UK PM launches national inquiry into 'grooming gangs'
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer says he will accept a recommendation for a national inquiry into grooming gangs who sexually abused thousands of girls, having previously resisted calls for a statutory review.
The scandal, which revealed how gangs of mostly Pakistani men had groomed, trafficked and raped young white girls more than a decade ago, returned to the political agenda this year after US billionaire Elon Musk criticised the British government.
Interior minister Yvette Cooper in January asked Louise Casey, a former senior official, to undertake a "rapid audit" of the scale and nature of gang-based exploitation in Britain.
Casey's report is expected to say that vulnerable white British girls were "institutionally ignored" by police and local authorities fearing being accused of racism, Sky News reported on Saturday.
"(Casey's) position when she started the audit was that there was not a real need for a national inquiry, over and above what was going on," Starmer told reporters en route to the G7 summit in Canada on Saturday.
"She has come to the view that there should be a national inquiry on the basis of what she has seen. I have read every single word of her report and I am going to accept her recommendation," he added.
The Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch said Starmer had to be led by the nose to make what she said was the correct decision.
"I've been repeatedly calling for a full national inquiry since January," she said.
"Many survivors of the grooming gangs will be relieved that this is finally happening. But they need a resolution soon, not in 10 years' time."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
A scrambled G7 agenda as world leaders scramble to de-escalate the Israel-Iran conflict
The return on Donald Trump to the G7 was always going to be unpredictable. That it is happening against the backdrop of an escalating conflict in the Middle East makes it even more so. Expectations had already been low, with the Canadian hosts cautioning against the normal joint communique at the end of the summit, mindful that this group of leaders would struggle to find consensus. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney carefully laid down an agenda that was uncontroversial in a bid to avoid any blow-ups between President Trump and allies, who of late have been divided like never before - be it over tariffs and trade, Russia and Ukraine, or, more recently Israel's conduct in Gaza. But discussions around critical minerals and global supply chains will undoubtedly drop down the agenda as leaders convene at a precarious moment. Keir Starmer, on his way over to Canada for a bi-lateral meeting in Ottawa with PM Carney before travelling onto the G7 summit in Kananaskis, underscored the gravity of the situation as he again spoke of de-escalation, while also confirmed that the UK was deploying more British fighter jets to the region amid threats from Tehran that it will attack UK bases if London helps defend Israel against airstrikes. Really this is a G7 agenda scrambled as world leaders scramble to de-escalate the worst fighting between Tel Aviv and Tehran in decades. President Trump has for months been urging Israel not to strike Iran as he worked towards a diplomatic deal to halt uranium enrichment. Further talks had been due on Sunday - but are now not expected to go ahead. All eyes will be on Trump in the coming days, to see if the US - Israel's closest ally - will call on Israel to rein in its assault. The US has so far not participated in any joint attacks with Tel Aviv, but is moving warships and other military assets to the Middle East. Sir Keir, who has managed to strike the first trade deal with Trump, will want to leverage his "good relationship" with the US leader at the G7 to press for de-escalation in the Middle East, while he also hopes to use the summit to further discuss the further the interests of Ukraine with Trump and raise again the prospects of Russian sanctions. "We've got President Zelenskyy coming so that provides a good opportunity for us to discuss again as a group," the PM told me on the flight over to Canada. "My long-standing view is, we need to get Russia to the table for an unconditional ceasefire. That's not been really straightforward. But we do need to be clear about what we need to get to the table and that if that doesn't happen, sanctions will undoubtedly be part of the discussion at the G7." But that the leaders are not planning for a joint communique - a document outlining what the leaders have agreed - tells you a lot. When they last gathered with Trump in Canada for the G7 back in 2018, the US president rather spectacularly fell out with Justin Trudeau when the former Canadian president threatened to retaliate against US tariffs and refused to sign the G7 agreement. Since then, Trump has spoken of his desire to turn Canada into the 51st state of the US, a suggestion that helped catapult the Liberal Party beyond their Conservative rivals and back into power in the recent Canadian elections, as Mark Carney stood on a ticket of confronting Trump's aggression. With so much disagreement between the US and allies, it is hard to see where progress might be made over the next couple of days. But what these leaders will agree on is the need to take down the temperature in the Middle East and for all the unpredictability around these relationships, what is certain is a sense of urgency around Iran and Israel that could find these increasingly disparate allies on common ground.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The rich are fleeing Labour's Britain. We could all pay the price
For over a century, Britain has been a hub for wealthy expats escaping political tumult, oppression or simply seeking better opportunities. From the 'White Russians' fleeing the Bolshevik revolution to wealthy Chinese seeking a safe haven for their capital in the 2010s, the UK was a magnet for the rich. Now, though, the flows may be reversing. After Labour's move to scrap non-dom status and overhaul inheritance tax, there are growing signs that the 1pc may be fleeing. 'I'm still here, counting the days I'm allowed to stay, waiting for a miracle, which is not going to happen,' says 55-year-old Magda Wierzycka, who has lived in Britain for half a decade. Wierzycka fled Poland as a refugee under communism in the early 1980s before settling in South Africa, where she made millions. In 2019 she moved to the UK to start a venture capital business. 'We brought in about £500m and invested it in British innovation. Five years in, I effectively get told 'We don't need your money, and we don't want you in the country'.' Wierzycka, who was a non-dom until the status was abolished, can now only stay in Britain for 91 days a year before incurring tax on her global earnings and gains, with a lower limit on how many days she can work. As a result, she is reluctantly planning to return to South Africa. Reeves's decision to raise taxes on people like Wierzycka was a calculated gamble. The Chancellor hopes that most of the rich will choose to stay in Britain and pay higher taxes, boosting public coffers by £5bn a year. The money will help pay for free breakfast clubs for children and plug gaps in stretched public finances. Yet the list of wealthy emigres has been growing steadily since tax changes took effect April. It includes people like South African national Richard Gnodde, Goldman Sachs' best paid banker outside the US, Aston Villa co-owner Nassef Sawiris and steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal. Those are the names we know of. How many others are leaving? 'We really don't know anything at this stage,' says Arun Advani, an associate professor of economics at the University of Warwick. 'The only way to know about what non-doms are doing is to look at the tax data. The data for the last tax year that ended in April, people don't even file those taxes until January of next year. 'Late filing is particularly prevalent at the top of the income distribution, where the £100 late fee is not really that costly. We don't really get that information here until, in I guess, 18 months.' It will be a nervous wait for the Chancellor. If 25pc of non-doms quit the UK, the Treasury would make no extra money from scrapping the tax status. If a third left, the UK would lose £700m in the first year of the policy, according to the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR). 'I love this country,' says entrepreneur Bassim Haidar, who was born in Nigeria but has Lebanese citizenship. 'We really integrated. We've made amazing friends.' He left before the changes took effect on April 6 and now splits his time between the United Arab Emirates, Greece and Italy. 'Just like we adapted here, we will adapt somewhere else.' Predicting an exodus of the wealthy has often been a case of the boy who cried wolf. Yet several studies suggest something big may actually be under way this time. Even before Labour took power, Swiss bank UBS said the UK was on track to see the biggest departure of dollar-millionaires out of a group of 56 countries by 2028. Henley & Partners, which makes money from helping the world's wealthy move around, claimed Britain saw a record exodus of almost 11,000 millionaires last year. Some of its data was based on flimsy metrics like the locations people list on their LinkedIn profiles, however. The most robust analysis so far has come from Bloomberg, which found a surge in the number of directors moving abroad after analysing 5m company filings. Around 4,400 directors reported an overseas move in the last year, it said. The figure likely includes non-doms and British nationals moving in protest over recent tax changes. This includes stripping away inheritance tax business relief, a policy that could potentially force the sale of family businesses to pay tax bills. The changes also abolished the more than 200-year-old non-dom status in April, replacing it with a residence-based regime. This grants well-heeled newcomers four years of reprieve from being taxed on their foreign income and gains. However, in a major change, anything you own anywhere in the world – like a stake in your family business – becomes subject to UK inheritance tax after this period, and for up to 10 years after you leave. Non-doms have been a target for the taxman for a while. Jeremy Hunt, the former chancellor, cut back on the tax breaks in April last year before Reeves scrapped the relief altogether. Many non-doms say this was their tipping point. One describes it thus: 'It's like boiling a frog, except in this case the frog can jump out of the water.' There were 68,900 non-doms living in Britain in the 2022 tax year, the latest HMRC data shows. They are typically employed in lucrative professions and are highly mobile. You would expect a high share to leave in any given year, which can make it difficult to discern genuine trends without hard evidence. One place to look for clues is in London's most well-heeled neighbourhoods. At private members' club Walbrook, in the City of London, between 20 and 50 clients have cancelled their memberships as a result of the tax changes. 'The exodus actually began last year,' says managing director Philip Palumbo. 'The City seems to lack confidence, purpose. It feels over-taxed, over-regulated, and we are haemorrhaging good people to artificial places like Dubai, which is just so unacceptable.' Wealth advisers tell clients that memberships, including for gyms and private clubs, can be used by the taxman to prove residency. As a result, other clubs have resorted to offering shorter-term options of up to 90 days, news reports suggest. It is not just clubland that is suffering. 'Very definitely, there's a reduction of customers – certainly customers from the Arab countries who had residences in London. They come here [in] far fewer [numbers] now,' says Brian Lishak, the 86-year-old co-founder of Savile Row tailor, Richard Anderson. There has also been a drop in demand for butlers and nannies, according to Joshua James from Super Private Staff. His firm helps source household staff for the very rich. 'We have observed a notable decline in the high-end household recruitment market in London. It's clear that opportunities are shifting. Strong demand is emerging in regions like the Middle East, Monaco, and America.' A surprising side effect of Reeves's tax changes may well be an exodus of Britain's finest butlers and nannies. 'It is worth saying, the appeal of a butler or nanny with a British accent remains attractive internationally,' James adds. Buyers of London's poshest houses in areas like Mayfair, Knightsbridge and St John's Wood are seeing financial crisis-level discounts, according to Savills. Prime central London prices are a fifth lower than at their peak in June 2014. The estate agent blamed the non-dom tax changes and stamp duty hikes. Interior designer Phillippa Thorp has witnessed several non-dom customers leave. 'Businesses like ours have survived on rich bankers and rich people coming here from all over the world. They've had their families here for 20 years, they would never have left but for this mad own-goal,' she laments. Thorp fears the skilled tradespeople she relies on such as painters and bronze workers will struggle to get by as a result. 'We're losing them and we're losing their skills, and they will never come back. It's desperate, the situation. There are an awful lot of people who don't know what to do. Should we let some people go? Do we pray that the Government is going to do something right for once? It just seems like one disaster after another,' she says. 'I can safely say it just gets worse. If I was a young me, I would never, ever start a business here.' Thorp's case underscores the broader risks from the tax crackdown. Few of Labour's voters will shed a tear if the super-rich decamp to Monaco or Dubai. But the exodus has a broader economic impact. It is measured in fewer pounds spent in Michelin-starred restaurants, fewer donations to galleries to support blockbuster exhibitions or wings, and fewer people employed to help and serve the wealthy, among other things. 'I had 16 staff [in the UK] – drivers, property managers, and so on,' says Haidar, the Nigerian-born Lebanese businessman. 'I'm down to two now. These guys have lost their jobs.' Just how big the eventual economic impact is depends on how many of the wealthiest choose to leave. 'It would be safe to say that a large number have left, full stop,' says Simon Gibb, a partner in the London private wealth team of Trowers & Hamlins. 'That is largely to do with the removal of trust protections both for income and capital gains tax, but ultimately inheritance tax was very much a deal-breaker.' Non-doms have traditionally sheltered income earned from foreign businesses by placing it in a trust abroad. However, such trusts will now be subject to a British inheritance tax bill of 6pc every 10 years after they die as long as it exists. Those inheriting the business may have to sell chunks of it to pay the tax bill, Gibb says. Many are more concerned about the tax rates in death rather than in life. The UK's loss is other countries' gain. Britons were the second biggest foreign buyers of property in Dubai last year. Philippe Amarante, managing partner at Henley & Partners Middle East, says the United Arab Emirates is welcoming the wealthy with open arms. 'It's pro-migration. It can take you five days or two days even to come to Dubai and set up the company. It will take you a few days, a few weeks, to set up local domestic bank accounts and get you going,' he says. Parents who in the past came to Britain to put their children through school are now going to Dubai, he says. 'The clients that we have are saying 'you don't have knife crime, right? You don't have fist fights in the school courtyards'. The UK – particularly with crime and other elements – maybe the overall proposition has somewhat decreased.' Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, says: 'It is a crisis of the Government's making. If [Reeves] would reverse the provisions about bringing global assets within UK inheritance tax, this flight from the UK would end tomorrow.' The issue is rapidly rising up the political agenda. Richard Tice, a Reform MP and the party's deputy leader, warns that Britain is 'seeing the greatest brain drain and wealth drain in my adult lifetime'. 'Every day of the week, I hear people say 'my friends are leaving,'' he says. 'It's truly terrifying. All these ludicrous people from the Left thinking the solution to our problems is to have a wealth tax. There won't be any wealth left in the country. It's a mobile world. This is a battle royale of hearts and minds.' Reform, which is currently polling as Britain's most popular party, has pledged to reverse the non-dom changes and scrap inheritance tax completely. The promise would leave a shortfall just shy of £20bn in public finances by the end of the decade, which Tice says would be filled 'by scrapping stupid net zero' amongst other things. The Treasury always expected people to leave in response to the non-dom and inheritance tax changes. The problems arise if more people go than expected. When Reeves announced her changes in October's Budget, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said the measures would raise £5.2bn a year by the end of the decade. This reflects only the direct tax take, not wider impacts on investment, staff and businesses relying on these very wealthy individuals. The fiscal watchdog assumed that 12pc of non-doms without trusts and 25pc with trusts would go. However, the OBR warned that predicting behavioural responses was difficult. Reeves has softened some measures slightly since October after a backlash from the wealthy, but the OBR said the tweaks did 'not materially affect' its forecasts. Britain relies more on high earners than many other countries, with the top 1pc paying 28pc of all income tax. If you broaden it to the top 10pc, the figure rises to 60pc of receipts. The Chancellor risks getting no revenues at all from the policy if more than 25pc of non-dom taxpayers leave, according to analysis by the Centre for Economics and Business Research. If as many as half relocate, Reeves could end up with a black hole of £12.2bn a year by the end of the decade in a worst-case scenario, the CEBR said. Chris Walker, a former Treasury economist, recently published a study suggesting 10pc of non-doms had already left by the end of last year, though it was based in part on the Henley & Partners analysis focused on LinkedIn. Regardless, Walker says: 'I think the OBR and the Government have underestimated the behavioural response. My gut instinct is that the Government probably won't lose money. But I would be surprised if it got even half of the £34bn it's projecting over five years. It's either going to be tax rises or spending cuts or a combination of the two to fill any gap that arises.' Advani, the economist, is less concerned about a wealth exodus. He believes there will be an initial spike and then the departures will tail off. Other people will also come in their place under the four-year regime, he expects. But he warns: 'It seems to me completely crazy that we've designed a regime that will continue to be a huge discouragement from people investing in the UK. That seems like a really big mistake.' Anyone betting on another Labour about-turn on the issue is likely to be disappointed. Those on the Left argue that the exodus of the wealthy is simply fabricated. 'All I can say is I don't see that,' says Stephen Kinsella, who describes himself as a 'patriotic millionaire'. 'I have lots of friends who have more money than I do. The people I talk to have got serious money. Most of them have their kids at school here, their family is here, and they just like the life and the culture and everything else this country offers you.' Kinsella is part of a lobbying group of wealthy individuals pushing for a 2pc wealth tax on anyone with more than £10m of assets to help repair Britain's crumbling state. People who claim there is a wealth exodus 'have such a vested interest', he argues. 'Who's more credible – them or us? I'm someone who says 'tax me more'. It would make no sense for me to do that if I genuinely believe that a lot of wealthy people would leave and therefore the UK tax take would go down. 'The wealth management companies have an interest in talking this up and talking up interest in their services. I'm not saying that being cynical, but it's obvious this narrative suits them.' Alex Cobham, the chief executive of Tax Justice, claims the whole notion of a wealth exodus has simply been whipped up the media and others who benefit from it. 'Anyone who says that they can tell you anything definitive about that is either kidding themselves or they're not being straight with you,' he says. 'Where did the spin come from that took these really thin and questionable numbers and turned them into this kind of headline news of 30 stories every day throughout 2024?' Cobham claims there is 'solid evidence' that tax changes generally lead to only small waves of migration among millionaires. 'Everybody's starting point should be that there isn't a significant concern here,' Cobham says. Regardless, lobbying groups are still trying to convince the Government to backtrack on some of the changes. Leslie MacLeod-Miller, founder of Foreign Investors for Britain, says: 'It's not just tax revenues, even though the non-doms contribute approximately £9bn per year in tax. Some families were spending between £20m and £40m a year on their services. Those go to cleaners, shopping, restaurants or hairdressers. The golden geese are leaving. I want to try and keep them here.' Some non-doms are stubbornly holding out hope too, but optimism is fading. Wierzycka is still hoping 'that some reason prevails'. She is sad to leave. So are many others. 'I think the UK is one of the greatest countries on the face of the planet,' says one wealthy foreigner who is reluctantly headed to Dubai with his family. 'I have a huge affinity for this place, and I'm leaving because the financial impact on our family is so substantial.' The true cost of such decisions may only become clear when it is too late. 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
Council ‘kept me in the dark' over parking spaces shop owner claims
The owner of a Brierley Hill supermarket says Dudley Council planners left him in the dark in a row over parking spaces. Asif Majid, from Brierley Wholesale Superstore, has been refused a change of use planning application because planners say he is not providing enough parking spaces at the site. Mr Majid asked the council to remove conditions limiting the store to selling 'vintage retro collectables, antiques and local craft items' and operating a small tea room, which were linked to an approved planning application dating back to 2016. The new application was thrown out because the store has eight parking spaces and the council required 24 spaces; however the council did approve a separate application for a change in opening times. Mr Majid said: 'I have been left completely in the dark by the authority, their unwillingness to cooperate has completely baffled me. 'We have provided a store with continental grocery items as well as goods and foods from all corners of the world. 'Brierley Hill is a multi-cultural community and a store like this caters for all residents.' The council deny Mr Majid's claim and say they were trying to assist him during an enquiry into whether he was operating without planning permission. Councillor Phil Atkins, Dudley cabinet member for development and regulation, said: 'As part of a planning enforcement investigation, officers have worked with the applicant to try and resolve the matter. 'Both applications were assessed and determined in accordance with relevant policy and procedure as required by legislation. 'In terms of the refused application, the applicant can appeal this decision or submit a revised application with additional information to try and address the previous reasons for refusal. 'The council is currently reviewing its position on any further planning enforcement action.' An appeal against the refusal has been made to the government's Planning Inspectorate. Brierley Hill and Wordsley South councillor Matt Cook from Black Country Party is backing Mr Majid. Cllr Cook said: 'What's most frustrating is that the council is insisting on planning conditions that simply don't reflect the reality of how this business operates. 'The majority of the store's customers are local residents who travel on foot.'
