Survivors of child sexual exploitation (CSE) in Greater Manchester feel they are ‘back to square one’ after several women quit the panel of a national inquiry into historic grooming cases.
Three survivors claimed in their resignation letters to the Home Office there was a ‘toxic, fearful environment’ and that the review was ‘less about the truth and more about a cover-up’.
Disagreement between Minister and survivors
Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips denies claims of a cover-up and said the inquiry was ‘committed to exposing the failures’ to tackle ‘these appalling crimes’. The national inquiry was first announced by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer in June, with a number of CSE survivors invited to join a panel to help steer its direction.
But a number of those involved have criticised the government for its handling of the panel. Survivors have blasted the choice of chairpeople, with the two shortlisted candidates reported to be a former police chief and a social worker, described as a ‘disturbing conflict of interest’ due to the role of GMP and social workers in some of the alleged failures to intervene in cases of suspected grooming.
One former panel member also took issue with the ‘widening of the remit’ beyond grooming gangs, which Phillips has denied.
Survivors are losing faith in the enquiry
The public disagreement has left some survivors fearful over the future of the inquiry, while others said they had ‘lost faith’ in it before it had even begun.
Sam Walker-Roberts, another survivor on the panel who has waived her anonymity, said there were problems with how the review was being managed, but felt ‘walking out is unjustified’. She told the Local Democracy Reporting Service:
What does it achieve? We’re now back to square one, all kicking off about what’s going on.
We’re now back to square one, all kicking off about what’s going on. Yes, we need to speak out and raise our concerns. I did so the minute it started. But every survivor matters. We’ve never had a national inquiry where it’s been survivor-led. This is the first of its kind.
‘The terms of the inquiry should be widened’
Walker-Roberts said she had argued for the terms of the inquiry to be widened.
She said:
For the past five years, the media and parliament have been calling this a CSE inquiry. But since the Casey report has come out, they’ve changed the narrative and started calling it a grooming gang inquiry.
If those are the terms of the review, that wouldn’t include me. I’m not a grooming gang survivor. I’m a CSE survivor. My case is a grey area. But there’s so many victims who are in grey areas. Every survivor needs a voice in this.
If every survivor can be part of this national inquiry, then statistics will show the truth about everything. And it won’t be the narrative the far right wants it to be.
Walker-Roberts added that she’d been far from happy with the panel so far. She said:
Stage one of the panel felt like a fight to have your voice heard and say what you wanted. And now none of us know what’s going on to be honest. They refused to let me be part of Stage Two. Only a select few can be part of it.
Another Oldham survivor known as ‘Amelia’ is not part of the panel, but shared that she felt disillusioned by the latest news from the inquiry.
I feel proud of the survivors for having the confidence to do what they believe is right,” she said. “But I feel appalled, and let down once again that the Home Office has tried to put these two people in place without, in my eyes, proper thought – who are from the very two professions that are at the heart of these failures.
Once again, the government thinks it knows better than survivors.
Jess Phillips MP spoke in parliament
Speaking in parliament today, Jess Phillips responded to questions about the resignations, stating emphatically that she would ‘continue to listen’ to survivors and the inquiry would carry on.
Mrs Phillips said:
Not all victims are of the same opinion. They are not one homogenous group who all think the same thing, who all want the same exposure and want their identities known.
In regards to requiring a judge, Baroness Casey said to this house she did not want a traditional, judicial-led inquiry. She was explicit. If anyone can find me an institution that didn’t fail these girls over the years, including our courts… they all failed.
We will continue to progress. I will engage with the survivors and continue to listen to those who have been put in the media, that are put in panels. I will always listen.
An article by Local Democracyreporter Charlotte Hall.
