PMQ

[MyLadyGreensleeves]

Having watched Keir Starmer at PMQ denying a inquiry into Pakistani Rape Gangs, am I unreasonable to conclude that he is a Bumping Weight Prick,

Seeing hypocrite Phillips next to him, cheering him on with her angry face, has made me sick,

I used to admire her for standing up for women, for reading out lists of women abused by domestic abusers which makes her disgusting attitude now all the more awful.

Shame on you both. One might be too stupid and self serving to know he is stupid and self serving but Jess Phillips-you're not. You will happily sell rape victims down the river to keep your arse on the front bench and to buy votes.

Shame, shame , shame on your head. Shame on you.

They have no shame.

What is a Bumping Weight Prick?

Keir Starmer.

Victims "clearly want action" and do not need a new national inquiry into grooming gangs, the woman who led a seven-year probe into child sexual abuse has said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp836w074gko

What exactly do you think an inquiry needs to look into that has not already been covered?

https://www.iicsa.org.uk/index.html

There are so many victims they want different things.

I heard in radio, why not work on the points raised already however, they could do a new national enquiry on points that were missed

The Jay Report was wide ranging. Pakistani Rape Gangs formed only a small part of it.
In addition, no-one in a position of power was ever held to account for the multiple failings of it.

A Judge led Enquiry-focusing solely on Pakistani Rape Gangs needs to be held.

An enquiry that has the power to call witnesses, to have them give evidence on oath and with the power to make those who did not do their job because they were frightened of community tensions, be brought to account.

The Jay Report did none of these things and many people are now waking up to that fact. many towns in which girls suffered were not even mentioned in it.

Of course, the Bumping Weight Prick who was DPP at the time, and Jess Phillips, who almost lost her seat to the Muslim vote ( her majority was reduced from 13000 to 600) would be very happy to see people swallow the line that the Jay Report was enough.

The person who headed the report-and was paid to write it-will naturally say her report was enough.

I'm really scratching my head as to why they might all be saying no other enquiry is needed, Scratch scratch. It's a mystery isn't it.

I can understand why Phillips, in October, and the Tories previously, did not agree to having a Home Office led investigation specifically into Oldham. Local authorities have primary responsibility for investigating local issues, the Home Office conducts national ones. The conversation has moved on, though, to whether a new national inquiry is needed.

I think its clear that the most immediately pressing issue is implementing the reccomendations of prior inquiries should be the most immediate concern, and I think it is right that should be the government's priority.

It isn't an either-or, though, you can implement reforms and have a new inquiry, too.

I've read a bunch of arguments from both sides of the current debate over the necessity/utility (or otherwise) of a new national inquiry. I don't give much heed to arguments from politicians or the likes of Musk, but I do think its fair to say that opinion varies even among people involved, who care deeply about the issue, are knowledgeable on it, and do not appear to have an alternative agenda.

We're told that most victims do not want another inquiry but I'm taking that with a pinch of salt, because I'm sure opinions vary among victims and I doubt they have been formally polled. I can see that some victims have spoken in defence of Jess Phillips in particular, so I don't think the OP's comments about Phillips are fair on that basis.

Starmer appears to have done a lot of good, on this particular topic, while he was DPP, hence the praise heapened on him by the Tories previously, before this became a political issue, recently.

The latest seems to be that Starmer will open a new inquiry only if victims groups call for it (although, he says, that in Jess Phillip's extensive engagement with victims, the overwhelming view has been that they so not want more inquiries).

I think making the decision based on what victims want is entirely reasonable, and I guess we wait to hear anything further from victims groups in that respect.

All to say, I think the OP is extremely unfair.

I do, also, think it is worth pointing out (as this is a thread about PMQs) that Badenoch has today admitted that she has not met with the victims, nor has she any plans to do so. I don't think it is right for her to demand a new inquiry and make this a party-political issue without at least taking the time to speak to any of the victims and take their views into consideration. It gives the impression that she doesn't care about the victims but wants to point-score.

Based in that assessment, I’m going to say you didn’t watch it. What you’ve said bears very little resemblance to what happened, which included Badenoch lying on 2 occasions that I’m aware of.

How about compensating the victims?

You do understand that the push for a new inquiry was a "wrecking amendment" don't you? It was literally done just so that they could say Labour voted against it, which they had to do or the whole bill would have been scrapped. If Kemi wanted another inquiry she was perfectly placed to push for that while her party was in power for 2 years after the Jay inquiry final report came out. This is nothing but political game playing.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/mps-vote-against-new-national-inquiry-into-grooming-gangs-13285629

"However, even if the Commons had supported the measure, it wouldn't have actually forced the government to open the desired inquiry, due to parliamentary procedure.
Instead, it would have killed the government's legislation, the aim of which is to reform things like the children's care system and raise educational standards in schools."