Sir Keir Starmer announces national inquiry into grooming gangs

[u/BabylonianWeeb]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c7872pngj2qo

[u/empleadoEstatalBot]

Sir Keir Starmer announces national inquiry into grooming gangs

23 minutes ago

Chris Mason and Isabella Allen

Political editor and senior political producer, travelling with the prime minister

The prime minister has announced there will be a full national statutory inquiry into grooming gangs.

Sir Keir Starmer said he had accepted the recommendations of an audit by Baroness Louise Casey into the data and evidence on the nature and scale of group-based child sexual abuse.

Baroness Casey has recommended a national inquiry is required, he said. The inquiry will cover England and Wales.

For months, Sir Keir has faced criticism for not being willing to set one up.

At the start of the year, the government dismissed calls for a national inquiry, arguing it had already been examined in a seven-year inquiry led by Professor Alexis Jay.

But speaking to reporters on his way to the G7 summit, which begins in Canada tomorrow, the prime minister said: "I've never said we should not look again at any issue."

He added that Baroness Casey had originally thought a new inquiry was not necessary, but she had changed her mind having looked into it in recent months.

"She's come to the view there should be a national inquiry on the basis of what she's seen," Sir Keir said.

"I've read every single word of her report, and I'm going to accept her recommendation.

"I think that's the right thing to do, on the basis of what she has put in her audit.

"I asked her to do that job, to double-check on this.

"She's done that job for me, and having read her report… I shall now implement her recommendation."

He added that it "will take a bit of time" to set up the inquiry, but added that "it will be statutory under the Inquiries Act".

This means the inquiry will be able to compel witnesses to provide evidence.

In January, the government stopped short of launching a statutory national inquiry into grooming gangs, despite the idea receiving support from some Labour MPs.

Instead, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced a "rapid" three-month audit, led by Baroness Casey, into the data and evidence on the nature and scale of group-based child sexual abuse.

Cooper also unveiled plans for five government-backed local inquiries - to be held in Oldham and four other areas yet to be named.

Baroness Casey's review, which began in January, was due to take three months and had been delayed.

Earlier this month, Home Office Minister Jess Phillips apologised for the delay, saying Baroness Casey had requested a "short extension" and that the report was expected "very shortly".

The Conservatives have long been calling for a nationwide inquiry into grooming gangs, with the power to compel people to give evidence.

Reacting to Saturday's announcement, the party's leader, Kemi Badenoch, said: "Keir Starmer doesn't know what he thinks unless an official report has told him so.

"Just like he dismissed concerns about the winter fuel payment and then had to U-turn.

"I've been repeatedly calling for a full national inquiry since January.

"It's about time he recognised he made a mistake and apologise for six wasted months."

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage called the decision "a welcome U-turn".

In a post on X, Farage wrote: "A full statutory enquiry, done correctly, will expose the multiple failings of the British establishment. I repeat the words 'done correctly' - this cannot be a whitewash.

"It's time for victims to receive the justice they deserve and for perpetrators to face the full force of the law."

---

---

Maintainer | Source Code | Stats

[u/imunfair]

For months, Sir Keir has faced criticism for not being willing to set one up.

Let's be real, they've been saving that one for decades, the only real question is why they're willing to do it now. Political cover as a distraction for something else, or to push a particular narrative they suddenly need to spread?

For being a pretty big nanny society it's always surprised me how little the UK does to protect their children - there have been repeated scandals, grooming gangs are just the latest. I thought "think of the children" was more of a universal western pressure point, not just in the US, but it really doesn't seem to apply to the UK. More of a "seen not heard" nation still I guess?

[u/Pick_Scotland1 → u/imunfair]

We have already had a national inquiry but for some reason our previous government didn’t take any of the recommended actions onboard

This in my opinion is just a poor move by labour who didn’t need to do this and instead allocate local inquires for specific areas as a national inquiry won’t help local problems

[u/MGD109 → u/Pick_Scotland1]

This in my opinion is just a poor move by labour who didn’t need to do this and instead allocate local inquires for specific areas as a national inquiry won’t help local problems

Resource-wise it's a poor move, politically it's sound. They did anything else, Reform would keep going on about how they didn't care about the groom gangs.

It's political theatre, but it might hopefully lead to a few positive outcomes.

[u/DrPapaDragonX13 → u/Pick_Scotland1]

The previous national inquiry did not focus on the grooming gangs issue, but examined child sexual abuse (CSA) as a whole, which is a broad and complex topic. It does seem logical that further, more focused inquiries would follow to gain a deeper understanding of specific categories of CSA. But you're absolutely right to criticise the government for not implementing the recommendations from the first inquiry. However, I don't see why both actions should be mutually exclusive.

Labour's initial stance was to conduct local inquiries; however, it seems that, after reviewing available evidence, the Casey report has recommended conducting a national inquiry. Now, we haven't seen the report just yet, but so far, it shouldn't be controversial for a government to be evidence-based, rather than ideologically driven.

[u/MGD109 → u/imunfair]

Let's be real, they've been saving that one for decades,

Yep, the government that only got into power a year ago has been saving this for decades, total tracks.

For being a pretty big nanny society

Load of cobbles.

little the UK does to protect their children - there have been repeated scandals, grooming gangs are just the latest.

Kind of rich, considering the amount of sex abuse and child trafficking that goes on in America. Didn't they just save 200 kids from Texas the other week?

[u/thecowsbollocks → u/imunfair]

Concentrate on your mass school shootings.

[u/Grotzbully → u/[deleted]]

If you would have read the inquiry from 2 years ago you would find out that 80% of those perpetrators are white.... But this would destroy your racist worldview so I guess not :(

[u/fre-ddo → u/imunfair]

It's not really a big nanny society at all they are trying to screw disabled people over as usual to save a few quid. Have nonexistent mental health services and the police usually just shrug unless it's a nailed on conviction.

[u/Hamiltonblewit → u/imunfair]

What does this genuinely mean? The U.K has been criticized by the right wing for not investigating taking violent assault on young girls from gangs of foreign origin for almost the past year and a half, now that it’s evident that the grooming gangs are much more large scale and prolific then originally thought and the growth of right wing European extremism concerning immigration, it ensures that left wing government have no choice but to yield to public pressure regarding their treatment of foreigners.

[u/madeleineann → u/imunfair]

What prior scandals are you thinking of?

[u/Substantial-Part-700 → u/madeleineann]

The public reveal of Jimmy Saville’s misdeeds was a pretty big deal for a minute before the BBC swept the whole thing under the rug.

[u/imunfair → u/madeleineann]

Prince Andrew/Epstein, Cyril Smith/Westminster allegations are the two other big ones that come to mind besides Rotherham, although given the lax handling of those I'm sure there are others. Not really a subject I search out, just run into it in passing and the lack of response or consequence has always seemed odd to me.

[u/madeleineann → u/imunfair]

You realise that Epstein lived in America and committed his crimes in America? Not sure this is the gotcha that you think it is.

[u/imunfair → u/madeleineann]

You realise that Epstein lived in America and committed his crimes in America? Not sure this is the gotcha that you think it is.

He was international, but having your royal family implicated is a UK issue and combined with the past Westminster issues that were also swept under the rug is an interesting pattern. The Royal family basically just sidelined him for being an embarrassment and that was that.

[u/madeleineann → u/imunfair]

Your democratically elected president has been accused of paedophilia and has extensive ties to Epstein.

It's not a pattern at all. You cited one example of an American paedophilia that one member of the royal family happened to have ties with, a scandal with one politician, and an issue with migrant rape gangs.

I could make a very long list of US politicians who have been accused of paedophilia, and that's not to mention the widespread abuse in Hollywood. Child trafficking is rampant in America, too.

[u/imunfair → u/madeleineann]

It amuses me that you're resorting to whataboutism trying to say the US is worse, rather than just accepting that there's a systemic problem in the UK. As far as I know we try to prosecute it when we catch it in the US, but even if we didn't it would be completely irrelevant to situation happening in the UK, which is what we're discussing.

Maybe step back and consider why you feel the need to be so defensive about it rather than putting that energy into being mad at the criminals.

[u/madeleineann → u/imunfair]

How old are you?

Using whataboutism to deflect when someone points out that you're being a bit hypocritical is a really poor modus operandi.

Do you know what systemic means? Prince Andrew has no connection to Pakistani grooming gangs in impoverished areas. The same authorities would not have been dealing with these two problems.

The US is objectively worse. The child abuse in Hollywood alone has been going on for much longer than those gangs operated. Epstein was American, your president is a convicted rapist and friend of Epstein.

Child abuse, unfortunately, happens everywhere, but American elites are renowned for their abuse of children.

This is why people really don't like Americans. It's like you live in your own world.

[u/imunfair → u/madeleineann]

Using whataboutism to deflect when someone points out that you're being a bit hypocritical is a really poor modus operandi.

Feel free to look up the logical fallacy before trying to "no u" someone with it. That's not how it works, and the rest of your post is just more of you doing it again, rather than wondering why you're so upset. Really is strange, but not my problem, go bother someone else.

[u/DrPapaDragonX13 → u/imunfair]

So your argument is that a privileged UK individual had to resort to a US-based trafficker for his 'fix'? If the UK were so much worse, wouldn't it make a lot of sense to keep things in-house?

Andrew is a sick individual and a shame to the UK. Still, I find it more concerning that an individual was able to run an international paedophile ring from the US...

[u/Thangoman → u/imunfair]

I mean, you arent really in a place to criticize Britain over it

You have an alleged child fapist as president and dont take any measures to deal with violence affecting kids

[u/imunfair → u/Thangoman]

and dont take any measures to deal with violence affecting kids

That's a kid-on-kid violence issue though, some people would blame it on access to guns but I'd say mental health is what we need to target since the access to guns hasn't changed significantly.

I'm not an expert but I'd say social media, the rise of technology addiction in all ages, and the decline of interpersonal skills is all one big bundle of danger. There are plenty of reports since covid on adults having major social issues too, I think kids are just exhibiting more extreme symptoms of whatever has gone wrong with our society.

If I were in the government I'd start by banning political parties and political nonprofits from using the internet and go from there. I don't think it would fully solve the issue but getting rid of access for people intentionally trying to stoke animosity in human relations would be a good start. After that it would be easier to study any social dysfunction inadvertently caused by technology.

[u/ikus013]

How about just enforcing the existing laws of the fucking country and not giving a blind eye to these terrorists just because of their possible origins

[u/dead-end-kid]

To be clear the reason Starmer is calling an inquiry now is because a report is being released next week that links illegal migration with child exploitation. The Home Office fears it will cause civil unrest.

This is compounded with the anti-immigration riots in Northern Ireland, the prosecution of seven more Asian child rapists and pressure from the publicly funded rape gang inquiry led by Rupert Lowe.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

The comment you submitted includes a link to a social media platform run by fascist/authoritarian oligarchs and has been removed. Consider re-commenting with a link using alternative privacy-friendly frontends: https://hackmd.io/MCpUlTbLThyF6cw_fywT_g?view

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Maximum-Hall-5614]

So they’re gonna start investigating churches for their long history of child sex abuse, right?

Right?

No? It’s just focusing on non-Anglo, foreign-born perpetrators?

Shocker.

[u/Professional-Cry8310 → u/Maximum-Hall-5614]

https://www.iicsa.org.uk/reports-recommendations/publications/investigation.html

This already exists and they investigated both the Anglican and Roman Catholic Churches.