Keir Starmer announces statutory inquiry into so called grooming gangs/organised child sexual abuse and exploitation

sorry, correct above - "data" not "date"

As far as I understand it Kandinsky date will be collected country wide. Hardly any point doing otherwise.

I think a side effect of this is a good one in that it could well mean drawing in support, not hiding by those communities.

I have actually read up on several sites the efforts made by Muslim organisations going back a long time to work against the gangs and this may help them. Becuase thats what could best make a difference if the men concerned are not "protected" anymore.

I am not a cynical person and believe any decent family would not "protect" if it's taken up. We need to support efforts not grumble or blame. Always carrot, not stick.

Casdon

You seem really upset that Asian men are being mentioned at all.

Very weird.

Well......I just cant understand, if it was suddenly pressing issue in January of this year, why the Conservatives, who are not as affected by the Muslim vote, did absolutely nothing at all for two years following the first £400 million enquiry - except form groups within police forces.

Why not? looks like they cared less than Labour, despite both all its faults and strong points.

Absolutely clear guide lines today, at last.

The tools are there, under good guidance, clear promises that the wrongdoers be it the police, SSD, the groomers, politicians will be called out for it.

Great interview with Maggie Oliver on tonight's 6pm BBC news, who outlined all this in great detail including of course there must and will, from now on, data collected by race as well as other factors.

There is no get out now, as far as I can tell - on the news Yvette Cooper said all this (as well as Sarah Champion, who of course was MP for Rotherham from 2012 to now - ie people prosecuted, and race data collected etc.

Given that the conservatives did virtually nothing (one out of 20 recommendations), I found Badenoch's attitude just trying it on without many legs to stand on.

The assumption that a national inquiry focussed on ‘Asian Gangs’ is more appropriate than a full national inquiry without there being evidence to back that assumption up one way or another? Three police force areas out of 45 reporting either A or B on incomplete data is not conclusive.

However, it added that at a local level for three police forces - Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire - there was enough evidence to show a "disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds amongst suspects for group-based child sexual exploitation

This is from the BBC.

What are you disputing?

Yes, I know exactly what you’re pointing out? That’s what I was saying the first time. People make assumptions which can’t be proven because the data is not collected, or not collected accurately, or not used.

I am afraid I am pointing out that Skys report is based on rubbish data. I am not interested in bandwagon. I am interested in safeguarding.

Galaxy

There can't be evidence either way because ethnicity wasn't recorded for two thirds of the rape gangs. I have no idea why we do data collection in relation to safeguarding it is routinely either useless or ignored.

Exactly this. I get fed up with bandwagons.

Primrose53

Oldwoman70

I am in full support of an enquiry - hopefully we will get a better result than the usual "lessons have been learned"

let’s hope Starmer resigns when the whole truth comes out and shows just how much he knew about what was going on. Most of the towns where this abuse went on are Labour towns and he didn’t want to upset the Muslim voters.

What in God's name is a Labour town?

How on earth anybody can use this to score points is beyond me.

Will Elon be contributing at all?

There can't be evidence either way because ethnicity wasn't recorded for two thirds of the rape gangs. I have no idea why we do data collection in relation to safeguarding it is routinely either useless or ignored.

Kandinsky

*disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds amongst suspects for group-based child sexual exploitation*

Why is this I wonder?

Thee is no evidence to suggest it’s actually the case.
news.sky.com/story/child-sex-abuse-and-grooming-gangs-what-we-know-and-what-we-dont-from-the-data-13285420
I never believe media representation which demonises one group without checking it out for myself.

Yes TerriBull. I heard her son interviewed earlier today. Dreadful treatment of her and the victims
I raised it in 1998.

Not pertaining to Keir Starmer, probably before his time. Labour MP Ann Cryer did her best to try and bring this matter to the party's attention 20 or so years ago, for that this excellent MP was villified and besmirched as a rascist. This has been the ongoing problem the inconvenient truth that wasn't acknowledged, in fact to say so at all fed into that far right accusation. Prevarications, obfuscation, blame shifting and outright denials, all that has been there from the time this behaviour was outed and has under pinned the raging anger within the communities affected and society as a whole when miscarriages of justice are not properly addressed.

Exactly AGAA4
These girls were often not seen as children but as eazybee said earlier as child prostitutes. Wrong on every level

You can't blame Starmer for this. It was a whole system failure by all the organisations that should have been supporting children.

And this issue is too important to become a political football. Just mentioning though 14 years and no recommendations implemented

Starmer became an mp in 2015 for Holborn and Pancras. In what way did he stop proper investigation

Oldwoman70

I am in full support of an enquiry - hopefully we will get a better result than the usual "lessons have been learned"

let’s hope Starmer resigns when the whole truth comes out and shows just how much he knew about what was going on. Most of the towns where this abuse went on are Labour towns and he didn’t want to upset the Muslim voters.

Rosie51 👏👏👏👏👏👏

And all the while terms such as 'child prostitute' and 'child porn' are used it will always be One step forward three back Iam64. That anyone can ever hold a child responsible for any sexual activity with an adult disgusts me, be that a policeman, social worker, teacher, priest or ordinary member of the public. Children can not consent to sex.

eazybee, no child can prostitute themselves. Children who behave as you describe are being exploited by sex offenders who are sexually excited by children including damaged youngsters who have almost certainly been introduced to sex by adult men at an early age

Your post confirms the reluctance of some police/agencies who dismissed these children as making poor lifestyle choices or my favourite, putting themselves at risk.
One step forward three back

You can't be a prostitute if you are a child. Children can't consent. It is child abuse.

Unfortunately, a child can prostitute his or her self, that is, offer (someone) sexual activity in exchange for payment.

A school caretaker was suspected of interfering with girls, aged 10-13, and a police camera was set up in his room to record what happened. The dreadful thing was that the girls initiated the activities, offering touching and seeing activities in return for sweets, then money, then threats. The worst thing was that the parents when informed, had to watch the film of their daughters' behaviour.
The caretaker was prosecuted and imprisoned and his behaviour was appalling, but the term 'prostitute herself' can be correct. These children are vulnerable and need protecting against themselves.

disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds amongst suspects for group-based child sexual exploitation

Why is this I wonder?