Casey says having incomplete ethnicity data on grooming gangs has been ‘disaster’, and officials to blame for ‘public irresponsibility’
Referring to the national inquiry, Casey says she wants this to be different from the types of inquiry that have happened before.
On data, she says national data on grooming gangs is “incomplete and unreliable”. That is to put it mildly, she says.
She says this is a form of irrresponsibility.
She says:
I feel very strongly on issues that are as searing as people’s race, when we know the prejudice and racism that people of colour experience in this country, to not get how you treat that data right is a different level of public irresponsibility.
Sorry, to put it so bluntly, I didn’t put it that bluntly yesterday, but I think it’s particularly important if you are collecting those sorts of issues to get them 100% right.
And if you are not getting them 100% right, please don’t use them to justify another position, which is potentially what happened.
That may be well meaning, it may not be well meaning, but that’s how the data has run. And I think the sooner we bring a close to that – my view is collect something or don’t collect something. For God’s sake, don’t half collect it. That’s a bloody disaster, frankly.
She says, even where data has been collected on ethnicity, it has only talked about people being of Asian or Pakistani heritage. She says that bundles people together in one big grouping. It is not helpful, she says.
UPDATE: Casey also said:
When we asked the good people of Greater Manchester Police to help us look at the data we also collected – I think it’s in the report – what was happening with child abuse more generally, and of course … if you look at the data on child sexual exploitation, suspects and offenders, it’s disproportionately Asian heritage. If you look at the data for child abuse, it is not disproportionate, and it is white men.
So again, just note to everybody, really outside here rather than in here. Let’s just keep calm here about how you interrogate data and what you draw from it.
Key events
Badenoch defends politicising grooming gangs issue, accusing Labour of doing this first
Q: Do you regret the tone you took in the Commons yesterday?
Badenoch says:
I do think that we should take the politics out of it.
But she goes to attack Labour – claiming they were the first to politicise this issue.
But who was it that said when we raised this issue that we were pandering to the far right? That’s what brought the politics into it. Who was it that said that this was dog whistle politics? It was Keir Starmer and his ministers.
She says it is her job to hold the government to account.
She says, speaking here on a platform with survivors, she is not being political.
But in the Commons she will raise politics, she says. “We are politicians – politics is what we do.” She goes on:
When I’m in the Houses of Parliament, when I’m in the Commons, I will do politics. And I think that it is wrong for people to tone police those who are pointing out when something has gone wrong.
Badenoch plays down value of politicians apologising, saying ‘apologies are easy’ – 24 hours after demanding one from Starmer
Q: Will you offer an apology to survivors for the failures of the past government?
Badenoch says she has apologised to survivors.
But apologies are easy, she says.
She says:
I have apologised, but what I find extraordinary is that more people are interested in prosecuting a government that did some things … rather than looking at what needs to happen right now ….
No one here has asked me for more apologies. They have heard the apologies. Apologies are easy. What we need to see is action.
We can sit here and say sorry all day long, but what I actually want to see is an inquiry that gets at the bottom of this.
Yesterday Badenoch was demanding an apology from Keir Starmer.
Badenoch says Sajid Javid and Suella Braverman were “vilified” for saying that race was a factor in this offending.
Badenoch says most of what was in Louise Casey’s report ‘I felt I had seen before’
Badenoch is now taking questions.
She starts with Charlie Peters, the reporter who has led the GB News coverage of this issue.
Q: Will you ensure Westminster, including the CPS, are investigated by the inquiry over cover-up allegations?
Badenoch says the inquiry should follow the evidence. No one should be out of scope, she says.
She says most of what was in Louise Casey’s report “I felt I had seen before, and I knew”.
She says a national inquiry could have been ordered sooner.
Badenoch invites Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, to speak. She says the Tories have set tests to judge the inquiry.
Philp says the authorites were not just negligent; they deliberately covered up these crimes, he says.
He cites the case he talked about on Sky News yesterday involving a police officer actively deciding not to investigate abuse allegations.
He says people who covered up this crime should be prosecuted for misconduct in public office. That should happen alongside the inquiry, he says.
He says all 50 towns where grooming has happened should be investigated.
(It was GB News that said 50 towns were involved).
He says all councils should cooperate.
And he says the inquiry should start soon. The terms of references, and the chair, should be announced before the summer recess.
At the Tory press conference, the survivors and relatives are talking about how hard it has been to get the police to the issue seriously. They say that going to the media has been important in getting the police to act.
The next speaker is a mother whose son was abused from the age of 13. He was in the care system. As an adult, he went to the police. Sadly, he died, she says. She says it took 10 years for the case to get to court. Her son died before the case could go to court, she says.
Badenoch invites the woman to say more about the court process. The victim’s mother says she thinks the restrictions imposed on the suspect were not strict enough.
Badenoch invites her next contributor, Fiona, to speak. She says the inquiry needs to engage with victims. They feel let down, she says.
Badenoch asks her to elaborate on her concerns about delays.
Fiona says victims need more support. She recalls the way her hair fell out when her case went to trial because of the stress.
Badenoch invites her first contributor to speak. He is the father of a survivor.
He says he wants professionals to be held accountable. He says he is not reassured this will happen.
His daughter was groomed from the age of 14, but as she grew older she was passed on to other groomers. Victims get passed on, he says.
Kemi Badenoch holds press conference, giving abuse survivors platform to speak about their experiences
Kemi Badenoch is holding her press conference now.
There is a live feed here.
She says she thinks the views of survivors have not been heard enough. That is what she will focus on today.
She says the Tories welcome the decision to hold a national inquiry.
She says she decided a national inquiry was needed when the scale of the problem became apparent.
Q: Should the devolved governments contribute to the national inquiry?
Casey says she would be disappointed if the national criminal investiation did not involve Scotland. It is easy for criminals to move from England to Scotland, she says.
She says it is “really important” that there is join-up between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, she says.
Joani Reid (Lab) says she is a Scottish MP. She asks if Casey spoke to any devolved organisations when doing her report.
Casey says people in Britain should not read her report and think this could not happen here.
In Scotland police forces were merged into Police Scotland. So there data sharing should be better, she says.
Reid suggests it isn’t.
Casey is back talking about data. She says sharing data is easier now than at any time before in her career. And it is not expensive. But privacy concerns can be a problem. Often these are used to justify institutions protecting their interests, she suggests.
Q: Do we need a complete overhaul of police IT?
Sarah Kincaid, a policy adviser at the Home Office, says you do not need a whole new system. She says you can use new tools withing existing systems.
Casey cites work being done by Befordshire police as an example of good practice. You do not need to spend “300 years” on a digital overhaul, she says.
Casey explains why she changed her mind on holding national inquiry, saying it is needed for ‘accountability’
Jake Richards (Lab) ask Casey why she changed her mind on a national inquiry.
Casey says, early on, she was doubtful about the need for another inquiry. The Alexis Jay one was very thorough. And, as someone who has written reports that have not been implemented, she knows the importance of focusing on implementing recommendations.
But she says, without a national inquiry, she realised they would not deal with the issue of accountability.
She says she is in favour of catching criminals. Her view initially was, if money was available, it should go to the police, to help them catch criminals.
But then the government said it would set up five local inquiries. But Oldham was the only council that wanted to do one, he says. The others were not volunteering.
And then she looked at the assurance reviews carried out for Andy Burnham in Greater Manchester. These showed that authorities were withholding information, and lawyering up. These reviews were taking years, and not getting to the truth.
Source link
