Grooming gang outrage as Labour slammed for ‘distressing’ victims | Politics | News

The Government’s national inquiry into grooming gangs faces the “impossible” task of regaining the trust of survivors after a series of high-profile resignations, a leading abuse lawyer has warned. Alan Collins, partner at Bolt Burdon Kemp, said the credibility of the investigation was “seriously undermined” after the departure of four women from the Victims and Survivors Panel, including Fiona Goddard and Ellie-Ann Reynolds, who accused authorities of creating a “toxic” and “controlling” environment.

Mr Collins told Express.co.uk: “For the inquiry to gain public trust it must be effective, independent and – crucially – have the support of survivors. Without the support and input of survivors it will be doomed to criticism, whether unfair or not. Resignations have led to the inquiry being withdrawn. Restoring trust will be a huge challenge and perhaps impossible.”

Survivors said they resigned after being removed from the decision-making process and ignored when voicing concerns about leadership and coverage. Ms Goddard said officials used “condescending and controlling” language, while Ms Reynolds said the experience had left her “isolated and depressed”, adding that she would not rejoin “even if my life depended on it”.

The investigation, announced in June, is designed to investigate how local authorities and police forces have failed to prevent decades-long abuse by gangs in towns and cities across England. But within a few months of its founding, a hard line was taken over who would run it and how widely it should spread.

Mr Collins said the resignations revealed “deep institutional distrust” that may now be impossible to repair.

He said: “There is a widely held, and probably justified, perception that the government does not want this investigation and has been dragged on by heels to agree to it. Survivors who were disbelieved in the past now feel rejected again. They have caused avoidable distress. It will be extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to rebuild trust.”

He added that structural problems are much deeper than personalities. “The surveillance process is in disarray, and survivors have retreated. To get the investigation back on track, clear leadership and a trusting president are needed – someone willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads, no matter how uncomfortable.”

Criticism from survivors focused on two points: the short list of potential heads (one a former police chief, the other a senior social worker) and efforts to broaden the scope of the investigation beyond street-based grooming rings to include broader child sexual abuse. They argue this risks “watering down” the focus on systemic failures that allow networks of abusers to operate with impunity.

One of the candidates, former Lambeth children’s services director Annie Hudson, withdrew after widespread criticism. The Home Office has not yet confirmed who will lead the investigation or how survivors will be involved in the next phase.

The resignations led to ministers scrambling to contain the fallout. Environment Minister Emma Reynolds apologized to the women, admitting the government had “work to do” to rebuild trust. Home Affairs Minister Shabana Mahmood stressed that the scope of the investigation “will not change” and said it would focus on “delivering justice” for the victims of “predatory monsters”.

In the House of Commons, Sir Keir Starmer moved to stabilize the process, saying the inquiry “has not been watered down and will never be watered down”. He told MPs: “The scope will not change. We will examine the ethnicity and religion of the offenders and find the right person to lead the investigation.”

Sir Keir confirmed earlier this year that Dame Louise Casey, who led the national review into group-based child sexual abuse, would “support the inquiry’s work”. The 2025 report found that public institutions repeatedly avoided addressing cultural and ethnic factors when reviewing cases “for fear of appearing racist.”

Baroness Casey’s appointment – following her previous reviews of Rotherham Council, homelessness and the Metropolitan Police – aims to restore the credibility of a process already mired in distrust.

But for many survivors and campaigners, this reassurance may come too late. As Mr Collins warned: “We owe the country, and especially the survivors, an investigation. But without their trust, the whole thing risks collapsing before it’s even started.”