Lucy Powell dog whistle comments!

The Grooming Gangs Inquiry is of great concern to many, and after promising five Government Inquiries, in which witnesses are compelled to attend, Labour has downgraded them to council-led inquiries. These have little power over the perpetrators, but particularly over representatives of the Police and Social workers, whose responses have been identified as inadequate, incompetent, contemptuous, misogynistic, and driven by fear of inflaming racial tensions. All comments taken from various reviews over the past ten plus years.
Lucy Powell's comment was contemptuous and inflammatory.

I agree Eazybee and watered down inquiries are useless.

Lucy Powell is truly awful, along with the rest of the goons leading our country.

growstuff

Wyllow3

I had to clarify dog whistle by looking it up, but there are different definitions.

Growstuff's description of a speech or statement of making a number of comments which supporters would understood as provocative and critical but not saying as much in plain speech does fit the bill -

Powell spotted it as such but should have stuck to the issue not the provocation..

Yes, she should and the way she expressed herself was inept. I don't think she actually meant "dog whistle" - she really should have explained herself better.

I expect she was thinking about the demos by Tommy Robinson and his ilk. More often than not, there is somebody holding up a placard about grooming gangs. They couldn't care less about the victims. Their issue is the ethnicity of the gangs and is a racist attack. There were a number of them just after the Southport riots, even though those murders had nothing to do with grooming.

When Jack Straw was MP for Blackburn he didn’t hold back when calling out the ethnicity of the grooming gangs.

I think it was the whole response she gave "Oh, we want to blow that little trumpet now, do we? Let's get that dog whistle out, shall we? that was so offensive. 'Little trumpet' 'dog whistle' both used to dismiss and silence. I wonder what her reaction to those phrases would be if uttered by an opposition MP.

I agree with you Rosie51. I didn't interpret what she said as others have done. However, she rose to the bait, lost it and opened her mouth before putting her brain into gear. She's been a politician for long enough to know better.

Wes Streeting said: “She’s also human. I’ve made mistakes in the past, I’m sure I’m going to make mistakes in the future.’
Lucy Connolly jailed for 31 months for a subsequently deleted Facebook post was not afforded the same understanding.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Wes Streeting said: “She’s also human. I’ve made mistakes in the past, I’m sure I’m going to make mistakes in the future.’
Lucy Connolly jailed for 31 months for a subsequently deleted Facebook post was not afforded the same understanding.

That's because she made more than one "mistake" and she pled guilty to a crime.

Refresh your memory about the Lucy Connolly conviction:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp3wkzgpjxvo

She knew perfectly well what she was doing.

Disproportionate punishment though growstuff.
We shall have to agree to disagree over this.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Disproportionate punishment though growstuff.
We shall have to agree to disagree over this.

What do you disagree about?

She made multiple comments which constituted racial hatred, including burning down hostels while immigrants were in them.

She pled guilty.

She tweeted that she would "'play the mental health card" and "If that makes me racist, so be it." She knew perfectly well what she was saying and admitted it.

In what way do you disagree with me - I didn't write anything about the severity of the sentence, so you don't even know what I think.

A Reform UK spokesman said Powell's "abhorrent comments truly demonstrate how out of touch the Labour Party is".

He went on: "She does not take the mass rape of young girls by predominantly Pakistani men seriously. The mask has slipped.

Utterly sickening to make political capital from this.

The bottom line is - there is to be no national inquiry.
Now that IS disgraceful in my opinion.

lafergar

A Reform UK spokesman said Powell's "abhorrent comments truly demonstrate how out of touch the Labour Party is".

He went on: "She does not take the mass rape of young girls by predominantly Pakistani men seriously. The mask has slipped.

Utterly sickening to make political capital from this.

Ironically, of course, they are proving now that it was a "dog whistle" comment by Tim Montgomerie.

I watched the original interview on TV. Pakistanis weren't mentioned, but they are now and the whole issue is being widely discussed. That is precisely what dog whistle comments are about.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

The bottom line is - there is to be no national inquiry.
Now that IS disgraceful in my opinion.

What could a national inquiry achieve that local inquiries can't and won't?

Its quite right that people should be called to account for historic cover ups where they happened but what strikes me is that some posters go on about it (thread after thread)

- but seem apparently unconcerned and indeed have not mentioned here -

about whats happening right now as regards high levels of child abuse and unconcerned about the need to address it and ignoring new measures being brought in to try and address it.

Yes, political capital time, lafergar.

Because Powell was not dismissing those historic concerns but objecting to that very "political capital" game.

Because Powell was not dismissing those historic concerns but objecting to that very "political capital" game.

And she was right, as even proved on this thread. Tim Montgomerie didn't need to mention the ethnicity of any of the gang members because he's provoked comments from the public.

A Government Inquiry can compel people to attend; a local council Inquiry cannot.
The intention is not just to investigate the perpetrators but to expose the dismissive attitude of the Police and social services, which allowed the abuse to continue, and ensure it is still not continuing. Possibly some punitive measures.

Any Questions is a political programme, so why refer to Grooming gangs as a 'political football'?

Lucy Powell needs to speak plain English, not indulge in slang which mystified at least some of her audience.

Sorry, but I saw it and I assumed people understood the term "dog whistle", as Lucy Powell presumably did. It's not the grooming gangs who are "dog whistle" (she didn't mention political football), but bringing up the topic in the way Tim Montgomerie did.

Thank you for explaining that a national enquiry can compel witnesses to attend.

PS. Haven't we already had a number of inquiries?

I think the governemnts argument is that there has already been a series of local enquiries and some authorities are still failing to implement the recommendations made.
This present government are presently looking into the reasons why and atempting to foce councils to implement thouse changes. This does not get the media coverage, however.
A national enquiry would take years and cost even more money. I think the argument is there's no point in having one if the perevious recommendations are still not being implemented.
Last week an all white grooming gang were sent to prison and I have seen no coverage of this at all (except for one Facebook page) so the focus on the muslim/pakistani gangs seems to feed into a racist trope which doesn't hold too much water when more closely investigated.
I didn't hear the comment from Powell but I sense she was touching on this aspect of the issue with her comment.

Just seen a poll where 99% of people thought she should resign.

Hardly surprising when the poll is on GB news, is it?

What I can't get my little pea brained head around is why now?

For short hand I'll use the phrase grooming gangs...this happened years ago. We have excellent TV dramas and documentaries, first class professionals who have worked and are working in this field and now we have the hard right sitting up and demanding an enquiry? Why now?

How many more times?
Yes, this happened years ago and is still happening. Local Inquiries haven't stopped it, neither have the police and social services agencies, because no-one is held accountable. Only when people in positions of authority are held to account publicly and punished, will these services take the continuing abuse seriously.

The simple reason people are calling for action is because Labour promised it.
The Conservatives did initiate inquiries, and they have proved to be inadequate. Hence the need to take stronger action, as promised by Labour, who have now reneged on their promises.

We still have grooming gangs and other forms of child abuse and we still don't have an adequate response to them in the "here and now

The Jay enquiry cost £200.000.000 and made 20 recommendations in 2022 for the future investigation and prevention of grooming and other forms of child abuse.

Yet the Conservatives implemented only one, and in the first week of April more measures were announced by Labour to further Jay report recommendations.

The Jay report did not fully cover all the people who delayed or sought to "cover up" the prosecution of Pakistani gangs although some local inquiries have uncovered some figures,
and the demands for Independent Inquiries is to find more who did.

The problem is that there has to be a balance struck between funding more enquiries into the past versus actually spending money on what is happening right now.

We havent got another £200.000.000 to spend on current measures to catch the appalling criminals still abusing children, to implement the Jay report,

and therefore I agree with the position that we do try to find those culpable in the past but funding has to be balanced with the needs of those suffering right now.

But the far right continue to beat the same drum and cant see the necessity of decisions that are realistic about resourcing and balance.