To think that Sadiq Khan needs investigated?

[Whatifitallgoesright]

Considering the ongoing disclosures of the extent of the Pakistani rape gangs in London and Khans refusal to even acknowledge them do we think he has bought the office of Lord Mayor into disrepute?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2123376/i-exposed-sadiq-khans-grooming/amp

Paragraph 11:

What we have in London is young people being groomed - to use your word, not mine - to be used in county lines in relation to sometimes -

So he diverted the question about how many rape gangs to say young people are groomed to be used in county lines.

So where did he answer the question about rape gangs?

♥️

The title's libellous I'd say.

Haven't read the article - why waste time reading mendacious, dogwhistle for the uneducated/uninformed, right-wing nonsense - but I'd put good money on it having no substantiated sources, and no verifiable figures.

Why don't you start a thread on that?

He also says below that:

Sir Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): We know in London there are issues about exploitation of young people, but they are not as defined by the Member in her definition of what those types of gangs are.

I don’t have a “world view”
Why are you puzzled about my interest in this thread?
Khan in my mayor . I work with young people. I think Khan has a responsibility to be open and transparent about this issue.
I would say the same for any political figure.

That’s obfuscation

Where have you said the same about another political figure?

Why don’t you - since you’re the one who is not happy with this one ..?

He is supporting the inquiry, there is nothing to suggest your claim is true.

MQT
Date: Tuesday 1 July 2025

Sir Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): First of all, can I thank the Member for how cognisant she is about the kids. We are all very grateful for that.
My understanding from speaking to the police, and she will appreciate, I have done on a regular basis, is - and I choose my words carefully for the reasons she will understand - there are no reported cases and also no indication of the grooming gangs that she is concerned about in London. That is not to say it could not have happened for the reasons she has said, but the MPS has been quite proactive in trying to see if there are any issues in relation to the stuff reported in other parts of the country.

What is important is that when the public inquiry is set up, the MPS and others, including MOPAC and local authorities, must co-operate fully with the public inquiry. She will be aware there have been cases across the country where people were NFA’d and no further action was taken or action was not taken. What Dame Louise Casey is saying is some of those cases should be revisited as well. I have no indication of them being in London, but the MPS understands the importance of checking for the reasons that she knows.

Susan Hall AM: There is, and I have been concerned because, every time I have mentioned it, you have deflected to something else. You talk about other forms of abuse. I am specifically really concerned, as so many of us are, about these specific rape gangs because the more that is dug up, the more terrifying all of us are. We must all be concerned that in a city with nine million people, it would be very odd, if I can put it that way, if we do not have it here when they have it in so many other areas. That is why I am so concerned. Do you have that same concern?

Sir Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I cannot but repeat the words of the most senior officers in London, whether it is the Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis], the Deputy Commissioner or the Assistant Commissioner, all who have spoken to the [London Assembly] Police and Crime Committee. We do have issues in relation to child sexual exploitation. We do have issues in relation to child sexual abuse. It is dissimilar to the cases that are being reported. There are no reported cases, but it is important that the police are vigilant and there is no complacency. The police will carry on being vigilant.

The good news that should reassure her is the progress made over the last nine years, identified, and recognised by HMICFRS, with the quality of investigations improving, victim blaming, which is an issue across the country, being addressed, data and data recording and reporting being better improved and so forth. That should give her some confidence in relation to the progress made over the last nine years.

Susan Hall AM: OK. We all live in hope that you are correct and there are not any in London. A yes or no answer, please. If those in Whitehall, local councils, police forces or the Crown Prosecution Service are found to have been complicit in failing the victims, would you support prosecutions of those individuals?
Sir Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely.

Susan Hall AM: Excellent.

Sir Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Listen, the inquiry has to follow the evidence and it is really important that the public inquiry follows the evidence. Assembly Member Lord Bailey raised a really important issue at the beginning of this Mayor’s Question Time (MQT). The phrase I used was “without fear or favour”. It is very important in the public inquiry that the inquiry goes and follows the evidence.

Susan Hall AM: Good. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair.

On mumsnet? Or in real life ?
That’s a ridiculous question.
I’ve criticised numerous politicians .

So bearing in mind that various people who are investigating these matters have said that there are massive issues with grooming gangs in London. khan in saying that there aren’t in this response and implying that county lines is the only gang problem. Either
a) lying
or
b) completely ignorant of the issues.

which do you think it is?

Because I don't sufficiently feel it's any one persons fault.

Yet obviously some people do. And they feel it's khan's. Even though these issues have appeared throughout time, geography and political persuasion.
So why, exactly, do you feel the need to blame, specifically khan?

So he played dumb and acted like he didn’t know what she meant. How does this answer the question? Why pretend he did when he didn’t?

It boils down to this.

Khan is the Mayor of London. He is responsible for policing in London. Therefore he should be subject to scrutiny over his handling of policing in London. This is true regardless of his race.

He was asked a question about how many grooming rape gangs there are in London. He refused to answer the question (and he didn’t, despite false claims he did) because he thought Susan Hall’s question was motivated by racism. He thought it more important to keep her in her place and not play up to any “racist dog whistles” than address the issue at hand.

This raises a serious question: if Khan is willing to play politics on such a simple question, does that mean he has also played politics on anything that has come across his desk? Are there reports he’s seen that he hasn’t publicly commented on because he doesn’t want to play up to “racist dog whistles”? Are there reports that indicate the police have acted in a certain way to avoid being accused of playing up to “racist dog whistles”?

It is inconceivable there aren’t grooming rape gangs in London. So either Khan knows about it but won’t say because the politics are more important to him, or he doesn’t know which indicates he has no grasp on the seriousness of the issue in the jurisdiction he is responsible for. So of course an investigation is the only way to determine this. Khan should welcome an investigation if he has nothing to hide.

Providing the safety of women and girls is a priority of course. An investigation isn’t warranted if you don’t care.

I think the mayor has to be led by facts and data, and his position should reflect the data. He hasn't said county lines is the only problem, but that it is the mode of child exploitation in London going by the number of reported cases (14,500 estimated cases last year by london.gov). That may change with more data or what comes out of the inquiry.

That’s good.
I will be very glad if the inquiry finds that there are no grooming gangs in London like those of Rotherham etc. . ( I know there are childvictims of sexual abuse but it’s the orchestrated grooming gangs that we are specifically talking about)
I still think he should have answered the question in January. But if the inquiry finds that there has been no “turning of a blind eye” to wrong doing then that is all that I’m concerned about.

Which other politician has stuck their neck on the line?

It is inconceivable there aren’t grooming rape gangs in London. So either Khan knows about it but won’t say because the politics are more important to him, or he doesn’t know which indicates he has no grasp on the seriousness of the issue in the jurisdiction he is responsible for. So of course an investigation is the only way to determine this. Khan should welcome an investigation if he has nothing to hide.

He has welcomed the inquiry. And I agree there probably are grooming gangs n London. But he is the mayor, he can't just guess, he needs facts.

His answer that the child exploitation in London is not 'as defined by' Susan Hall 'those types of gangs' is likely based on the data he has at the time.

I highly doubt he would know about the existence of grooming gangs and keep silent. Aside from the morality of it, it would be career suicide.

What did Boris do about this for example?
Can anyone direct me to as many Boris grooming gang threads as we've had in the last few days about khan?

Or did this all just recently proliferate?

This is thread about Khan. Who is responsible for London. Why would there be a need to discuss other politicians’ perspectives?

Don't we elect police commissioners too? And mps?

Or is this all on khan?

Read the OP .
It’s about the office of Mayor.

Considering the ongoing disclosures of the extent of the Pakistani rape gangs in London and Khans refusal to even acknowledge them do we think he has bought the office of Lord Mayor into disrepute?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2123376/i-exposed-sadiq-khans-grooming/amp

Yes, this thread is about Khan. Feel free to start threads about all the other people who potentially obfuscate their responsibility about child safeguarding. You’ll be a while. Best to focus on one at a time I would say.

As you seem to have missed it, below is the post that @nomas made at 00.14 which answers your question. Neither lying, nor completely ignorant of the situation, in fact completely the reverse. The extract is from Mayor's questions in July. From this, a reasonable conclusion to draw is that Hall jumped to try and cause trouble over an issue that (a) she didn't (couldn't be bothered?) to do any research into herself and (b) is being very closely monitored by the MPS and, through them, by Khan.

So, ask yourself why a London politician, as Hall is, would jump on a feeling ("it would be very odd if it weren't happening here") rather than speaking to the MPS herself to get some idea of the facts before speaking - if she is, as she says, very concerned with protection of London girls.

MQT
Date: Tuesday 1 July 2025

Sir Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): First of all, can I thank the Member for how cognisant she is about the kids. We are all very grateful for that.

My understanding from speaking to the police, and she will appreciate, I have done on a regular basis, is - and I choose my words carefully for the reasons she will understand - there are no reported cases and also no indication of the grooming gangs that she is concerned about in London. That is not to say it could not have happened for the reasons she has said, but the MPS has been quite proactive in trying to see if there are any issues in relation to the stuff reported in other parts of the country.

What is important is that when the public inquiry is set up, the MPS and others, including MOPAC and local authorities, must co-operate fully with the public inquiry. She will be aware there have been cases across the country where people were NFA’d and no further action was taken or action was not taken. What Dame Louise Casey is saying is some of those cases should be revisited as well. I have no indication of them being in London, but the MPS understands the importance of checking for the reasons that she knows.

Susan Hall AM: There is, and I have been concerned because, every time I have mentioned it, you have deflected to something else. You talk about other forms of abuse. I am specifically really concerned, as so many of us are, about these specific rape gangs because the more that is dug up, the more terrifying all of us are. We must all be concerned that in a city with nine million people, it would be very odd, if I can put it that way, if we do not have it here when they have it in so many other areas. That is why I am so concerned. Do you have that same concern?

Sir Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I cannot but repeat the words of the most senior officers in London, whether it is the Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis], the Deputy Commissioner or the Assistant Commissioner, all who have spoken to the [London Assembly] Police and Crime Committee. We do have issues in relation to child sexual exploitation. We do have issues in relation to child sexual abuse. It is dissimilar to the cases that are being reported. There are no reported cases, but it is important that the police are vigilant and there is no complacency. The police will carry on being vigilant.

The good news that should reassure her is the progress made over the last nine years, identified, and recognised by HMICFRS, with the quality of investigations improving, victim blaming, which is an issue across the country, being addressed, data and data recording and reporting being better improved and so forth. That should give her some confidence in relation to the progress made over the last nine years.

I'm not sure how it works in London. Do they have councillors too? In charge of social care?
How has the defunding of local government under 14 years of Tory rule(now some defected to reform) affected the people on the ground who actually deal with these issues day to day?
Which parts of London was khan supposed to defund from his specific budget to combat this?

Would you like to pay less taxes so khan has less resources to deal with this?
Immigrants in London pay a LOAD of tax, so we can't get rid of them or there'd be even less money to allocate to this issue.

And of course, famously, white men are more likely to commit these crimes. I mean, I've listed many examples in this thread. That only 2 other posters have condemned.

Have we asked how khan is dealing with those too?