“Though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back… she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.” - Aslan, C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Showing posts with label MP complaint. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MP complaint. Show all posts

When Safeguarding Threats Require Parliamentary Oversight


⟡ SWANK Parliamentary Dispatch ⟡

“When Safeguarding Threats Require Parliamentary Oversight”
Filed: 2 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/MP/RBLAKE/2025-06-02
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-02_SWANK_MPComplaint_KirstyHornal_SafeguardingThreat_DisabilityBreach.pdf

I. The Matter, Escalated

On 2 June 2025, SWANK London Ltd. submitted a formal request for parliamentary intervention to Rachel Blake MP, citing Westminster’s misuse of safeguarding powers against a disabled litigant — our Director — in the form of a coercive and baseless supervision threat.

The social worker in question, Ms. Kirsty Hornal, had emailed days earlier to say that Westminster was “applying to court” — an assertion made:

  • With no risk

  • With no meeting

  • With no lawful foundation

  • During live civil litigation

In short: It was not a safeguarding act. It was a politically-timed retaliation.

II. The Legal Offences, Itemised

The letter to Ms Blake enumerates five critical violations:

  • Disability Discrimination
    Breach of a written-only communication adjustment due to PTSD and dysphonia

  • Procedural Sabotage
    Use of safeguarding language without lawful trigger

  • Litigation Retaliation
    Issuing a supervision threat while under active civil suit

  • Public Authority Misuse
    Institutional gaslighting under colour of child protection

  • Complaint Process Breakdown
    Council complaints were exhausted — a parliamentary lever was required

When local mechanisms are used to protect misconduct, you escalate vertically.
SWANK did just that — and filed it in the archive.

III. What SWANK Requested of Parliament

The letter requests four actions:

  1. Contact with Westminster’s Director of Children’s Services

  2. Escalation to the Secretary of State for Education

  3. Formal withdrawal of the supervision threat

  4. Registration of the case as part of systemic disability retaliation

This is not personal. It is procedural. It is political. And it is now published.

IV. SWANK’s Position

If an MP is required to intervene because a social worker cannot follow process,
then the issue is not the parent.
The issue is the State’s architecture of impunity.

This dispatch has been submitted to Parliament, logged with regulators, and archived as a warning:

You may weaponise safeguarding. But we weaponise documentation.


⟡ This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡

Every entry is timestamped.
Every sentence is jurisdictional.
Every structure is protected.

To mimic this format without licence is not homage. It is breach.
We do not permit imitation. We preserve it as evidence.

This is not a blog.
This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.
Filed with velvet contempt, preserved for future litigation.

Because evidence deserves elegance.
And retaliation deserves an archive.

© 2025 SWANK London Ltd. All formatting and structural rights reserved.
Use requires express permission or formal licence. Unlicensed mimicry will be cited — as panic, not authorship.

No comments:

Documented Obsessions