Starmer’s grooming gang inquiry left in turmoil after two survivors quit panel | Gangs

Keir Starmer’s national grooming gang investigation has been left in turmoil after two survivors resigned from the oversight panel and accused the Home Office and Labor of “contempt” and “political interference” before appointing a chairman.

Ellie-Ann Reynolds and Fiona Goddard resigned from the inquiry’s oversight panel on Monday, complaining about “condescending and controlling language used towards survivors” throughout the process.

The two likely candidates to head the investigation, former deputy chief constable Jim Gamble and Annie Hudson, chair of the child safety practices review panel, are expected to meet with the panel on Tuesday.

Barrow’s Reynolds said in a statement: “The Home Office held meetings we were not told about, made decisions we could not question and withheld information that directly affected our business. When I asked for clarity I was treated with disdain and ignored.”

Goddard, who was abused while living in a children’s care center in Bradford, made a number of criticisms of the way the investigation was conducted; This includes victims’ fears about conflicts of interest between those involved.

The Guardian revealed last week that the terms of the statutory inquiry were still being discussed by a panel of stakeholders, including survivors of the hazing gangs, four months after the prime minister bowed to pressure and established it.

Survivors objected to demands from a Labor mayor that the investigation be widened to look at the areas as a whole rather than focusing on known gang victims. They believe this will dilute the investigation, prolong the time to conclusion, and shift the focus away from proven victims.

West Yorkshire mayor Tracy Brabin and her deputy Alison Lowe lobbied home secretary Shabana Mahmood last month to ask the inquiry to examine grooming gang activity across the region.

But survivors close to the investigation criticized these demands. A source said: “Survivors want justice and that means focusing on specific victims in specific places and getting to the bottom of who knew what and when. If you expand the investigation it will become very unclear.”

Concerns about the length of the investigation were further raised when the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse (IICSA), led by Prof Alexis Jay, took seven years to conclude.

In his resignation email from the victims/survivors liaison panel, Goddard wrote that he was concerned that some stakeholders had “relationships with members of the Labor government that constitute a potential conflict of interest.”

“This investigation is in danger of being broadened, diluted, and once again failing to get to the truth. We have repeatedly encountered suggestions from authorities to expand this investigation, and there is a real fear among survivors, including myself, that this will become another IICSA and the grooming of gang victims will be forgotten,” he wrote.

After the investigation was announced, Brabin and Lowe met with survivors in the area and wrote a letter to Mahmood in September calling for a region-wide investigation. Sixty-one defendants have been charged and are on trial or listed for trial in relation to 14 investigations in Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees and Wakefield.

Asked to respond to survivors’ concerns about the powers and allegations of political interference, Lowe said: “Our actions in West Yorkshire have always been driven by survivors and that is why we are taking action to bring justice to them.

“The evidence shows that this appalling crime is not confined to one part of our county. We have written to the Home Secretary to invite the head of inquiry to West Yorkshire and examine the issues in each area so we can ensure justice is delivered for all victims.”

Goddard wrote in an email Monday morning that he was concerned the investigation could be led by a former police officer or a social worker; These two services were suspected of covering up rape and child trafficking. “This is a troubling conflict of interest and I fear that the lack of trust in services due to years of failures and corruption will have a negative impact on survivors’ participation in this investigation,” he wrote. Gamble has been approached for comment. Hudson declined to comment.

Richard Scorer, head of fraud law and public investigations at Slater and Gordon, who groomed around 30 gangland victims, said: “I am very concerned at suggestions I have heard that the Home Office wants to stage this process. I know survivors are concerned about this too. For this inquiry to be effective it needs to be able to criticize the actions of politicians both nationally and locally where necessary. “At such an early stage in the process political interference, This is what is happening, it is not a good sign.”

In a letter to the home affairs select committee published last night, conservation minister Jess Phillips rejected any allegations of a cover-up, saying “this could not be further from the truth”.

“It is by no means exceptional that an inquiry is announced several months before a chairperson is appointed; the Covid and infected blood inquests in the UK both take seven months before a chairperson is appointed. It has also been reported that no judicial nominee is willing to take on the role, which is categorically untrue. By either instructing the government to take a regional approach to investigations or by instructing it to take a regional approach to inquiry He reportedly tried to dilute the focus of the investigation. by broadening the scope beyond ‘grooming gangs’. This is not true either. “The conduct and procedure of the investigation will be a matter for the president, but the terms of reference will be clear that its scope will be laser-focused, as Baroness Casey has recommended,” he wrote.

A Ministry of Internal Affairs spokesman said: “The exploitation of children by grooming gangs is one of the most horrific crimes imaginable. We will do everything in our power to ensure these crimes never happen again. That is why we have launched a legal investigation equipped with the power and resources necessary to get to the truth and bring justice to survivors.”