I was asked by Talk TV to air my views on the decision by Jess Phillips MP not to back calls by Oldham Council for a public inquiry into the problem of child sexual exploitation in the town. Before I summarise my views, it would be worth summarising the story so far.
Summary
In October 2024, Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips declined Oldham Council’s request for a government-led public inquiry into historical child sexual exploitation (CSE) in the area. Phillips stated that it was the council’s responsibility to commission such an inquiry, referencing successful local investigations in Rotherham and Telford.
This decision has sparked significant criticism. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called for a comprehensive national inquiry into the UK’s “rape gangs scandal,” emphasizing the need for coordinated action across various regions.
The situation gained international attention when billionaire Elon Musk accused Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, who served as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008 to 2013, of failing to prosecute grooming gangs during his tenure. Musk also criticized Phillips, suggesting she should face legal consequences for her decision regarding the Oldham inquiry.
In response, former chief prosecutor Nazir Afzal defended Starmer, highlighting his efforts to reform the Crown Prosecution Service’s approach to child sexual abuse cases during his leadership. Afzal noted that previous national inquiries, such as the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) led by Professor Alexis Jay, have already addressed these issues, and their recommendations are pending implementation.
The debate continues over whether a new national inquiry is necessary or if existing recommendations should be promptly enacted to address the systemic failures that have allowed such exploitation to persist.
What do I think?
First of all, should there be an inquiry at all? After all, there have been local inquiries in Rotherham, Telford, and Oxford, so why should Oldham, where the problems are similar be any different. Would anything new be learned in Oldham? Clearly it is alleged that there have been systemic failings, which the Local Authority recognise should be investigated in the interests of transparency and open government. Undoubtedly the survivors of abuse deserve answers to the obvious questions such as
- “How was this allowed to happen, and was there a cover up?”
- “Were obvious signs missed?”
- “Did public services fail to respond to signs that abuse was going on?”
- “Did social workers ignore signs of aberrant behaviour and blame the cared for child rather than pursue the offender?”
- “Did the police investigate the crimes properly?
There are no doubt many other questions that need answers which an inquiry can investigate. Lessons will no doubt be learned. How many times have we heard that phrase?
Secondly, should the inquiry be local and KC led, or public on a statutory basis with a judge in charge? A Public Inquiry every time for me.
- A local inquiry cannot compel the attendance of witnesses like a public inquiry
- A local inquiry cannot force institutions to disclose documents.
- It is unlikely that any participants would be able to seek legal advice and have supportive Counsel at the hearing.
- A local inquiry sits in private, whereas a public inquiry sits in public and evidence can be viewed online, usually.
- A Public Inquiry is appropriate where there are generic issues which not only occur in Oldham, but in other parts of the country, as here. There is the generic issue of what influence the cultural restrictions of the Muslim faith have had upon the behaviour of the offenders who are, predominately, Pakistani males.
- A local inquiry would be funded by Oldham MBC who are no doubt strapped for cash. There would be a lack of independence and accusations of poacher turned game keeper if the Council would be seen to be investigating themselves. A Public Inquiry, however, would be independently funded by government.
- Whilst the IICSA (Independent Inquiry Child Sexual Abuse) looked at Child Sexual Exploitation, their final report did not contain any governmental recommendations on point.
Thirdly, politics should not be weaponised when important sensitive issues such as child sexual abuse are at stake. Although Elon Musk has created a media storm due to his comments on X, and highlighted the problem, one wonders how his recent elevation to Trump’s Government have brought about his controversial remarks and criticism of a Socialist Government when he is clearly part of a right wing party with allegiances to Reform UK.
Fourthly, when the survivors of child sexual exploitation in voluntary care try to seek civil redress against Local Authorities, they will be met with arguments based upon a case called CN & GN v Poole Borough Council, which I have discussed here, and which gives Local Authorities more or less exemption from liability on the basis that they do not owe the looked after child a duty of care. This is a law that isn’t going to change, but should be reversed because it denies such victims the right to civil redress.
Finally, the rejection by Jess Phillips of calls for a public inquiry will send a very bad message to the thousands of child abuse victims all over the country, who will take the view that the government does not care about giving them justice that they so badly need.
