely spring today. Chilly, but still and sunny with stirrings of growth in the garden and a warmth in the sun. First mow of the season.
I remember commenting about the late autumn pub Sunday sentiments in songs such as Gerry Rafferty’s Baker Street or David Gray’s Babylon. Very different on a spring Sunday before Easter. It’s time for jingly British indie music.
This weekend I’ve latched on to a quaint little group from Wigan called The Lathums. There’s nothing particularly ground breaking in their music but it’s nice, very springlike, and obviously from the North West (if you liked the Las you’ll like them). The most fun track on their latest album is called turmoil and it’s an absolute textbook pop ballad structure-wise. The sort of thing you’d study in GCSE music.
It would be fascinating to examine the global spread of languages in, say, the year 2500 (assuming the human race survives).
If there's an apocalyptic breakdown of technological civilisation there will be an ever-increasing myriad of languages, but if civilisation continues there will be just one global language - a variant of English.
FFS.... How small-minded would it be for the UK to say we aren't going to use any words of Latin derivation because, well, we are no longer part of the Roman Empire...?
I would have thought the primary cause of this Anglomania was American media, rather than anything British.
And technology which tends to be named in English, at least till the Académie Française can work out what it and absolutely no-one else wants to call a web server.
A banking friend tells me of his first visit to an Italian trading room where everyone spoke English all of the time in order to avoid expensive errors in translation when switching between languages.
It’s definitely spring today. Chilly, but still and sunny with stirrings of growth in the garden and a warmth in the sun. First mow of the season.
I remember commenting about the late autumn pub Sunday sentiments in songs such as Gerry Rafferty’s Baker Street or David Gray’s Babylon. Very different on a spring Sunday before Easter. It’s time for jingly British indie music.
This weekend I’ve latched on to a quaint little group from Wigan called The Lathums. There’s nothing particularly ground breaking in their music but it’s nice, very springlike, and obviously from the North West (if you liked the Las you’ll like them). The most fun track on their latest album is called turmoil and it’s an absolute textbook pop ballad structure-wise. The sort of thing you’d study in GCSE music.
What do you mean obviously from the North West, like the Las.
I would argue there was is audible difference between Liverpool and Manchester bands, the former being more melodic.
In the last election Finns Party rose two points when the election day votes were counted, this could be very close.
For those not familiar. NCP = Mainstream Conservatives. SDP = Social Democrats of PM Marin. Finns = Populist Right. Centre = As it says on the tin. Rural. Left = You can guess. Green = Ditto. CD = Christian Democrats. SPP = Swedish speakers. Move = Economic liberals.
SDP, Green, Left, Centre and Swedes are the incumbent government coalition. It looks like they'll get a majority of votes. However. Largest Party gets first dibs. Complicated by the fact that this is D'Hondt across 13 constituencies. So most votes doesn't necessarily equal most seats. Especially when this close.
What is Suella actually planning to do about “British Pakistani” grooming gangs?
We need a word for a dog whistle that everyone can totally hear.
Braverman is a Trump understudy, alright.
What exactly is Trumpian about it?
Bad Facts
Ok, I'm going to have to ask: by 'Bad Facts' do you mean 'facts we don't want to hear' or 'falsehoods'. If the latter, Bad Facts is poor description - they are not facts at all but lies.
When I did a course on modern sensitivities there was a whole section on Facts that are true, but mustn’t be used because they are Bad.
In the last election Finns Party rose two points when the election day votes were counted, this could be very close.
The polls have been calling a dead heat between the three leading parties for a while with all three around 20%. Last time they were split by less than 1%.
Not looking a good result for the Greens and Centre down a fraction.
Seems like the NCP, SDP and Finns are all up a couple of percent and Centre, Greens and smaller parties all down. Actually a good score for the SDP, but Marin will probably struggle to form a coalition, given NCP seem like they will top the poll.
It’s definitely spring today. Chilly, but still and sunny with stirrings of growth in the garden and a warmth in the sun. First mow of the season.
I remember commenting about the late autumn pub Sunday sentiments in songs such as Gerry Rafferty’s Baker Street or David Gray’s Babylon. Very different on a spring Sunday before Easter. It’s time for jingly British indie music.
This weekend I’ve latched on to a quaint little group from Wigan called The Lathums. There’s nothing particularly ground breaking in their music but it’s nice, very springlike, and obviously from the North West (if you liked the Las you’ll like them). The most fun track on their latest album is called turmoil and it’s an absolute textbook pop ballad structure-wise. The sort of thing you’d study in GCSE music.
Yes. I’m on top of Primrose Hill and it’s definitely spring. The sun has suddenly emerged. And the people. The soft wind is cold yet somehow unthreatening. It speaks in kindly words of warmth ahead
I love listicles so I just asked ChatGPT to give me the 100 most important people of the 20th century.
The response is quite eccentric. Includes Sting, Greta Thunberg, and Isaac Bashevis Singer.
When did 'eccentric' become a synonym for 'shite'?
I buy into much of the hype about AI, but I confess to being a bit disappointed. I couldn’t use this list.
Another list of most important British politicians gave me Andrew Bonar Law twice, and when I pointed it out, ChatGPT just kind of went, “oh yeah”. (The list was also deficient in other, qualitative respects).
I have found it similarly disappointing and prone to factual errors. It's pretty good at knocking out a sonnet on a subject of your choice in real time though; that's clever.
Ok sorry going to be mr angry here. Yes a the majority of child sexual abuse happens in the family and friends arena. The minority in the grooming gang arena
However the difference is the problem in the family arena is getting it reported and when it is the authorities deal with it.
In the grooming gang area it is reported and the authorities tend to ignore it because of cultural issues
It’s definitely spring today. Chilly, but still and sunny with stirrings of growth in the garden and a warmth in the sun. First mow of the season.
I remember commenting about the late autumn pub Sunday sentiments in songs such as Gerry Rafferty’s Baker Street or David Gray’s Babylon. Very different on a spring Sunday before Easter. It’s time for jingly British indie music.
This weekend I’ve latched on to a quaint little group from Wigan called The Lathums. There’s nothing particularly ground breaking in their music but it’s nice, very springlike, and obviously from the North West (if you liked the Las you’ll like them). The most fun track on their latest album is called turmoil and it’s an absolute textbook pop ballad structure-wise. The sort of thing you’d study in GCSE music.
What do you mean obviously from the North West, like the Las.
I would argue there was is audible difference between Liverpool and Manchester bands, the former being more melodic.
Which is why Wigan is the perfect synthesis. 17 miles from each. Big soul and house tradition.
It would be fascinating to examine the global spread of languages in, say, the year 2500 (assuming the human race survives).
If there's an apocalyptic breakdown of technological civilisation there will be an ever-increasing myriad of languages, but if civilisation continues there will be just one global language - a variant of English.
FFS.... How small-minded would it be for the UK to say we aren't going to use any words of Latin derivation because, well, we are no longer part of the Roman Empire...?
Unfinished business from yesterday, by the look of it.
Seeing as we are talking about our favourite drinks, can I just recommend the Marks and Spencer own brand (but actually Lustau: a great sherrymaker) Palo Cortado sherry
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
Sherry has been the biggest bargain in the Wine world since it became unfashionable in the US and UK in about 1990. It is also largely unfashionable in Spain, drunk little outside its area of production.
A white burgundy or claret of the same general quality as a £30 sherry would be £150.
Of course, none of this is any use unless you happen to like the stuff.
Jerez is pleasant, if rather obviously run down these days. Worth a stop on the way from Seville to Cadiz.
You're right of course. There's become almost no choice or variation. I think the same is true of port, and Madeira has been astonishingly out of fashion for decades.
It's a dark thing though. If you want to buy good Port or Madeira it'll cost you as many arms and legs as you have. I don't know who's buying it.
I am quite a fan of Madeira, polished by visiting the Island a number of times. It keeps very well when opened and is delicious alongside rich puddings such as at Christmas. Great value too.
Ok sorry going to be mr angry here. Yes a the majority of child sexual abuse happens in the family and friends arena. The minority in the grooming gang arena
However the difference is the problem in the family arena is getting it reported and when it is the authorities deal with it.
In the grooming gang area it is reported and the authorities tend to ignore it because of cultural issues
Ok Mr Angry, I am looking forward to your evidence to support that assertion.
It would be fascinating to examine the global spread of languages in, say, the year 2500 (assuming the human race survives).
If there's an apocalyptic breakdown of technological civilisation there will be an ever-increasing myriad of languages, but if civilisation continues there will be just one global language - a variant of English.
I'm not sure I would bet on that. Technology has made it possible for every language to be a global language.
It would be fascinating to examine the global spread of languages in, say, the year 2500 (assuming the human race survives).
If there's an apocalyptic breakdown of technological civilisation there will be an ever-increasing myriad of languages, but if civilisation continues there will be just one global language - a variant of English.
FFS.... How small-minded would it be for the UK to say we aren't going to use any words of Latin derivation because, well, we are no longer part of the Roman Empire...?
Unfinished business from yesterday, by the look of it.
Time to discuss reparations with the Italian government?
Seeing as we are talking about our favourite drinks, can I just recommend the Marks and Spencer own brand (but actually Lustau: a great sherrymaker) Palo Cortado sherry
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
Sherry has been the biggest bargain in the Wine world since it became unfashionable in the US and UK in about 1990. It is also largely unfashionable in Spain, drunk little outside its area of production.
A white burgundy or claret of the same general quality as a £30 sherry would be £150.
Of course, none of this is any use unless you happen to like the stuff.
Jerez is pleasant, if rather obviously run down these days. Worth a stop on the way from Seville to Cadiz.
You're right of course. There's become almost no choice or variation. I think the same is true of port, and Madeira has been astonishingly out of fashion for decades.
It's a dark thing though. If you want to buy good Port or Madeira it'll cost you as many arms and legs as you have. I don't know who's buying it.
Several Cambridge colleges sold off large amounts of Vintage Port in the early 90s when it fell out of fashion, and had to buy back in at higher prices ten years later.
There are some delightful LBVs at £15-£20 though. Niepoort for one.
Having recommended Jerez earlier, I must speak up for Porto. Delightful place to go, sensible climate, good hotels and restaurants these days too. Good for all budgets. Drink Vintage Port by the glass in the Taylor's English Rose Garden overlooking the river. Then take the train along the valley inland to the vineyards.
Comments
That was years ago.
If it is still happening now, then the Tories have had 13 years to sort it out.
Also. Who exactly are "social services"?
You are talking about managers not frontline social workers. They wouldn't have the admin privileges to remove anything.
Each time Home Sec has changed, since Rotherham, within minutes of the Home sec leaving the building, emails have been sent about pushing for a more “sensitive handling of the issue”.
A chap I know has been copying them offline to publish in his book, when he retired.
Like the Laughing Gas Ban, this is another "Bad things (prevention by saying so)" law.
If only it were so easy.
That's the problem.
We've been raising causes for concerns about children since September, especially about mental health (in particular overtly and age inappropriate sexual conversation). They're still on waiting lists for even preliminary assessment appointments.
Why not the same rules for other crimes, in other places?
- Was at a party last night and they had both Palestinian flags and Ukrainian flags up on the walls. Corbynism is dead.
- "Gentrification" is just a whiny way to say "much improved". We need a more specific word for when cool independent shops are priced out by Starbucks, however.
Did you not read the conclusions of the Rotherham report or have you just chosen to ignore them because it doesn't fit in with your views.
However, your answer gives a clue as to how Labour (depressingly) will deal with this. There will be some vague generic comments about it being terrible girls being abused before going onto a far more detailed commentary as to how this is a resource issue and it is cruel to target overworked public workers who are just trying to do their best.
They arrested the girl for being drunk in a public place, IIRC
I suspect it's more about attitude than resources.
Is it something I said?
But your patronising "did you not read the Rotherham report?" has closed down this conversation.
Yes I have, I've read all of them and far more than just the conclusions. I've been on endless very distressing training days too, and worked with some of the girls and boys involved too. They're all grown adults now because it was quite some time ago.
Sorry I don't agree with you.
If you think it's not a resource issue, well you're welcome to donate your expertise at the going rate to sort it all out.
Also, you have a mordant wit, which you unfortunately hiding. I trust it will return
Moreover, it is estimated that TENS of thousands of girls - maybe more than a hundred thousand - have been abused, raped, tortured, even occasionally murdered. It is absolutely the greatest social scandal of British post war history.
I hope that future generations will look back at our feeble cowardice and grotesque complacency, our total inability to confront the issue head on, with brutal contempt. We will deserve it
What people do in private is entirely there own affair unless it is illegal or impacts negatively on others.
It is still happening. There are multiple reports of it
"Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower
A former detective says the police and authorities are still failing to take the matter seriously and are continuing to let victims down"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/02/11/grooming-gangs-still-abusing-girls-decade-rochdale-scandal-says/#:~:text=Grooming gangs still abusing girls a decade after Rochdale scandal, says whistleblower,-A former detective&text=Child sex abuse perpetrated by,a new documentary has claimed.
"Children are still being sexually exploited by grooming gangs in all parts of England and Wales in the “most degrading and destructive ways”, a report has found."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/grooming-gangs-child-sex-abuse-b2004963.html
But you want to wish it all away. As ever. "It's all in the past, let's move on"
It's a long, long, long while since I frequented the late YabYum club in Amsterdam, so I know not of such affairs.
It's happened in Marylebone High Street (the De Walden Estate) and I see it has also happened in Store Street Bloomsbury (the Russell Estate)
Perhaps it could be called Maryleboning
"Ah, I see your high street has been Maryleboned. Lucky you"
It sounds much more exciting than it is. You drive ten hours to get there, see some fucked up old trees, drive back. They don't call it the Empty Quarter for nothing
"Russian channels are saying there was an explosion in a cafe in St. Petersburg where well-known Russian mil blogger/combatant Vladlen Tatarsky was holding an event. There are reports that he was killed. "
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1642559067133562880?s=20
“I hear the high street is Post Guardian”
“Yup”
The place has gone to the dogs I tell you.
In general, I think the medieval Church was right to treat prostitution as a necessary evil, and to regulate it.
We drank in an authentic Loyalist bar (including in our group some actual Irish Catholics). This provided endless fun. Especially when the American Plastic Paddy put a bunch of money in the collecting tin. She had managed not to notice it was all a bit Protestant…
That's the problem.
We've been raising causes for concerns about children since Far, far from it.
You think I don't know there are grooming gangs active and want to pretend otherwise?
Why the fuck would I do that? What would be my motivation?
I actually have worked in this area. I've read the reports. Not just the conclusions.
Rotherham was some time ago. All procedures have been changed. That's why we know about so much of this.
More abuse still takes place within families. Often nice, white middle class ones.
The question is what do we do about it?
The government's mandatory reporting is about 15 years overdue.
And is still as good as useless if there aren't the resources to follow it up.
It was when my friends and I began composing a simpering personal statement just to rent a flat that it finally clicked for me: Britain’s rental market is broken. “Hello! We are Laura, Matt and Katie, three professional sharers all working in the media,” we told the landlord, after a prompt from the estate agent that we needed to stand out from the competition with a Ucas-style covering letter...
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/26b24534-d098-11ed-85a8-caaa67d15364?shareToken=b882b8b7d17010dfe117e5afed1c6ad7
To be fair, they have a point.
There are 28 million households in the U.K.
There are 27 million dwellings in the U.K.
The Report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse
https://www.iicsa.org.uk/reports-recommendations/publications/inquiry/final-report/executive-summary.html
£8 a half bottle. It is totally superb. Rich yet dry, aromatic and intense, delicate and succulent
For comparison the only-slightly-better Lustau 30 year old VROS Palo Cortado costs £50 for a pint-bottle
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lustau-Year-Vors-Oloroso-Sherry/dp/B00Z6BU7BK
It wasn't meant to minimise any of it at all.
But to emphasise that all training and procedures are now seen through the prism of Rotherham. That's why so many more grooming gangs are now being uncovered.
I'm going to stop talking about this topic now.
I've never mentioned it on this forum before, as it's a bit too close to the bone for me, and I didn't think I could keep my emotions in check and would start rowing with folk.
And so I have.
So I'll cut it out now and re-impose silence.
You do sound quite stressed and I have sympathy for anyone in education dealing with the huge overhang of nightmares produced by covid/lockdown etc
Good luck
Polls close 6pm UK
https://areena.yle.fi/tv/suorat
https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/
https://vaalit.yle.fi/ev2023/tulospalvelu/en/
Gut feel is that Marin won't remain as PM, NCP or possibly Finns will be largest party.
This kicks off the spring election season, and May will be busy, with the UK locals on the 4th, Turkey on the 14th, and Greece on the 21st.
Thanks,
DC
I’d posit it’s to do with the relative levels of business letting costs and rates on the one hand, and housing on the other.
When house prices rise to posh levels but footfall on the high street / suburban centre remains limited and commercial rents low, you get the trendy independent shops. As seen in Brockley or Nunhead around here.
When commercial rents rise due to increased footfall while housing remains somewhat affordable, you get the chains coming in. See Lewisham town centre or Woolwich.
Finally when both housing and shop rents become very expensive you get the posh but less trendy independents and the expensive mini chains. High end fashion shops, caviar outlets, Michelin star chasing restaurants. Dulwich village our closest example.
No need to remind anyone on here of the complexities of Andorran politics of course.
A white burgundy or claret of the same general quality as a £30 sherry would be £150.
Of course, none of this is any use unless you happen to like the stuff.
Jerez is pleasant, if rather obviously run down these days. Worth a stop on the way from Seville to Cadiz.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhyrjbvDHT8
The response is quite eccentric. Includes Sting, Greta Thunberg, and Isaac Bashevis Singer.
*well, one English nationalist.
This evening I’m returning to my favourite pre dinner rapid-impact drink, a basic freezing cold gin martini. Almost perfect for the chilly sunshine outside but the vermouth I got at Lidl is a little bit too sweet.
NCP: 20.8%
SDP: 20.7%
Finns: 18.6%
Centre: 12.3%
Left: 8%
Green: 7.3%
CD: 4.4%
SPP: 3.8%
Move: 2%
Others: 1.9%
In the last election Finns Party rose two points when the election day votes were counted, this could be very close.
I'll be so pleased if I can complete it in time
It would be fascinating to examine the global spread of languages in, say, the year 2500 (assuming the human race survives).
If there's an apocalyptic breakdown of technological civilisation there will be an ever-increasing myriad of languages, but if civilisation continues there will be just one global language - a variant of English.
Also sweet wines. Last week as I sat in my family’s dynastic kitchen listening to my father dying upstairs I drank a smallish bottle of the marvellous Royal Tokaji Blue Label Puttonyas sweet wine. Magnificent
It was also exactly the right wine for the occasion. Such a Victorian scene
It's a dark thing though. If you want to buy good Port or Madeira it'll cost you as many arms and legs as you have. I don't know who's buying it.
Not looking a good result for the Greens and Centre down a fraction.
Another list of most important British politicians gave me Andrew Bonar Law twice, and when I pointed it out, ChatGPT just kind of went, “oh yeah”. (The list was also deficient in other, qualitative respects).
I remember commenting about the late autumn pub Sunday sentiments in songs such as Gerry Rafferty’s Baker Street or David Gray’s Babylon. Very different on a spring Sunday before Easter. It’s time for jingly British indie music.
This weekend I’ve latched on to a quaint little group from Wigan called The Lathums. There’s nothing particularly ground breaking in their music but it’s nice, very springlike, and obviously from the North West (if you liked the Las you’ll like them). The most fun track on their latest album is called turmoil and it’s an absolute textbook pop ballad structure-wise. The sort of thing you’d study in GCSE music.
A banking friend tells me of his first visit to an Italian trading room where everyone spoke English all of the time in order to avoid expensive errors in translation when switching between languages.
I would argue there was is audible difference between Liverpool and Manchester bands, the former being more melodic.
NCP = Mainstream Conservatives.
SDP = Social Democrats of PM Marin.
Finns = Populist Right.
Centre = As it says on the tin. Rural.
Left = You can guess.
Green = Ditto.
CD = Christian Democrats.
SPP = Swedish speakers.
Move = Economic liberals.
SDP, Green, Left, Centre and Swedes are the incumbent government coalition.
It looks like they'll get a majority of votes.
However. Largest Party gets first dibs.
Complicated by the fact that this is D'Hondt across 13 constituencies.
So most votes doesn't necessarily equal most seats. Especially when this close.
Ethnic patterns in crime was one of them.
But how precisely do you make such a dumb error?
My faith is flagging.
However the difference is the problem in the family arena is getting it reported and when it is the authorities deal with it.
In the grooming gang area it is reported and the authorities tend to ignore it because of cultural issues
There are some delightful LBVs at £15-£20 though. Niepoort for one.
Having recommended Jerez earlier, I must speak up for Porto. Delightful place to go, sensible climate, good hotels and restaurants these days too. Good for all budgets. Drink Vintage Port by the glass in the Taylor's English Rose Garden overlooking the river. Then take the train along the valley inland to the vineyards.