Starmer says Louise Casey will join grooming gangs inquiry after four survivors quit panel – UK politics live | Politics
Check out our latest products
![[Upgraded] USB Computer /Laptop Speaker with Stereo Sound & Enhanced Bass, Portable Mini Sound Bar for Windows PCs, Desktop Computer and Laptops](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61NAayKmVIL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
Starmer says Louise Casey to be brought in to support grooming gangs inquiry
Kemi Badenoch starts with a tribute to the former Tory MP Oliver Colvile, who has died.
She says her first question comes from Fiona, one of the grooming gang survivors. Fiona asks what the point of speaking up if you are going to be called liars.
Starmer thanks Badenoch for the question. The grooming gangs scandal was one of the worst of all time. He says his “vow” to Fiona and others is that this inquiry will be different; survivors won’t be ignored. Fiona is welcome to rejoin the panel. The inquiry will not be watered down, it will focus on grooming gangs and it will cover the ethnicity of offenders.
And he says Louise Casey will be brought in to support the inquiry.
Key events
Nigel Farage took to a side gallery for this week’s PMQs, instead of his usual seat next to other Reform UK MPs, claiming he is a “mere spectator”. As PA Media reports, the Clacton MP sat above the Labour benches with Reform backer Arron Banks.
In a post on social media, Farage said:
Every week at PMQs I am attacked by the PM and Labour MPs, but have no right of reply.
I am just a mere spectator.
So I have decided to spectate from the public gallery today instead.
PMQs – snap verdict
Years ago, when I started doing this live blog and writing snap verdicts after PMQs, I tried to consider how the proceedings might appear, not just to MPs in the chamber, but to a non-partisan, fair-minded, reasonable viewer – ie, to the public at large. Even then, that may have been naive. Now at least one of the main performers at PMQs does not seem to think such an audience exists.
That was clear today because Kemi Badenoch managed to put in what came across as quite a strong performance (Tory commentators liked it – see here and here, for example) without really trying to engage with the arguments at all. Calls for a grooming gangs inquiry took off in the new year (even though prosecutions have been going on for the best part of two decades, and various reports have explored this in considerable detail) because fresh reporting (mainly from GB News) revived a sense that there are grievance and injustices here that have not been fully addressed. It is a story that flourises online, and appeals to people innately suspicious of the state. For Badenoch, it is very comfortable territory.
The inquiry process is clearly in trouble (see 9.11am), and the survivors who have left the oversight panel have clearly lost confidence in the process and it was reasonable for Badenoch to take up their concerns. And there was nothing wrong with gunning for Jess Phillips either. Phillips is under pressure because of this comment she made in a Commons UQ on the inquiry.
We are progressing as swiftly as thoroughness allows. Misinformation undermines this process. Allegations of intentional delay, lack of interest and a widening or dilution of the inquiry’s scope are false.
Survivors on the oversight panel like Fiona Gooddard (one of the ones who resigned) say they were consulted explicitly on whether the scope of the inquiry should be extended. Whether or not that would be a “dilution” of the inquiry is arguable, but the government should explain why Phillips said the “widening” claim was false – unless she meant it was false because, while it had been considered, it has now been ruled out.
But Badenoch did not question Starmer in detail on these issues. She could have done, but she didn’t. Instead, she was content just to assert bad faith, over and over again.
And Starmer was trying to address the concerns raised by survivors. His opening statement did this, using similar language to Shabana Mahmood in the Times today. He announced a further, unspecified role for Louise Casey, which is always a sign of this government taking something seriously. (Perhaps she will combine this with being cabinet secretary – see 9.40am.) He also had a good explanation as to why a judge-led inquiry would not be ideal, whacked the Tories on mandatory reporting (see 12.14pm) and (rightly) defended Phillips’s record on child protection (see 12.17pm). A “fair-minded, reasonable viewer” would have concluded that he made a strong case, and that Badenoch should have taken yes for an answer. But God know if there are any of them still out there.
Harpreet Uppal (Lab) raises a knife attack in her constituency, and asks what the government is doing about this.
Starmer says the government has a strategy to tackle the root causes of knife crime.
Alex Mayer (Lab) says during the war Churchill changed the clocks to ensure there was more daylight in the evening. Will the government try “Churchill time” again?
Starmer says he will consider the idea (in the tone of voice that implies he won’t.)
Rebecca Smith (Con) asks when the government will implement its pledge to reduce business rates. The Tories would abolish them, she says.
Starmer lists measures the government is already taking to help businesses.
Patrick Hurley (Lab) asks what the government is doing to support youth clubs. He particularly mentions the FAB charity.
Starmer praises the FAB charity, and says the government’s youth strategy will be published later in the autumn.
Simon Hoare (Con) asks about the problems facing Jhoots Pharmacies.
Starmer says customers and staff have been badly left down. He says officials are currently addressing whether councils and health boards need more powers to go after rogue pharmacies.
Julia Minns (Lab) asks about flood defences in her Carlisle constituency. Does the PM agree climate change-sceptic policies of the opposition parties are reckless?
Starmer says the Tories left flood defences in their worst state for years.
Starmer attacks a Reform UK council for bringing Reform into disrepute, which he says is “quite something” for a party whose former Welsh leader has been convicted for taking pro-Russian bribes.
Starmer declines to rule out further delay in council elections because of local government reorganisation
Will Forster (Lib Dem) says it has been reported that local elections will be cancelled for a second year because of local government reorganisation. Can the PM rule that out?
Starmer defends the reorganisation. He says the timetable for the elections in Surrey will be set out soon.
He does not rule out a further delay.
Wendy Morton (Con) asks the PM to define when grey belt is grey.
Starmer says he can given an example of a car park being defined as green belt. That is the sort of place where development should take place.
Ellie Chowns (Green) asks if the PM accepts inequality, not immigration, is the reason for low living standards.
Starmer says, if the Greens want to tackle inequality, they should vote for Labour’s measures to address this.
Daniel Francis (Lab), who represents Bexleyheath and Crayford, says the local Tory council does not want people to report potholes because it cannot afford to fill them in.
Starmer says that is “ludicrous”.
Davey welcomes Labour accepting Brexit has been ‘disaster’, and calls for customs union with EU
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, asks if the PM agrees the Commons should properly scrutinise the Crown Estate, given the revelations about the Royal Lodge. Would he support a select committee inquiry, with Prince Andrew giving evidence.
Starmer says he favours proper scrutiny.
Davey says Labour MPs are relieved they can finally call Brexit a disaster. But that must not be just a means of attacking Nigel Farage, “however much he deserves it”. Will the PM repair the damage by negotiating a customs union with the EU.
Starmer rejects that idea.
