MP urges Government to 'step up' and hold 'full inquiry' into grooming gangs
In January, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said there would be 'victim-centred, locally-led inquiries' in five areas, including Oldham in Greater Manchester - but the other locations are yet to be announced.
Addressing the Government in the House of Commons yesterday, Robbie Moore, Conservative MP for Keighley and Ilkley, complained that 'no real progress whatsoever has been made on their promise to launch five local rape gang inquiries before Easter'.
He added: 'It gets worse: for more than five years, leaders at the very top of Bradford Council in my constituency have denied, refused and covered up, every single time I and victims, survivors and their families have called for a full rape gang inquiry across Keighley and the wider Bradford district.
'When will this Government step up, use their statutory powers and give the victims and survivors in areas such as Keighley and the wider Bradford district the full inquiry that they have wanted for almost two decades?'
Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips said local authorities would be able to access a £5 million national fund to 'support locally-led work on grooming gangs'.
She added: 'Following feedback from local authorities, the fund will adopt a flexible approach to support both full independent local inquiries and more bespoke work, including local victims' panels or locally-led audits of the handling of historical cases.'
Mr Moore said: 'Bradford's leadership simply will not act by itself, so why are this Government letting the very Councils that failed victims decide whether they want to be investigated?'
Ms Phillips said: 'Absolutely nothing that I have said today suggests that Bradford would not be able to access funding from the Home Office, just as Oldham has, to undertake the work that might be needed there.'
Councillor Susan Hinchcliffe, leader of Bradford Council, said: 'We're very clear: child sexual exploitation (CSE) is an appalling crime that blights victims' lives. Perpetrators face the full force of the law. No matter who you are or when the crime took place, you will be prosecuted. 'We're very open about how we tackle CSE.
'We have published more than 50 reports in recent years, including to cross-party committees, where councillors have asked questions and discussed CSE.
'These committees are open to the public and the media to attend.
'An independently authored review into historic CSE cases in the Bradford district between 2001 and 2021 has been published.
'We also referred ourselves to the national inquiry into CSE chaired by Dame Alexis Jay.
'All our data was shared with the inquiry, and we provided evidence to this as well as hosting the Truth Project which invited victims from Bradford to come forward in confidence to tell their story.
'We have worked as a partnership to implement the reviews' findings along with national best practice so we can better protect children.
'The new Government is taking swift action to implement the findings of the national inquiry into CSE, which Bradford took part in.
'This was an inquiry completed in 2022 which took seven years and cost over £185 million.
'The last Government never implemented any of its recommendations.
'This new focus from a fresh Government on actions, not just words, is welcome.
'In the latest statement the Government talks about funding meaningful work beyond inquiries and reports and that's what we need here in Bradford and within West Yorkshire.
'We've done reports, published them and worked to implement the findings.
'If there's more money available that we can spend on practical programmes and actions that further protect our children, we'd welcome that, rather than paying someone to write another report.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Could an outright ban on zero-hours contracts harm working mums?
Since the Labour government came into power in the summer of 2024, ministers have pledged to crackdown on 'exploitative' zero-hours contracts as part of changes to the employment bill. Under the new rules proposed, employers will have to offer workers a contract that guarantees a minimum number of hours every week – a change many see as a significant step forward for job security. More than one million people in the UK are working on a zero-hours contract basis, in areas ranging from hospitality and warehouses to the NHS. Women are disproportionately affected by the precarious nature of zero-hours work, which contributes to the gender pay gap. Read more: Why did shared parental leave fail in the UK? According to the Trades Union Congress, women are 34% more likely than men to be on such contracts, and they earn nearly £10 less an hour than men who aren't on them. However, some argue that an outright ban, without tackling the growing shortage of flexible jobs, won't truly level the playing field for women and working mothers. Chronic lack of flexible work In a push to pre-pandemic flexible working arrangements, almost half of all businesses across the UK now want staff back in the office on a full-time basis, a British Chambers of Commerce survey of more than 500 businesses found. At the same time, more than a million UK workers have quit their jobs in the past year because of a lack of flexibility. This U-turn is hitting mothers hard, with one in four forced to leave the workforce because it's impossible to work and care for children without adequate flexibility. 'An outright ban on zero‑hours contracts could indeed harm working mothers, but not for the reasons you'd expect,' says Elizabeth Willets, founder of the recruitment firm Investing in Women. 'The issue isn't that women choose precarious work. It's that our labour market offers so few truly flexible, professional-level roles – and zero‑hours contracts often become the only way to combine work and caregiving.' Women aren't taking on zero-hours roles by choice. For many, there is no quality flexible or part-time equivalent. According to the 2023 Flexible Jobs Index by Timewise, the number of jobs advertised as flexible has plateaued. Only 31% overtly offer it – which is a negligible change from 30% in 2022. 'It leaves women balancing insecurity against inflexibility as their only options,' says Willets. Women need enough to live and plan on That being said, there's a need to balance flexibility with financial stability. For those without guaranteed hours, it's hard to anticipate income and schedule childcare in advance, says Rachel Carell, founder and CEO of childcare organisation Koru Kids. 'We've worked with many working mums as freelancers doing things like marketing and design – but rarely on zero hours,' she says. 'I've heard again and again that flexibility is vital, but so is the ability to plan and earn enough to live on. Zero-hours contracts rarely offer that.' Read more: What to expect from a maternity discrimination employment tribunal About 80% of zero-hours contract workers want regular hours, with 75% reporting financial hardship due to insufficient hours. And, these contracts can sometimes limit flexibility too. According to TUC research, two-thirds (67%) of mothers on zero-hours contracts have difficulty managing work with childcare – and two-thirds have missed out on a planned family event because of needing to work. When Carell launched the business, most of the nannies were on zero-hours contracts. 'But we moved away from these contracts voluntarily, because we heard from Koru Kids nannies that they didn't provide the security the nannies needed. We worked with parents to design new contracts that still gave flexibility, but also offered predictable hours and income,' she explains. Finding a flexible middle ground Clearly, change is needed – but simply banning zero-hours contracts may not be the solution. What could be done to keep those who rely on flexibility in the workforce, without forcing them to sacrifice their income? 'Countries like New Zealand, Germany and Ireland have shown ways to regulate zero-hours use while preserving flexibility,' says Willets. In 2016, New Zealand banned the insecurity of zero-hours contracts, not the adaptability. Employers still get to increase hours when needed, but workers start from a guaranteed base, are compensated for standby time and can decline extra work without fear of losing future shifts. 'Short-term reforms could also include guaranteed minimum hours after six months, notice periods for shift changes and pension contributions from day one, regardless of earning thresholds,' adds Willets. 'In the long-term? The real fix lies in businesses offering genuine alternatives like quality job shares, part-time roles aligned with professional pay scales, term-time contracts that don't penalise women and flexible working from day one.' Offering quality part-time work in senior roles would no doubt help to narrow the gender pay gap, which widens at higher salary levels. Below salaries of £20,000, 22% of job adverts offer part-time work, but this almost halves to 12% at the £20k point. And, it reduces to just 6% amongst jobs paid more than £60,000 a year. Improving access to promotions for part-time workers is also key. Michelle Chikanda, who founded the leadership firm Legacy Never Dies to work around her 2-year old son, adds that a ban on zero-hours could lead to more permanent and consistent work being available, if the government aids businesses. 'A ban must be matched with tax incentives for businesses that reduce the cost of hiring certain groups of people, like working mothers, creating a sustainable solution for all parties,' she says. Ultimately, the goal should be to replace zero-hours contracts with stable, flexible roles that don't force women into choosing between work, stability and their families. 'That's how we build real equity,' says Willets. 'Not with one-size-fits-all reform, but with thoughtful change grounded in lived reality.' Read more: How to speak to your boss about miscarriage How to stay motivated during a long job hunt Does mental health first aid work?Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
'Australia will recognize the State of Palestine,' Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says
Australia will recognize a Palestinian state, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Monday, joining the leaders of France, Britain and Canada in signaling they would do so.
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
Analysis: Trump has been on a roll for the ages — but blowback could be looming
Nearly seven months into his second term, President Donald Trump is riding high on far-reaching policy wins and unchallenged personal power plays, barging into every corner of American life to impose his will and worldview. But his presidency may be about to enter a new phase, as the policy and political consequences of his relentless pace begin to unfold and the lives of Americans and millions overseas feel the impact of his relentless ambition. He's done everything, quickly, and all at once. He's obsessed with slaying his biggest dragons — like global free trade — and more homespun goals that most presidents might not bother with — like reinstating a Presidential Fitness Test in schools or putting his architectural stamp on the White House. His trade push is classic Trump. He imposed the most punitive tariffs on imports since the Great Depression — based on a lifelong personal obsession with an economic theory mocked by experts. He says he's reviving manufacturing — but the sector lost a combined net 14,000 jobs in May and June, according to federal data. And the tariffs — a tax on everyone who buys goods — could spike inflation. The president has been as good as his word and secured the southern border, honoring a promise that helped him win back the White House. But will Americans now recoil at his draconian deportation methods as federal agents in masks sweep their neighbors off the streets and the administration builds armed camps to hold undocumented migrants? Trump scored a legislative triumph by passing his 'big, beautiful bill' and extending his first-term tax cuts. The White House insists the measure will unleash roaring economic growth and job creation. But how will this giveaway to the rich look if it shuts down rural hospitals and thousands of people lose Medicaid? Trump's Health and Human Services secretary, Robert Kennedy Jr., is vowing to 'Make America Healthy Again.' But the risks are enormous, especially if Kennedy's cancellation of a half-billion dollars in funding on inoculations like the ones that ended the Covid-19 pandemic expose the US to a new public health crisis that could cost thousands of lives. Trump is meanwhile poised for his most consequential foreign policy move yet, as he hosts Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday to try to repair his failed bid to end the Ukraine war. A breakthrough could save thousands of lives and might even deliver his longed-for Nobel Prize. But if he caves to Putin's demands, Trump could make a historic error that paves the way to future Russian expansionism and shatters his White House-conjured image as 'the president of peace.' There's a common thread running through most of Trump's actions — whether it's browbeating political enemies and weaponizing the legal system or forcing trade concessions out of small and vulnerable nations. He's always assessing his leverage over an adversary and seeking to impose his personal will. But while showcasing American might can be effective, Trump is also alienating allies who were force multipliers of US global power. What happens the next time America wants help from its friends — for instance after a 9/11-style attack? Will disaffected populations allow leaders he bullied to rush to America's defense? Trump meanwhile may also be pushing angry allies into the arms of a new superpower — China. And his failure so far to wring trade concessions out of a Beijing that keeps dealing its rare-earth metals trump card may render his broader trade agenda hollow. Trump's gambles are huge and risky. Perhaps many will pay off. But history is full of presidents who misread their mandate and overreached. If some of Trump's most ambitious policies trigger adverse results, the coming months could show whether political gravity will assert itself. The president is already underwater in polls. His approval rating is in the mid-to-low 40s in most surveys. And the administration's failure to quell the scandal over its refusal to release the Jeffrey Epstein files has meanwhile exposed a split in Trump's base for the first time. A perilous national moment could arrive if public opinion turns sharply against Trump and Republicans seem about to pay the price in next year's midterm elections. This, after all, is a president who believes he has almost unlimited power and tried to steal an election he lost in 2020. Trump's growing authoritarian streak shines through his unlocking of vast executive powers through dubious national emergencies. His assaults on the judiciary, the media, universities and officials in previous administrations already threaten the principles of republican government. This comes a year before he presides over the 250th anniversary of the American revolution, which shook off the unaccountable whims of kings — whom Trump increasingly resembles. The president is already hedging against a political backlash. Some of his recent moves, including the firing of the government official who presides over unemployment data and his attempt to craft five new US House seats from an unprecedented mid-cycle gerrymander in Texas, look like attempts to subvert reality and to avoid paying the political price if the economy goes sour. Tariffs are the most stunning example of Trump's success in changing political and economic convention. America spent decades building a global free trade system. Trump has destroyed it in a matter of weeks. 'We're taking in trillions of dollars,' Trump said in an interview with CNBC last week, speaking of revenues flowing into the government from import duties. But while Trump never admits it, the ultimate price for tariffs will be paid by American consumers who are already tired of the higher cost of groceries and housing. The administration says the global economy will adjust to tariff rates starting at 10% and rising much higher for some countries — and that every American will be better off. So far, Trump has escaped the worst consequences of reforms opposed by almost every economist. 'Right now, the tariffs are not necessarily creating the kind of economic chaos that I think was forecast,' Kristen Soltis Anderson, a Republican pollster and strategist and CNN political commentator, said on 'State of the Union' on Sunday. But things will change if higher prices filter down to consumers. 'It is hard to message your way out of a situation … if prices are really going up, if these retailers are saying, 'We have been absorbing some of this for a little while, but we're going to have to stop.' There is a real potential for political blowback.' Trump has been on a dayslong victory lap, touting trade deals after intimidating partners like Japan, Indonesia and the European Union into agreements that lopsidedly benefited the US. But the small print of such deals suggests they are less impressive than they seem. Hundreds of billions of dollars in promised foreign investment in the US is questionable. Foreign governments can't force firms to spend in the US. And most of the deals do not, as Trump claims, throw open protected sectors of foreign markets to US goods. At best, they include pledges for the US and its trade adversaries to work together to find solutions. And while trade with the US is tariffed — other nations can still trade freely among themselves, meaning they have an incentive to find non-American markets. Another perilous area for Trump is over immigration — his signature issue that twice helped him win the presidency but led to extreme enforcement efforts that alienated moderates in his first term. The approach has been even more punitive in his second. Flights of undocumented migrants have left for El Salvador and an oppressive prison. The due process rights of some migrants have been infringed. And the administration plans more migrant camps like the already notorious 'Alligator Alcatraz' in Florida. This has been accompanied by performative toughness to appeal to Trump's most hardline voters. But Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, a border-state Democrat, warned Sunday that Trump had gone too far. 'The border security issue under President Biden was not working. And I pushed the administration on that,' Kelly said on CBS' 'Face the Nation.' 'But we have now swung drastically in another direction. And I don't think this is what the American people want either.' In a CNN poll last month, 55% of respondents said the president had gone too far when it comes to deporting immigrants living in the US illegally. That number has climbed 10 points since February. Majorities also oppose the construction of big detention centers to hold arrested migrants and the billions of dollars in spending that was included in Trump's big policy bill. Passing that bill was Trump's greatest legislative achievement of his two terms. It was more impressive given the GOP's tiny House majority. But it's also one of the most unpopular things Trump has ever done. Roughly 6 in 10 Americans oppose the bill and a majority expects it will hurt the economy. Trump is a singular politician, and he's been helped by a Republican Party that marches to his tune and a Democratic Party that doesn't have one. But unless Trump shattered political logic while he was breaking the mold of the presidency, a reckoning could be looming. What happens next will define how history remembers his second term.
