Lucy Powell apologises to grooming gang victims over ‘dog whistle' remarks
Ms Powell's apology came after shadow Commons leader Jesse Norman said his counterpart had received 'universal condemnation for dismissing concerns' about grooming gangs as 'dog whistle politics' during an appearance on BBC Radio 4's Any Questions programme.
When a recent Channel 4 documentary about five women's stories of being groomed and abused by gangs was raised by a fellow panellist, Ms Powell replied on the BBC programme: 'Oh, we want to blow that little trumpet now, do we? Let's get that dog whistle out, shall we?'
Ms Powell, speaking in the Commons on Thursday, said: 'I am very sorry for those remarks, as I made clear over the weekend. I and every member of this Government want your truth to be heard wherever that truth leads.
'Your truly appalling experiences need to be acted on, for those responsible to be accountable and face the full force of the law and for justice to be served.
'I would never want to leave the impression that these very serious, profound and far-reaching issues, which I have campaigned on for many years, should be shied away from and not aired. Far from it. No stone will be left unturned.
'And what the victims want first and foremost is for action to be taken and for the many, many recommendations from the previous inquiries to be implemented in full, including mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse – something I have called for for nearly a decade.
'Shockingly these recommendations remained sitting on the shelf until we came into government last year.
'Baroness Louise Casey, who conducted the no holds barred inquiry into Rotherham, is carrying out an audit on the scale, nature and characteristics of grooming gangs. She will be reporting soon. This will include the questions of ethnicity, as well.
'Every police force in England and Wales has been asked to look again at historic grooming gang cases and they will be reopened where it is appropriate to get perpetrators behind bars.
'So I hope the House is left in no doubt of my commitment to these issues and my apology to those victims for any distress I have caused them.'
Mr Norman earlier accused Ms Powell of having 'talked in the same way about grooming gangs' from the despatch box when 'she accused people of jumping on bandwagons on January 9 of this year' in business questions.
He said: 'I hope we can agree now that this is an extremely serious national issue and that no-one, whether or not they hold public office, should be deflecting or denying its seriousness.
'I hope that in her response now the Leader of the House will put aside party politics, avoid criticising others and speak from the heart.'
Mr Norman asked if Ms Powell had watched the Channel 4 documentary, adding: 'Does she agree that the dismissal of these entirely valid concerns has been one of the factors behind what even today remains a huge continuing national scandal.
'Will she now back the call of many victims for a comprehensive national inquiry into grooming gangs?'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
17 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Elections in Bolivia expected to empower right-wing for first time in decades
Bolivians are voting for a new president and parliament in elections that could see a right-wing government elected for the first time in more than two decades. After a lacklustre campaign overshadowed by a looming economic collapse, the vote – which could spell the end of the Andean nation's long-dominant leftist party – is one of the most consequential for Bolivia in recent times, and one of the most unpredictable. Advertisement In the run-up to Sunday, some 30% or so of voters remained undecided. An electoral official shows voters the presidential ballot in Jesus de Machaca (Juan Karita/AP) Polls showed the two leading right-wing candidates, multimillionaire business owner Samuel Doria Medina and former president Jorge Fernando 'Tuto' Quiroga, locked in a virtual dead heat. Voting is mandatory in Bolivia, where some 7.9 million Bolivians are eligible to vote. 'I have rarely, if ever, seen a situational tinderbox with as many sparks ready to ignite,' said Daniel Lansberg-Rodriguez, founding partner of Aurora Macro Strategies, a New York-based advisory firm. Advertisement The election is being closely watched across Latin America for its potential impact on the economic fate and political stability of this long-restive, resource-rich nation. Presidential candidate Samuel Doria Medina shows his ballot (Natacha Pisarenko/AP) It also marks a watershed moment for the Movement Toward Socialism, or MAS, party, whose founder, charismatic ex-president Evo Morales, rose to power as part of the 'pink tide' of leftist leaders that swept into office across Latin America during the commodities boom of the early 2000s. Now shattered by infighting, the party is fighting for its survival in Sunday's elections. The outcome will determine whether Bolivia — a nation of about 12 million people with the largest lithium reserves on Earth and crucial deposits of rare earth minerals — follows a growing trend in Latin America, where right-wing leaders such as Argentina's libertarian Javier Milei, Ecuador's strongman Daniel Noboa and El Salvador's conservative populist Nayib Bukele have surged in popularity. Advertisement A right-wing government in Bolivia could trigger a major geopolitical realignment for a country now allied with Venezuela's socialist-inspired government and world powers such as China, Russia and Iran. The sombre mood of the election was clear as voting kicked off at polling stations in central La Paz, Bolivia's capital, and a steady stream of voters began to trickle in. Voters outside a polling post in El Alto (Natacha Pisarenko/AP) Bolivians waiting to vote at three different secondary schools across the city expressed confused, cynical and bitter emotions, fed by an annual inflation rate of more than 16% last month (compared to 2% less than two years ago), a scarcity of fuel and absence of hope for swift improvement. Several said they were voting for 'el menos peor', the lesser evil. The right-wing opposition candidates bill the race as a chance to chart a new destiny for Bolivia. Advertisement But both front-runners, Mr Doria Medina and Mr Quiroga, have served in past neoliberal governments and run for president three times before — losing at least twice to Mr Morales. Mr Doria Medina and Mr Quiroga have praised the Trump administration and vowed to restore ties with the United States — ruptured in 2008 when Mr Morales expelled the American ambassador. They have also expressed interest in doing business with Israel, which has no diplomatic relations with Bolivia, and called for foreign private companies to invest in the country and develop its rich natural resources. After storming to office in 2006, Mr Morales, Bolivia's first indigenous president, nationalised the nation's oil and gas industry, using the profits to reduce poverty, expand infrastructure and improve the lives of the rural poor. Advertisement Voters queue at a polling station in Jesus de Machaca (Juan Karita/AP) After three consecutive presidential terms, as well as a contentious bid for an unprecedented fourth in 2019 that set off popular unrest and led to his removal, Mr Morales has been barred from this race by Bolivia's constitutional court. Whoever wins faces daunting challenges. Mr Doria Medina and Mr Quiroga have warned of the need for a painful fiscal adjustment, including the elimination of Bolivia's generous food and fuel subsidies, to save the nation from insolvency. Some analysts caution this risks sparking social unrest. All 130 seats in Bolivia's chamber of deputies, the lower house of parliament, are also up for grabs, along with 36 in the senate, the upper house.
Times
30 minutes ago
- Times
Pensions commission must resist being warned off triple lock
T owards the end of last month, the government launched a new pensions commission. The last one, which reported nearly 20 years ago, carried out one of the most effective and impactful of all independent reviews done for governments. It led directly to automatic enrolment into pensions, consensus on the need to increase pension ages and increases in the level of the state pension. It is not surprising that this new body is badged as a 'revival' of the original commission. Its remit is to look at ways of raising income levels for future generations of pensioners, particularly those at risk of poverty and with low lifetime incomes, while taking account of the sustainability of the system. Excellent. While, on the surface, things seem to be going pretty well, there are some serious challenges coming down the road.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Edinburgh failing to honour childcare commitments
FAMILIES have been left paying thousands of pounds a year for childcare because Edinburgh City Council has reneged on a flagship Scottish Government policy that promises all children more than 1000 hours of free care at a nursery of their choice, it has been claimed. Under the policy, children aged three to five years old are entitled either to 30 free hours per week during term time or 22.8 hours per week for 50 weeks per year – a total of 1140 hours a year. These state-funded hours can be either a council-run nursery or a council-approved private one or with a registered childminder, according to the Government's Funding Follows The Child approach. Many working families say they choose privately run nurseries because they typically have longer opening hours and operate during school holidays, while some council nurseries are only open during school hours or term time, which don't fit with most work schedules. READ MORE: Fix visa problems to allow Gaza students to study in Scotland, Keir Starmer told However, in 2024, problems arose for families who were using private nurseries in Edinburgh but living in a bordering local authority area, when City of Edinburgh Council decided it would no longer fund free childcare in these circumstances. These cross-border families, who use Edinburgh nurseries either because they work in the city or because it is closest to their home, were told they could either find a new nursery in their own local authority or a council-run one in the city. But a group of impacted parents, many of whom were unable to find anything that met their childcare needs and working hours, are now claiming the move breaches both governmental policy and child rights, while discriminating against working parents. City of Edinburgh Council insists it is meeting statutory guidelines and claims its cross-border policy will lead to savings of £1 million. But the parents' group disputes this claim. It has shared freedom of information requests with The Ferret which the parents claim show savings are as little as £36,650 because almost as many children living in Edinburgh claim free places from nurseries in other local authorities. Several parents also shared emails from other councils willing to reimburse Edinburgh if cross-border private nursery places there could be granted. 'It had a real impact on his confidence' The Ferret spoke to families impacted – some living just metres outside the City of Edinburgh Council border – who were facing annual fees of more than £7000 if they did not remove their child from their private nursery. But some say they have been unable to find a nursery outside of Edinburgh that is open before they have to leave for work, or closes before they can return for pick-up. Others have been offered insufficient hours at council nurseries in Edinburgh, given work commitments, or have only been offered available hours at nurseries further away that would add hours on to already long commutes. Some had to cut working hours or ship in grandparents from other parts of the country. In one case, a mother was forced to give up her lunch break so she could pick her three-year-old up from a council nursery, where he had a free place for five mornings, and take him to a private nursery for the afternoon, as it was the only way she could find additional hours. Some parents have considered legal action and, backed by a leading professor in child law, they are calling for the Scottish Government to intervene. Private and third-sector nurseries – such as those run by charities and community groups – said they were also impacted. Claylands Nursery, in the western outskirts of Edinburgh, closed last July, after Edinburgh council decided that children attending from West Lothian, just a few miles away, would not receive funded places. It had asked the council for an exemption from the ruling, claiming the number of cross-border families that would be forced to leave would make their business unsustainable. Kirsten, a mother who has asked us not to use her surname, said her child was attending Claylands three days a week when she received an email giving five days' notice of its closure. She lives 'minutes' from the City of Edinburgh Council boundary. 'It was a really stressful time as more than 50 people were looking for last-minute places all at once,' she said. 'We looked at one nursery in West Lothian, but because of our working patterns, it would have added about an hour to our commute, and we would have to pay for a second car to make pick-ups and drop-offs possible due to our hours, so we went with an Edinburgh nursery which was much closer.' Though Kirstin felt 'lucky' to find a nursery she is happy with, the sudden move had a big impact on her then almost two-year-old, who went from being content at drop-offs to 'screaming and crying and clinging to us'. 'It was horrible,' she said. 'It had a real impact on his confidence.' The family got through a difficult transition with the help of additional leave from work. Now almost three, her son has settled and 'loves the nursery and the staff', but his place will not be funded by Edinburgh Council. Kirstin has decided not to move him again this year. Instead, the family will make 'sacrifices' to afford £10,000 worth of fees over the next two years, though they will reassess in her son's preschool year. 'It's hugely frustrating,' she added. 'The council took this decision [about cross-boundary funding] without assessing the impact on children, and it's been left to parents to sort it out. I feel it should be up to the council and the Scottish Government should recognise that its policy is not being upheld.' Father Sam Illingworth lives in West Lothian, just metres from the City of Edinburgh Council boundary. His youngest daughter was settled in a private nursery just over the Edinburgh boundary. But since she has turned three, they have been unable to secure funding for her place there. They found a council nursery nearby, but as it doesn't have enough hours available, they had to 'top-up' their hours by continuing to use the private one. He has gathered testimonies from other parents whose work patterns rule out available council nurseries and others unable to find funded places that work with their commute. Earlier this month, he set up a petition calling on Edinburgh City Council to reversve its decision on funding. 'The frustration is that West Lothian was willing to reimburse Edinburgh in terms of the funding,' he said. 'We understand that council budgets are stretched – of course we do – but we dispute that they can make the savings they claim. It feels like this decision is ideological.' Sharon Fairley, chief executive of the Scottish Private Nurseries Association and owner of the Little Flyers chain, claimed the problems stemmed from the decision to move away from the centralisation of funding in 2020. 'It means that councils are nursery providers but are also making decisions on who gets funding,' she said. 'This is a conflict of interest. This can be solved by moving back to a centralised payment system.' She claimed there had also been widespread issues in other council areas, with 'unfair' payment funding distribution. In recent years, hundreds of third sector and private nurseries have closed, with many blaming problems on a lack of 'fair funding'. Bruce Adamson, a professor in child law at the University of Glasgow, said the issue was about 'children's rights and fairness'. 'The high cost of living in Edinburgh means that many parents and carers who work in Edinburgh live in neighbouring local authorities, but need childcare close to their work,' he added. 'The City of Edinburgh Council's decision to block funded nursery places for children living outside the city risks breaching children's rights. 'We should be making it easier – not harder – for children to get high-quality early learning and childcare. The Scottish Government needs to step in to protect families and uphold children's rights.' Women, he claimed, were more likely to 'bear the brunt of childcare gaps'. A study by the Fawcett Society from November 2023 found that almost a quarter of a million women had left their jobs due to the difficulty of balancing work and childcare. Anna Ritchie Allan, executive director of charity Close the Gap, which campaigns on gender-based inequality in work, said: 'It's clear the childcare system isn't working for women and their families, especially those on low incomes. Local variation in how funded hours are delivered further penalises many women.' READ MORE: Protesters go on strike in Israel demanding ceasefire and hostage releases However, councillor James Dalgleish, the education, children and families convener at Edinburgh City Council, insisted it 'follows national guidance in offering funded early learning and childcare (ELC) for children in Edinburgh and work in partnership with a range of providers to ensure that all parents and carers in Edinburgh are able to access quality funded early learning and childcare'. City of Edinburgh Council does offer its own local authority nursery provision to families living in neighbouring local authorities, he added, though it is currently not accepting new private or third sector providers as partner nurseries. A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'Local Authorities have a statutory duty to make available funded early learning and childcare to the children residing within their own area and are also responsible for meeting the statutory guidance requirements in relation to cross-boundary placements. 'We encourage local authorities to work with neighbouring areas to ensure publicly funded services meet the needs of families and prioritise children's wellbeing, including those who need cross-boundary placements.'
