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

So while one could, at the kindest, assume ignorance at the first trial, him doing it the second time blows it out of the water.

He clearly wanted to centre himself, he was indifferent to the success of the court cases. It's a huge reach to suggest he deliberately tried to prevent their conviction.

It's bad enough as it is, and I doubt there are many Tommy Robinson fans on FWR, so no need to invent things.

Yes I’ve already fully agreed that TR potentially risked prejudicing the trials. I just disagree with PP that framing this as TR “tried to prevent the conviction of child sex abusers" is accurate. Is the suggestion that TR actually wanted these rapists to walk free? I guess that’s a possibility but how would that further his political aims? Provoke race riots etc?

It is a possibility but I don't see any reason to jump to that conclusion.

Yes, I agree strongly @OneAmberFinch that there will always be unintended consequences of all interventions.

In fact, one should assume from the start that there will be, and keep an eye out. There's no "job done, dust hands, walk away".

One always needs to be watching the second & third order effects of policies, and whether a new intervention or change to the first one is now needed.

Nor do I.

In terms of TR, yes he has an ego which factors in here but I think also there's an extent to which some people could possibly think that the courts are so incredibly biased against justice for girls that making noise about this will ultimately be more beneficial than some piss poor "sentence" where they get out in a year to go back to the same locality and terrorise their victims further.

For clarity this is not my view. But I can see how some might think this is reasonable.

It's galling that when Elon Musk speaks finally there's a national conversation about this when victims and women speaking up have been ignored for years and the 'justice' done so far clearly isn't justice at all.

I'd still like to know how the publicly funded support given to the victims (NHS, counselling, support during court cases etc) compares to the publicly funded support (in legal funding, funding to prevent deportation etc) given to the convicted perpetrators. Dear journos, dig this up.

It's galling that when Elon Musk speaks finally there's a national conversation about this when victims and women speaking up have been ignored for years and the 'justice' done so far clearly isn't justice at all.

I agree.

I've been in despair at how much political energy has been sucked into trans stuff to the detriment of everything else.

The safeguarding failures as a result of trans ideology are for the same fundamental reasons of all safeguarding failures - the priority of another group, policy or ideology.

Authorities are compromising safeguarding for the sake others and other political and personal needs.

Spend long enough looking at this, and youll see the failings of trans ideology in schools. Understand how trans ideology underminds safeguarding and youll see failures here. It doesn't matter which failure women investigate and campaign for - the results will benefit all children and women eventually.

Also, how would anyone be able to prioritise one failure over another?

The power of public shaming.

The safeguarding failures as a result of trans ideology are for the same fundamental reasons of all safeguarding failures - the priority of another group, policy or ideology.

Authorities are compromising safeguarding for the sake others and other political and personal needs.

YY.

A lot of the themes in the child rape and torture gangs and in trans ideology are similar. The idea that underage children can 'consent' to things that are or should be against the law. When they clearly can't. Adultification. The attempt to separate them from their parents and those who will safeguard them properly. The failure to apply existing safeguarding frameworks properly. The silencing, firing and abuse of women trying to safeguard children. The institutional capture. The evil.

I think this article is quite an interesting analysis of why so many people seem to dislike, or object to, attention being drawn to or kept on this issue of child sexual abuse.

https://thecritic.co.uk/grooming-gangs-at-the-end-of-history/

On top of the themes that are rattling around the PIE series/ thread; that children have bodily autonomy when it comes to sexual activity, can consent. That young girls "ask for it" and certain demographics of girls are worthless and can be freely abused.

The sex positivity movement has lines right out of the PIE handbook and also links to beliefs held by those in power who did not help these girls.

Obviously children apparently also have full bodily autonomy when it comes to sex and gender too.

The threads are all there.

BBC Radio 4 series this week about PIE: In Dark Corners www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/5246429-5246429-bbc-radio-4-series-this-week-about-pie-in-dark-corners

Parallel discussions about lolita for example in above thread.

Great article. I appreciate Victoria Smith listening to Stewart and Campbell so I don't have to but what a big not at all fucking surprise they haven't even bothered to get their facts straight. Men like this are part of the problem - part of the cover up, part of the institutions that allow this to happen.

They need to be shamed until they care as much about children's lives being ruined in this country as they do about the politics of Trump or the middle east or whatever else boys club politics they want to really talk about. It's shameful supposed journalists don't even get the facts straight - it's insulting to the victims and the people living in the areas affected.

If I was going to be on a successful podcast I'd do due diligence. The fact they don't feel the need to - it's only children's lives after all - says it all.

If I was going to be on a successful podcast I'd do due diligence. The fact they don't feel the need to - it's only children's lives after all - says it all.

I agree - I think people like Stewart and Campbell like to think they have wide areas of knowledge rather than only restricted specialised areas but their knowledge is very shallow on a lot of current issues/events. For example, I stopped listening to them the first time they bloviated about women’s rights v genderism.

It’s quite a good litmus test issue - the people who have an understanding of women’s rights v genderism seem to be better read and willing to put the effort in rather than just give their opinion as though it were fact.

Campbell will never admit New Labour ever fucked up on anything so he’ll never want to know what’s happened and is happening with these rape gangs. He has an amazing ability to compartmentalise info he doesn’t want to think about.

Stewart, for years, did a good job of coming across as well-read, humble, empathetic and knowledgeable….until he started a podcast and now I think his reality is very different from the portrayal. It was quite the let down.

I think it’s amazing that their opinions (and those of others like them e.g. The News Agents) on so many issues just so happen to inexplicably and randomly coincide with what is considered good manners among their bien pensant social set. Funny that, eh?

Great article. I appreciate Victoria Smith listening to Stewart and Campbell so I don't have to but what a big not at all fucking surprise they haven't even bothered to get their facts straight. Men like this are part of the problem - part of the cover up, part of the institutions that allow this to happen.

Given how much they made themselves look like idiots in the US election coverage, I'm not sure why they think anyone would be interested in their reckons on it. Sadly I'm sure people are.

I think it’s amazing that their opinions (and those of others like them e.g. The News Agents) on so many issues just so happen to inexplicably and randomly coincide with what is considered good manners among their bien pensant social set. Funny that, eh?

Yes, exactly.

I just don’t think women are even on RS’s radar. He recently commented that travelling across Afghanistan was much safer now than when America still had military presence because the men who made it dangerous to travel are now in power. No mention at all that this only applies to men and that 50% of the population are effectively imprisoned in their homes.

Very good podcast from an American perspective. It includes interviews with Julie Bindel and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/honestly-with-bari-weiss/id1570872415?i=1000683296423

I just don’t think women are even on RS’s radar. He recently commented that travelling across Afghanistan was much safer now than when America still had military presence because the men who made it dangerous to travel are now in power. No mention at all that this only applies to men and that 50% of the population are effectively imprisoned in their homes.

He really is a dickhead.

I just don’t think women are even on RS’s radar. He recently commented that travelling across Afghanistan was much safer now than when America still had military presence because the men who made it dangerous to travel are now in power.

Not noticing the absence of women and the impact on women is how Yogakarta happened.

It's how so much has happened.

The rest is politics podcast is designed to look like two men just chatting, but its a very profitable, professional podcast. Theres a team including legal and fact checkers because the owners are publishers and don't want to be sued.

So they obviously feel safe saying these lies. They say the lies claiming to be experts, but would claim its just opinion as defence.

So they obviously feel safe saying these lies. They say the lies claiming to be experts, but would claim its just opinion as defence.

Yes, there's an amount of plausible deniability.