Forced child migration 'bigger abuse scandal than Savile'

Tommy Monk wrote:
Not conflating...!!!???


Then you start conflating 'Rotherham' into it all too...!!!


I'm trying to stick to the OP... and I'm only asking you to clarify your points and statistics on this...?


I dont know why you are finding this so difficult...!?

Thorin wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Here is the stats Tommy

More than 130,000 children were sent to a “better life” in former colonies, mainly Australia and Canada, from the 1920s to 1970s under the child migrant programme . The children, aged between three and 14, were almost invariably from deprived backgrounds and already in some form of social or charitable care. It was believed, they would lead happier lives.

Charities such as Barnardo’s and the Fairbridge Society, the Anglican and Catholic churches and local authorities helped with the organisation of the emigration.

Once there, the children were often told they were orphans to better facilitate their fresh start. The parents – many of them single mothers forced to give up their child for adoption because of poverty or social stigma – believed this was giving them best chance in life, though often did not have details of where their offspring were sent to. The reality, for some of those children, was a childhood of servitude and hard labour at foster homes: on remote farms, at state-run orphanages and church-run institutions. They were often separated from siblings. Some were subjected to physical and sexual abuse.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/27/britains-child-migrant-programme-why-130000-children-were-shipped-abroad

The head of the Catholic church in England and Wales has apologised for its part in the” hurt” caused to young unmarried women who say they were felt pressured into handing over their babies for adoption in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. Cardinal Vincent Nichols acknowledged the “the grief and pain caused by the giving up of a child through adoption”, adding: “Sadly for unmarried mothers, adoption was considered to be in the best interests of the mother and child because of the associated stigma and the lack of support for lone parents.”

A documentary telling the stories of some of the women – who gave up an estimated half a million children during a period when the Catholic church, the Church of England and the Salvation Army ran “mother and baby homes” and adoption agencies in the UK – is to be broadcast on ITV on 9 November.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/03/catholic-church-apologises-for-role-in-forced-adoptions-over-30-year-period

The transportation scheme began in the 1920s, in part to east the population of UK orphanages int he years after the First World War, but also to give "lost" children a fresh start in the colonies. But many children, some of whom were forcibly taken from their parents and were not told where they were going, found a life of hardship and depravity once they arrived as many were forced to work on farms and were subject to severe sexual and physical abuse.

One of the surviving victims, David Hill, waived his right to anonymity earlier this year to urge the chair of the inquiry, Professor Alexis Jay, to "name the villains" responsible for the policy. Mr Hill, who later became the managing director of the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABC), later uncovered documents shown to the inquiry which said a fact-finding mission was set from the UK to Australia in 1956 after people raise concerns about the policy.

As a result, a blacklist of institutions which were mistreating the children was drawn up by the British government  but it was never enforced due to political pressure from the some of the charities and agencies involved.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/child-sex-abuse-inquiry-jimmy-savile-forced-transportation-deportation-to-australia-gordon-brown-a7852041.html

Tommy Monk wrote:I see the same conflating and lack of conciseness of figures...


Maybe you could help me to understand your points by reiterating what they actually are, and by answering the questions I asked...?


Would be most helpful...!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Maybe you could help me to understand your points by reiterating what they actually are, and by answering the questions I asked...?


Would be most helpful...!

Tommy Monk wrote:Maybe you could help me to understand your points by reiterating what they actually are, and by answering the questions I asked...?

Tommy Monk wrote:Try again dodge...


The only quesstion answered correctly was number 2...


But are you saying that all those 2000 suffered sexual abuse...?

Tommy Monk wrote:So you cant answer the questions then...!?


Oh well... nothing more to say here...

Tommy Monk wrote:Im still waiting for you to give answers and evidence to back up your claims...

Tommy Monk wrote:Is that you trying to shout down to Australia for some answers, dodge...!?