Labour rejects calls for Oldham grooming gang inquiry

[Signalbox]

Are Labour right to push the responsibility for carrying out a public inquiry back onto Oldham Council?

I don't understand how it is considered acceptable for local authorities to carry out their own inquiries when they are often part of the institutional failure that allowed these crimes to be carried out on such a large scale over decades. Councils, police and social services were/are all implicated in the failure to act (or to actively obstruct) in some way or another.

"Phillips’ letter to Oldham Council, seen by GB News, claims it is for the the local authority ‘alone to decide to commission an inquiry into child sexual exploitation locally, rather than for the government to intervene.’ Reports have previously been commissioned and produced in Rochdale, Rotherham and Telford; Oldham now plans to launch its own Telford-style inquiry. Given the strength of feeling – which Phillips acknowledges in her letter – it seems inevitable that there will be questions or debate in the Commons when parliament returns next week."

"Yet for the hundreds of victims and those invested in bringing perpetrators to justice, this will seem pitifully inadequate. In each town where grooming gangs operated, similar patterns emerged: victims were ignored, law enforcement complicit and political officials more concerned about reputational damage than lives affected. Local authorities can hold their own inquiries, of course. But given the scale of these crimes, the fact they took place over decades, in many towns, suggests a level of institutional complicity requiring the attention of central government."

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/labour-rejects-calls-for-oldham-grooming-gang-inquiry/

Archive...

https://archive.ph/3greC#selection-1667.0-1759.570

What is the alternative, in that case?

The Times also has an article on the Jay report with, amongst a couple of other things, an overview of how the 20 recommendations are being implemented

https://archive.ph/iRa6p

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/alexis-jay-grooming-gangs-report-hpzll0332

He stands up for Starmer, doesn't really back the calls for an inquiry but agrees research is needed into the specifics of the 'grooming gangs' phenomenon; why it happened, why it was allowed to continue, why was nothing done for so long.

It's a good article, and he's right about the research.

The Times is going a bit hog on this. Good to see. Musk...well...is what he is but he's fired up the establishment. Rich boy speaks I guess.

I'm going to look at the rest of the articles.

Absolutely agree

I think when people call for inquiries, what they want is to hear what exactly is going to change to stop this exact thing happening again, and people who were complicit, either through incompetence or malice, held to account.

Exactly.

@datun,

The alternative is to properly use existing laws to prosecute wrongdoers.

We already have good laws and these need to be used.

And, in terms of lessons to be learned, that is up to investigative journalists to uncover failings and for politicians to appropriately respond with new laws, and the CPS to update guidance.

The problem with a lot of these enquiries is they fudge and obscure, rather than shining a light upon. That is basically what the job of a good defence barrister is, and every single politician or senior police figure will have a top KC doing just that at the hypothetical enquiry (as they did in the Post Office enquiry).

That's all very well, but they need to find out where all the failings are and act on them, as well as understand the common factors of these gangs and how they operate. It needs the stamp of government or it will just be handwaved away as Rotherham council did. As I said, I don't think people will put up with being fobbed off forever.

This is the last article I'm linking from the Times, it's a leading article from Monday and may already have been posted upthread (apologies if so)

https://archive.ph/zSLNK

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/the-times-view/article/the-times-view-on-grooming-gangs-line-of-inquiry-l88rpbdkd

The whole thing is worth a read but I'm highlighting the last two paragraphs, partly in light of a pp's view of the Yes, Ministery-ness of inquiries (which is a great point)

A newspaper, however, can only go so far. Grooming gangs were only one element of Professor Jay’s inquiry — Rotherham garners a sole mention in her 468-page report and the gangs in Telford are not referenced. A new national inquiry is needed to explore where and how these gangs operated. It must not skirt around sensitive subjects, including ethnicity. It should not replicate mistakes of the past.

Investigations into the Grenfell disaster and the Post Office scandal have gone on for too many years, racking up enormous bills. If the victims of grooming gangs are to receive the justice that is long overdue, it requires a swift, ­independent and public process aimed at exposing in full detail one of the deepest ills of our age.

Labour doesn't disagree about an inquiry being necessary, they (through Jess Phillips) think it should be run by Oldham. I don't know if an enquiry by one local authority would have the same powers. Could they compel witnesses to attend? Also, it's a nationwide problem, and a particular type of offending. The inquiry by Professor Jay seems to have been too broad, an inquiry just by Oldham too narrow.

Also, it's a nationwide problem, and a particular type of offending. The inquiry by Professor Jay seems to have been too broad, an inquiry just by Oldham too narrow.

Yes, this is the key point for me.

Professor Jay’s inquiry — Rotherham garners a sole mention in her 468-page report

Which is a tad odd given she'd already carried out her own investigation into the council there, which as Louise Casey's later report demonstrates, they ignored.

@Ereshkigalangcleg ,

This will be my last post as I think I am in a minority and I have made my views clear.

‘That's all very well, but they need to find out where all the failings are and act on them, as well as understand the common factors of these gangs and how they operate. It needs the stamp of government or it will just be handwaved away as Rotherham council did. As I said, I don't think people will put up with being fobbed off forever.’

A public enquiry is the precise opposite of the ‘stamp of government’, it is policy made by KCs. If government want to deal with the issues, they can do it tomorrow, and without any enquiry. That is what they are elected to do: govern.

Now they say that they already are doing this and Jess Phillips has extensive experience in the field.

I don’t claim expertise in this field but the government has access to the top experts.

And, finally, if they do concede to a public enquiry, which I suspect they will, nothing will happen for months (or years). They can take months merely discussing the scope and guidance. And it will delay implementation of the 2014-2022 enquiry, as it will supersede it.

Is that really what people want?

I hope there's some investigation into the abuse of children within their own communities. I think I've linked enough articles on this thread for today but CSE is acknowledged to be a massive problem in Pakistan, particularly among the poorer sections.

If the Government use this to further clamp down on speech they really are going to make it look like they’ve got something to hide. They’re going to make things worse for themselves.

Now they say that they already are doing this and Jess Phillips has extensive experience in the field.

In which field?

This will be my last post as I think I am in a minority and I have made my views clear.

I think I've made my views clear and you've pretty much ignored what I've said about not being hung up on an "inquiry" in the way you've categorised them. Nor is the most important issue Musk's comments. This is the Feminism and Women's Rights board so it's likely that many of us will see the underage girls brutally raped and subjected to unimaginable degrading treatment over decades by gangs of organised men, justice for them, and ensuring that it can't happen in future as the primary issue here.

They are. But I fully expect them to try.

"We can't have a national focused inquiry into grooming gangs even though it's one of the worst miscarriages of justice in the last few decades, because we're a bit shit at them, we don't take them seriously, we use them to kick the can down the road and only lawyers benefit". Is that really the answer?

We know what the underlying cause is here. It is institutional and societal misogyny.

Race and class will be aggravating features no doubt, but behind every abusive man, every blind eye turned, every crass assumption made about the victims, is the underlying belief that women and girls just don't really matter in the same way that male people do.

This is why I baulk at our latest knights in armour. X is a cess pit of misogyny. If we really looked at the engines of how generations persist in this pattern, then social media would be right up there in terms of causality. When he starts talking about the role of social media in creating the conditions that allow abuse of women and girls to go unnoticed and unpunished then I will hear him. Until then, the loon can fuck the fuck off.

Agree, where portions of society shield themselves from the rest of society, abuse is inevitable. Abusers will be drawn to the relative secrecy and intergenerational patterns of abuse form.

This goes for many different cultures and religions. Some Muslim groups, some Jewish sects, some Christian sects, travellers etc.

The more isolated from society a group is, the harder the abuse is to detect.

I saw first hand the shocking way how some traveller groups treat their women and girls. Now it is not possible to call this out as it is viewed as bigotry

I also shudder when I go past the Jewish schools in Stamford hill, which are totally beyond the oversight of any authorities. How would any child suffering abuse ever speak up?

But again, community cohesion, and the need to be seen as not bigoted will always trump the rights and needs of women and girls.

I linked a Times article upthread on the recommendations in Professor Jay's report and how/if they're being implemented.

https://archive.ph/iRa6p link to full article.

I'll try to summarise it

1. A cabinet-level minister for children
Fudged Labour claims this is part of Bridget Phillipson's portfolio.

2. A legal duty to report child abuse
Just announced, completely coincidentally!
Grooming will also become an aggravating factor.

3. A national database of abuse
This has not been implemented. On Monday, Cooper pledged to establish it.

4 & 5. Compensation for victims
No comment on implemented, if or when.

6-8. Establish new child protection bodies
A new “Child Protection Authority”. This has not been implemented.
Separately, an independent body to register care home, etc. staff and maintain standards. Still no regulatory body.

9. National public awareness campaigns
So far no government-funded campaigns have been launched.

10-12. Make better use of the DBS ‘barred’ list
I think this is worth reading in full!
The government should ensure anyone taking on staff, to work or volunteer with children, can check Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) lists to check if they have been barred.
Currently employers do not need to check the DBS if the person will be “supervised to a greater or lesser degree”. In 2012 the group of people who needed to check the DBS was actually narrowed.
In addition, self-employed people and those engaging their services are not able to get hold of “enhanced” DBS certificates.
Jay said this needed to be tightened up, but it has not been implemented.
She also thinks the statutory duty to report concerns about individuals working with children to the DBS is being flouted.
She called for the National Police Chiefs’ Council to work with regulators and inspectorates to ensure breaches are investigated. The Times has contacted the NPCC for a progress report.
DBS checks on people in England and Wales also cannot be accessed by employers based overseas, which she said needed to change.

13 & 14. Tackle abuse online
Ofcom has been contacted for comment. I think Labour have legislation in the pipeline regarding online harm.

15 & 16. Make life better for victims in court
Survivors need better support. Speed up the police investigations and CPS charging decisions. Hollow laugh Review compliance with the victims’ code, “still not being consistently applied and followed”.
Increase the three-year time limit to bring a civil claim. This has not yet been done.

17 & 18. More support for victims
Councils to offer fully funded specialist support. It's unclear where this is at.
Records of abuse not to be deleted after 75 years. The ICO has been contacted for comment.

19. Ban headlocks and ‘arm twists’
This has not been done.

20. Amend the Children Act 1989
Courts should curtail council's parental responsibility if a child in its care is suffering harm. This has not been done.

Italics are my comments. Some of the recommendations are irrelevant re. grooming gangs, some are tangential. I can't see that a new inquiry would stop the implementations that have been promised, or make any difference to the ones that are being ignored.

Ofcom has been contacted for comment. I think Labour have legislation in the pipeline regarding online harm.

Which will undoubtedly be weaponised to shut down debate on this and other issues.

Another thread on AIBU. Your post about the recommendations is really important @lcakethereforeIam and I can quite understand why you might not want to deal with the general batshittery of AIBU but here's a link in case you want to add anything.

Brilliant article about the rape gangs in the UK http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/5247614-brilliant-article-about-the-rape-gangs-in-the-uk

I'm going in. Wish me luck. Tell my children I love them.