UKIP hypocrisy in exploiting child abuse for their PR stunts

8:27 pm - October 26th 2014

by Sunny Hundal    

      Share on Tumblr

UKIP have unveiled this poster as a PR stunt for a by-election


The response by the usual UKIP-faithful has been that I should be more outraged about child sexual abuse than the poster.

1) I have been writing about on of this kind of child sexual abuse (by gangs, usually of predominantly Pakistani-heritage men) for over ten years. Sometimes even at the risk of helping the BNP. I wrote two angry articles about the Rotherham scandal too. So don’t preach to me on what I should get angry about.

2) You can be very angry about child sex abuse without using it as a PR stunt to score political points. This is what UKIP are doing.

What’s more striking is UKIP hypocrisy.

UKIP MEPs have abstained on the issue of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children at the EU when it came up for a vote (thanks Gail)



And don’t say UKIP never turn up to vote at EU affairs, because they do.

They couldn’t bother to vote on legislation on child abuse at EU, but they’re now trying to score political points from it.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  

About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by

Story Filed Under: Blog ,Westminster

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Reader comments

Tony Blair ( On the Bulger case)said: “We hear of crimes so horrific they provoke anger and disbelief in equal proportions … These are the ugly manifestations of a society that is becoming unworthy of that name.” and this was a central plank of Labour`s general election campaign.

I daresay you were supportive of that load of illogical cobblers. which marked a dramatic new low in British politics.

In this case, which is not unique, the point was that a culture of “politically correct” fear was a factor in allowing the gang rape of white girls by Pakistani men to continue.
Had UKIP (who I do not support) been in power it would not have gone on, and for the young people in question, this is surely rather more germane than your recently acquired sensitivities about what material may be used by political Parties.
Would you rather it were politely forgotten?

I thought your articles were interesting by the way and at least the you engage with the new politics as it is.

It does not follow that an abstention in the EU is an indication of anything other than UKIP do not want the EU to make our laws. Would they not have been accused of being hypocritical if they had voted for an increase in EU powers.

Also given that the reason why there is an election in the first place is because the Labour-led leadership did nothing, the poster is totally relevant to that point.


The cheap quip would be to ask which side of Jimmy Saville’s family came from Pakistan, but, no doubt, you’ve heard them all.

This is a cheap trick because child-abuse/rape and the killing of white, black and Asian women has been going on for centuries. The Labour Party (who I do not support) have at least attempted to address this, I don’t see this as being very high on UKIP’s agenda.

Serial and child killers are all predominantly white male btw but I doubt if this will figure in UKIP’s literature.

I can think of a darn sight more than 1,400 reasons why I shouldn’t trust Labour.

“UKIP stooping so low that they’re using the sex abuse of children as a PR stunt.”

The abuse was covered up because of political ‘correctness’ therefore it’s a fair point to make. As though Labour don’t use emotive pictures of children when it comes to poverty etc.

UKIP may have abstained in the EU and I’m sure they had their reasons – but here’s the difference:

they weren’t hiding anything from the public.

Let’s not get anywhere as near as angry with UKIP as we should be getting with Labour. If the same thing had been happening in reverse with young Asian girls then we wouldn’t have heard the last of it from the Left.

Further to my comment at 4

UKIP weren’t hiding anything from the public and they certainly weren’t allowing crime of the worst sort to happen.

You really don’t get lower than some of the things that Labour have done.

6. junglecitizen

“The abuse was covered up because of political ‘correctness’ therefore it’s a fair point to make.”

Everyone speaks as if this were true, without even stopping to think about how it might have worked.

Surely if fear of the “PC brigade” were the reason the police did nothing, they would equally be totally ignoring other crimes committed by Pakistanis. In fact you’d expect the situation to be even worse for minor offences; and yet Pakistanis are prosecuted all the time for all sorts of things. This even happens with the involvement of “PC brigade” Labour local authorities (e.g. rent arrears, parking fines). It seems this “PC brigade” are oddly selective in the offences they allegedly cover up.

And also, if fear of the “PC brigade” was stopping prosecutions and investigations, because the people involved were scared of being called racist – well, that would be very strange. Why? Because as far as I can establish not a single mainstream publication – not one – since the story broke has decried the idea of prosecutions and investigations as racist.

So, if they were scared of the “PC brigade” they were scared of nothing, tilting at windmills. And yet the “PC brigade” are somehow to blame anyway. Seems to me more likely it’s cover for incompetence.

It’s as if I decided to behave in a racist manner in my job, got caught, and then blamed UKIP, claiming I feared they might demonise me as an enemy of the people in the Daily Mail otherwise. Even though they hadn’t done any such thing and most likely wouldn’t. Would that still be UKIP’s fault?

Jungle Citizen – Why do I think that this issue was viewed through the prism of political correctness ?

This crime had a racist element to it which made it so incendiary. The perpetrators were racially profiling their victims. There was also an imported cultural motivation behind it which made it ultra sensitive.

This is why the police and local authorities kept a lid on it, “Good God. The Daily Mail readers are going to backlash if this ever gets out !”

But the Daily Mail readers didn’t backlash – not in the way that some groups do: ie setting our cities on fire or blowing themselves up on buses when they don’t get their way. In this respect there had been tilting at windmills.

Now picture the reverse scenario. White men deliberately grooming Asian girls on our streets. How would the Left react ? Especially if it had been in a UKIP district.

By the way – I never used the term ‘PC brigade.’

The Daily Mail reader’s response (on this and other provocations) is to use the ballot box and for this he is pilloried. ‘Daily Mail reader’ has for too long been a pejorative term – demonising a significant strand of British opinion.

One had to be a UKIP supporter to fully understand the vicious and co-ordinated assault on Farage and his party – the likes of which we have never seen – during the EU elections, including by the Daily Mail I would hasten to add.


I am not here to change minds or to control thought, as seems to be the wont of Leftists (and I include the Tory front bench as being Leftist) I’m here merely to say why UKIP are making such headway.

People have been pushed too far. Their votes have been taken for granted for too long and their views have been oppressed and treated with contempt beyond endurance.

PS – I think the senior police and Labour ARE members of the ‘PC brigade’.

What they feared most was not the backlash of whites but handing ammunition to ‘racists’.

PPS – I don’t think the UKIP ‘stunt’ is anything like the Labour stunt of calling everyone racists at the drop of a hat. They’re still at it. A Tory minister in recent days for using the word ‘swamped’.

Was a time when ‘racist’ meant thinking a race inferior to one’s own and treating them so.

Now it means anything which doesn’t accord with Labour immigration policy.

How low is that ?

Am I expected to feel sorry for Labour now that someone is finally sticking the boot in on them ?


‘PS – I think the senior police and Labour ARE members of the ‘PC brigade’.

Whether this has any basis in fact I cannot tell, but the South Yorkshire Police, who are the force that covers the Rotherham area, have a long history of not representing working-class interests and covering-up facts. I wouldn’t use the Rotherham incidents as significant or representative of other areas.

Steve B 10

I am an ex police officer having served in central London 5 years in the ’80s to early ’90s.

I know the service to be insanely politically correct – particularly high ranking Bramshill officers. I still have contacts, go to reunions etc. Of my original group around 50% of have quit the service early, mainly because of the stifling regime that operated (I left because – quite frankly – I made a crap police officer and could not be a uniform carrier any longer.)

Sth Yorks police were not backward in coming forward when it came to giving white miners a good hiding and arresting them.

Of Hillsborough it beggars belief that the football club and its directors got away with so much and so did the hooligans who made rigid fencing a necessity. But let’s take the official view that the police might be criminally negligent with regard to white football fans in that instance. And allegedly telling tales about the ‘misconduct’ of white fans at the scene.

Then we have white underage girls being groomed and abused and it is assumed that they are slags and deserving of it.

Contrast this with the reticence and benefit of the doubt from police where there is a racial minority involved in crime and that which would have been categorised as racially discriminatory had it been committed by white men.

This attests to my belief that:

A) The police are obsessed with political correctness

B) That these men were not prosecuted because of that political correctness and because of senior officials’ fear of highlighting that racism isn’t a one way street – in fact I think (having been a NW London police radio operator for a while) that crime against white people has been the police’s dirty secret for decades.


I can understand your loyalty to the South Yorkshire Police but it wasn’t that force that gave white miners a good hiding, it was the good old Met. The strategy was to keep the local police away from the action on the basis that the majority of their area was mining communities and afterwards they still had to police the area. Btw, I’m an ex-miner who still lives in the same village and was part of the 1984 strike.

As far as Hillsborough goes, the fact that dozens of police officers were made to change their statements is, in itself, a
a sign of guilt. I do take your point about the other factors, if the police had come clean it would not have been so bad.

I have some sympathy with the police with regard to Rotherham in that the victims had been groomed to believe that they were in loving relationships and when many of the parent attempted to press charges, the girls would not co-operate.

I don’t agree that the lack of prosecutions were down to the PC brigade, otherwise how did dozens of Catholic priests get away with it even when their victims reported it to the police. And what about Saville and co?

PC is an over-used term which UKIP appear to be attempting to turn into political capital re; immigration and in doing so
covers over the widespread abuse of women and children at the hands of the indigenous population.

It was SY police who were sued for half a million pounds by the miners. Not the Met.

The Met police were officially branded ‘institutionally racist’ which affected the police throughout England. There doesn’t seem to be much evidence of institutional racism in Rotherham where SY constabulary were gifted the opportunity to vent their ‘prejudice’ if they had any.

Well, actually I think that they do have prejudice. I see no other explanation for them not doing acting in Rotherham other than that they are cowed by Political Correctness.

Catholics ? Mostly different countries for a start and certainly not thousands of children being molested in England. An awful lot of Leftists happen to be Catholic as it happens – including top ranking police officers, far more than Freemasons occupy senior ranks in fact.

Abuse of women and children in England is not generally ignored and nowhere is it on a systematically industrial scale along racial lines as it is in Rotherham.

I am not making villains of Asians – I’m making villains of the Leftists whose PC ideology allows things to fester and paralyses the police.

Let’s not also forget – where were the fathers ? The strong nuclear families ? The fathers that would have protected their daughters from predatory perverts ?

The politically correct destruction of the family (removal of fathers from the scene) can be attributed to the Left as well.

“Political correctness” is not a term which is over used. People are sick to death of it.

If any Leftist wants to understand the rise in UKIP I say look in the mirror.

I have no loyalty to SY police btw.

“#The Labour Party (who I do not support) have at least attempted to address this, I don’t see this as being very high on UKIP’s agenda.”

UKIP hasn’t been running most (any?) of the councils where the industrial scale abuse of children by grooming gangs took place under the nose of/with the connivance of local authorities. Labour has. If that’s Labour ‘attempting to address’ the problem, why do they have a worse record on this matter than any other party?


” I wouldn’t use the Rotherham incidents as significant or representative of other areas.”

The organised rape of 1400 schoolgirls counts as just a few ‘insignificant’ ‘incidents’?

As for other areas, a lot has already come out and there is a lot more coming out from other towns, with many more victims. Still, you can just put your head in the sand and treat those as insignificant incidents too, can’t you?

You’re not by chance a public sector employee, are you?

That’s Oldham. Then there is Manchester, Rochdale, Oxford, Peterborough, Bradford and Sheffield to name but a few.

If it had been UKIP or Tory or Lib Dem councils that had presided over the phenomenon of white grooming gangs abusing thousands of Asian girls, Sunny would have hit the roof and Labour would be going to town on it as evidence of a white racist plot. And they would have a damn good case for that.

But since it’s been overwhelmingly white girls and overwhelmingly abusers who are of Pakistani Muslim ancestry, Sunny and co would rather point the finger at ‘racist’ white society than the ethnic community and the public officials overwhelmingly responsible for industrialised abuse.

You have let parties like the BNP and UKIP capitalise on this because for so long it was covered up and fingers were pointed the other way rather than tackling it. the fact that people like steveb are still in the face of the horrifica evidence trying to downplay the extent or significance of this mass abuse shows a lot of people on the left still haven’t really learned anything, politically or morally. this ought to have brought on some soul-searching; instead you are carrying on with finger pointing, just as you were happily doing when Joyce Thacker was the hero who bloodied the nose of UKIP-supporting foster parents, as opposed to the public official who covered up the rape of children.

And no, I’m not going to vote for UKIP as a result of this or anything else, and I never intend to. But they are right on this in the sense that these horrors have given white parents bringing up female children in British towns plenty of good reason to be distrustful of Labour – as well as of local government and the police generally. You ought to be thinking about how to genuinely rectify that. Calling UKIP hypocrites is neither here nor there.


Have you genuinely misunderstood my comment or are you using a strawman argument? The South Yorkshire Police do not have a good record of working in the interests of the working-class, and you will find the majority (if not all) of the victims in Rotherham were vulnerable girls from working-class backgrounds. What is significant is that most of Labours’ seats cover the working-class heartlands. Said police are also very slow in dealing with matters of domestic violence against women, they aren’t the only force for that matter.

So if you want to make political capital about my use of the word ‘significance’ perhaps you also need to understand the implication of both the gender and class of the victims. It’s also significant that it was also young, working-class and vulnerable girls who were also the victims of Saville and co.

You might not be intending to vote for UKIP but you are taking that party’s simplistic and distorted analysis of the widespread child abuse which has been ignored for decades.

“So if you want to make political capital about my use of the word ‘significance’”

I am not remotely interested in making ‘political’ or any other ‘capital’ out of your comments. I don’t represent any party, though it’s clear enough that you feel very defensive about Labour, despite the shocking record of Labour councils in allowing this scale of abuse. I simply thought your remarks were crass and you still haven’t explained why the Rotherham ‘incidents’ are not significant. They were on a mind-boggling scale.

” It’s also significant that it was also young, working-class and vulnerable girls who were also the victims of Saville and co.”

What do you mean ‘also significant’? You’ve said the Rotherham abuse was NOT significant. For myself I think both the scale of Saville’s abuse and the Rotherham abuse are very significant.

This Website is So, So, So anti White British. If you speak out against others that are not caucasian you are labelled a hypocrite, racist or other equally bad things.

I have read posts on here where people really abuse others that have commented reasonably on subjects of immigration or other cultures. This website is full of people that hate the truth. Comment or speak out on this website in an innocent way regarding matters such as this, immigration or other cultures and you will get nowhere and in time face vulgar abuse.

Perhaps the former police officer will know, but it seems to me that some time around the mid-90s the nation’s police forces switched from “consensus” to “colonial” style policing.

This reflected demographic and cultural change – basically as the empire came home, so did colonial policing.

One thing this may mean is that one police objective is “to keep a lid on things” and allow communities to police themselves, as they did say in India, as opposed to scrupulously follow up every crime.

Hence the Rotherham kids (and all the rest across the country) were sacrificed because “community cohesion” came above crime – these kids were usually drawn from the relatively powerless sectors, while their abusers came from “tight-knit communities”.

That’s the reality of 21st Century England – not really about political correctness as such, just keeping control.

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. PCC: A sneaky back door to power for UKIP | ducksoap

    […] For the aforesaid PCC by-election UKIP’s wealthy donors have paid for billboard posters that use the child abuse revelations in Rotherham as a campaigning tool to attack the Labour party, a copy of which is posted here on the Brietbart website: UKIP poster.  The use of child abuse as a campaign tactic in such a blatant manner is strikingly unremarkable for a party whose grasp of an integrity is very slippery, and is grossly hypocritical for a party whose MEPs voted against or abstained from voting on a motion in EU parliament to tackle child abuse and child pornography, see: EU child abuse vote. […]

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.