Children’s rights activist Peter Newell jailed for abuse

For those of us committed to supporting children’s rights, this is a disturbing development, which underlines the importance of checks and balances when it comes to maintaining oversight of the ‘rentseeking sector’ and its so-called ‘regulators’.

Children’s rights activist Peter Newell jailed for abuse (BBC)

A children’s rights activist has been jailed for six years and eight months for sexually abusing a boy in the 1960s. Peter Newell was the former co-ordinator of the Association for the Protection of All Children charity.

Curiouser and curiouser (UK Column) exposes the significance of Newell’s conviction for the children’s rights agenda, the UNCRC, and UK Children Act(s), all of which have been perverted to facilitate the abuse of vulnerable children through universal surveillance, monitoring, databasing and early intervention.

See also this dot-joining blog post: UN’S TOP CHILDREN’S RIGHTS CAMPAIGNER IS A PAEDOPHILE

Joint Committee On Human Rights: Memorandum from the Family Education Trust (2003) 

While Mr Newell regards it as impolitic to press for a Commissioner with access to the family home “at this point”, that is certainly the goal on which he has set his sights. As the children’s rights agenda unfolds, little by little, the authority and responsibilities of parents will be whittled away and transferred to an unelected and unaccountable statutory office with the power to impose a whole philosophy and pattern of child-rearing on every home in the land.

How childcare was hijacked (Telegraph, 1998)

Activists for ‘children’s rights’ have unwittingly aided the paedophile agenda, argues Lynette Burrows

“THE PROGRESS of “children’s rights” affords a classic example of the spellbinding effect that can be created by pressure groups. The lobby that has masterminded the movement numbers no more than a couple of dozen people, and yet its effect has been phenomenal. This can be explained only by the fact that its area of interest, the family, was relatively unexploited until a number of administrative decisions were made.

“Childcare pressure groups have been influential, if not decisive, in many of the policy decisions concerning children and the family. Most people assume that campaigning groups enjoy public support. In the case of many of the children’s rights groups, however, this is not the case. It is worrying that many children’s rights organisations are, in fact, started by the same handful of people and that they rely almost entirely on institutional and charitable support.

“Peter Newell and Rachel Hodgkin have been involved in the setting-up of no fewer than eight of the most important organisations involved in children’s rights, including the Children’s Rights Office and the Children’s Rights Development Unit. All have enjoyed the support of the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust and the Gulbenkian Foundation. They and their colleagues are influential both here and in Europe, where they are helping to draft parliament regulations for the European Convention on the Rights of the Child.

“Together with a dozen or so colleagues, they have produced reports, sat on committees and recommended one another’s views on a host of issues, almost invariably within the agenda of the libertarian Left.”


Burrows claimed in her book ‘The Fight for The Family’ that Peter Newell was uniquely involved in setting up the first Children’s Rights charities in the UK. She also exposed the Paedophile Information Exchange Championing Children’s Rights, which preceded the UNCRC, but no one suspected that Newell’s had abused children himself.

She published a list of the Children’s Rights charities and related organisations and initiatives he was instrumental in setting up and/or in a prominent position within.  No other name appears connected with all of them, although many others recur many times:
  • First London Free School (ex Director)
  • Children’s Legal Centre (Founder Director)
  • Advisory Centre for Education (Educatonal rights organisation) (Ex Company Secretary)
  • STOPP Society of Teachers Opposed to Physical Punishment (Coordinator)
  • EPOCH End Physical Punishment of Children (Founder)
  • APPROACH Association for the Protection Of All Children (Founder)
  • IPSEA Independent Panel for Special Education Advice Ltd (FounderDirector)
  • CG1993 Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation published and funded the report “One Scandal too Many” – a case for comprehensive protection of children in all settings.  (Coordinated by)
  • CG1995 CGF published and funded report ‘Children and Violence’ (Coordinated by)
  • CRDU Children’s Rights Development Unit Ltd
  • CRO  Children’s Rights Office
  • CG1991  CGF funded and published report, ‘Taking Children Seriously’ a proposal for the establishment of a Children’s Rights Commissioner (part of advisory group)
  • CG1996  CGF published and funded report: ‘Effective Government Structures for Children’ – a proposal for ensuring that central government is responsive to the needs and rights of children. (Co-ordinated by PN and Rachel Hodgkin)
The Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation are part or whole funders of all of the above bar two, STOPP, which became EPOCH which was CGF funded, and IPSEA.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *