Keir Starmer ruled out a grooming gangs inquiry. What changed?

Times

6 hours ago

Sir Keir Starmer was fielding questions from reporters on the way to the G7 summit in Canada when he made one of the biggest U-turns of his premiership.
That morning, The Times disclosed that a review by Baroness Casey of Blackstock had recommended a public inquiry into grooming gangs.
The recommendation was explosive. For months, Starmer had repeatedly ruled out an inquiry, arguing that it was unnecessary. At one point, he accused those calling for one of jumping on a 'far-right bandwagon'.
Casey's recommendation left Starmer with no choice. 'I have read every single word of her report and I am going to accept her recommendation,' he told journalists squeezed into the aisle of the plane.
'That is the right thing to do on the basis of what she has put in her audit. I shall now implement her recommendations.'
For critics, Starmer's delay is evidence of his prevarication and lack of leadership. The prime minister only makes the right choice, so the argument goes, when he is led there by the nose.
Starmer's allies reject this, saying that he genuinely believed that a national inquiry was unnecessary. They argue that his decision to launch an inquiry shows that, ultimately, he is a pragmatist. When the evidence changes, he shifts position with it.
The grooming gangs issue erupted into public consciousness again shortly before the new year. Elon Musk, the world's richest man, became fixated on it, at one point posting dozens of messages on the topic a day. Starmer, Musk said, was ' complicit in the rape of Britain '. He claimed that Jess Phillips, the safeguarding minister, was a 'rape genocide apologist' who should have been jailed.
The Conservatives joined calls for a national inquiry, along with Reform UK, and soon an issue that had been on the fringes in recent years was dominating the political conversation.
When MPs returned from the Christmas break on January 6, Starmer went full throttle, defending Phillips and his own record. 'Those that are spreading lies and misinformation as far and as wide as possible are not interested in victims, they are interested in themselves,' he said.
'When the poison of the far right leads to serious threats to Jess Phillips and others then in my book a line has been crossed. What I won't tolerate is this discussion and debate based on lies without calling it out. What I won't tolerate is politicians jumping on the bandwagon simply to get attention.'
Those around Starmer say that the strength of his response was a reflection of his strength of feeling; that he took the attacks from Musk, particularly those on Phillips, personally and felt that they needed to be challenged.
His reasoning for not holding a national inquiry was driven in part by the views of Professor Alexis Jay, who chaired the seven-year investigation into child sexual abuse in the UK. 'We've had enough of inquiries, consultations and discussions, especially for the victims and survivors who've had the courage to come forward,' she said in January. Labour also pointed to the fact that the Tories did not call for a national inquiry while they were in government.
Amid the furore of the political debate, intensified by Musk, Starmer and No 10 effectively went into bunker mode. Rather than a full public inquiry, Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, unveiled plans for five government-backed local inquiries to be held in Oldham and four other areas using £5 million worth of funding.
However, there were signs of a shift after the appointment of Casey to conduct a 'rapid' national audit of information on grooming gangs to look at lessons that should be learnt at a national level.
HOUSE OF COMMONS/UK PARLIAMENT/PA
The review finally came back last week, including the recommendation of a national inquiry. It was damning, explicitly linking men of Pakistani origin to grooming gangs and warning that there had been successive cover-ups.
No 10 was said to have been concerned that the report could lead to civil unrest. The government initially delayed its response while it considered the best way forward, but The Times's revelation about its recommendation on Saturday forced its hand.
The challenge for Starmer is that however reasoned his opposition to a national inquiry was at the time, his rhetoric — particularly his dismissal of those calling for one as pandering to the far right — now looks ill-judged.