Keir Starmer’s grooming gangs inquiry has descended into fresh turmoil after the only remaining candidate to be its chair blamed “political opportunism” and “a lack of trust” for his withdrawal as an applicant.
As a key survivor called for a face-to-face meeting with the prime minister to save the inquiry, Jim Gamble, a former deputy chief constable, said the process to appoint a committee head was “toxic” and defined by “vested interests”.
The loss of another candidate risked eclipsing attempts by Starmer on Wednesday to get to grips with the inquiry by announcing that Louise Casey, the civil service troubleshooter, would be brought in as an adviser.
It comes after four survivors invited on to an inquiry panel resigned over two days and accused the UK government of attempting to manipulate them into broadening it to include other forms of sexual abuse.
One of those survivors, Fiona Goddard, told the Guardian she wanted face-to-face talks with Starmer so he could understand abuse victims’ experiences and their demands for a judge-led inquiry.
Jim Gamble (pictured in 2016) said he had pulled out of the appointment process due to ‘a lack of confidence’ in him among survivors. Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
Gamble, a former head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Command and of the RUC special branch in Belfast, was one of two known leading candidates for the role. The other, Annie Hudson, who was once the head of children’s services at Lambeth, said on Tuesday she no longer wanted to be considered after intense media coverage.
Survivors had complained that senior police officers and social workers should not be considered for the role because both professions had been accused of participating in a cover-up of abuse.
In his withdrawal letter, Gamble said he had pulled out of the appointment process because of a “lack of confidence” in him among some survivors of grooming gangs “due to my previous occupation”.
He later criticised those “who have been mischief-making” by highlighting his former police career, saying it was “nonsense” to imply that he would align himself “with any political party to hide their blushes”.
Asked why he stepped back, Gamble told Sky News: “I think the growing level of toxicity and the fact that in the midst of lots of misinformation, I think many of the victims and survivors were being disrespected and misinformed.”
‘We need someone [to chair the inquiry] who is politically neutral,’ said Fiona Goddard, a survivor of gang abuse. Photograph: Lucy North/PA
The four abuse survivors resigned from their roles on the victims and survivors liaison panel, accusing the Home Office and ministers of sidelining them and seeking to widen the inquiry for political ends.
They suspect the government is trying to deflect focus away from Labour-led councils, wishes to impose a government-friendly chair, and wants to avoid raising questions over the ethnicity of the perpetrators, many of whom were men of Pakistani descent.
Goddard, who was abused by gang members while living in a Bradford children’s home, said she would talk to the prime minister about the inquiry.
“I would be willing to meet Starmer and talk to him about what I want from the inquiry,” she said. “It has to be a judge or a lawyer who heads the inquiry, even if they come from outside the UK such as a Commonwealth country – somewhere that shares the UK’s legal structure. They must have no connections to institutions that could be investigated as part of the scandal.
“It is important for [Starmer] to see the real-life impact of what abuse has done to survivors – that is something that has been lacking from the Labour government other than [the MP and safeguarding minister] Jess Phillips.
“There is no way that a police officer can head this inquiry. You have to remember that some of the victims were raped by police officers. I respect Jim Gamble’s decision to step down as a possible chair but I think he is obviously lashing out at the Tories. We need someone who is politically neutral.”
Louise Casey, a peer and civil service troubleshooter, will ‘support the work of the inquiry’, said Starmer. Photograph: House of Commons/PA
Speaking in the Commons on Wednesday, Starmer said Lady Casey, the safeguarding expert whose audit recommended the creation of the inquiry, would “support the work of the inquiry”.
He told MPs: “I do acknowledge that in recent days some members, including Fiona [Goddard], have decided to step away from the panel … should they wish to return, the door will always be open. But even if they do not, we owe it to them and to Fiona and to the country to answer the concerns that they have raised.”
Pressed by Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, at prime minister’s questions, Starmer said the scope of the inquiry would “not be diluted and we won’t shy away from cultural or religious issues”. He also defended Phillips, after Badenoch challenged him on whether he still had confidence in her.
Badenoch also accused the government of waging a “briefing war against survivors”. To shouts of “disgrace” and “withdraw” from Labour MPs, the Tory leader told the Commons: “He says that they could return to the panel if they wish to. Why would they do that?”
The four women who resigned from the advisory panel said on Wednesday evening they would return to the inquiry if Phillips resigned. In a letter to Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, they set out five conditions for their return.
They said Phillips’s “conduct over the last week has shown she is unfit to oversee a process that requires survivors to trust the government. Her departure would signal you are serious about accountability and changing direction.”
Evidence has emerged that shows members of the liaison panel were explicitly asked by officials: “Should the inquiry have an explicit focus on ‘grooming gangs’ or ‘group-based CSEA’ [child sexual exploitation and abuse], or take a broader approach?”
Elizabeth, a survivor using a pseudonym who has resigned from the committee, said panel members were surprised to be asked such a question in a written Q&A.
“I voiced my opinion. I said: ‘Back in June you told the country that we would be having one just on grooming gangs, and now you ask, do we want it widening? No, we don’t, we want it on grooming gangs,’” she told Radio 4’s Today programme.
Asked whether she felt satisfied with the home secretary’s assertion that the inquiry would explicitly examine the ethnicity and religion of offenders, Elizabeth said: “No, I’m not, because we hear this all the time. We heard it in June. We hear it all the time. You know, people all want to do the best for grooming gang survivors and their families when they need a vote or they need to look good.”
Other survivors have come forward who have said they would be happy for a senior police officer to chair the inquiry.
