Keir Starmer is set to block a national inquiry into child grooming gangs in Parliament today, ordering his MPs to oppose an amendment tabled by Tory leader Kemi Badenoch that would trigger a new official inquiry. The Mail has more.
With Labour holding a massive majority in the House, it means the bid is almost certain to fail.
Sir Keir – who has been fending off an extraordinary social media attack on the issue from U.S. billionaire Elon Musk – accused the Conservatives of “shocking” tactics by tagging the measure on to the wider Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.
“I would implore any right-thinking Tory MP to vote for the Bill because this would kill the Bill, this would kill the legislation,” he told the Mirror.
The issue is likely to come up when the leaders clash at the first PMQs session since the Christmas break at noon, before the expected vote this evening.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said the decision showed “total moral cowardice”.
“The victims of these heinous child rape gangs deserve honesty, and they deserve the truth,” he said.
Mr. Philp said previous inquiries had failed to get to the bottom of the issue.
“Labour’s decision risks perpetuating the cover-up of the rape gangs,” he said.
“There will be many Labour MPs in constituencies where these awful crimes took place and where victims still seek justice. They now need to think long and hard about which side of history they want to be on.”
The scandal involved the rape and sexual abuse of thousands of white girls by gangs of predominantly Pakistani-origin men.
Campaigners against child sex abuse also urged the Prime Minister to reconsider.
Victims campaigner Dame Jasvinder Sanghera said she “fully supported” a public inquiry – and warned that rape and abuse of young girls by gangs of men was still continuing.
“Let’s be clear, this is still happening,” she told Times Radio. “This isn’t something that used to happen. This is still happening today. I’m sure the perpetrators of this kind of abuse will look for different ways of manipulating the system so we have to look at this as a whole and have a broader conversation.”
Dame Jasvinder said the Government’s approach to multiculturalism still appeared to be to “minimise the risk of offending communities as opposed to actually dealing with the very problem”.
But on a round of broadcast interviews this morning, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson branded the Tory approach “sickening”.
Worth reading in full.
The Telegraph explains the process:
The Bill is due to face its second reading debate this afternoon which is the first big hurdle legislation must clear and is when MPs debate and vote on the broad principles of a Bill. Amendments seeking to make changes to a Bill are not allowed at second reading.
So the Tories and Reform have instead tabled what are called “reasoned amendments” which set out reasons for objecting to a Bill rather than proposed changes.
If a “reasoned amendment” is passed by the Commons it has the effect of killing off the Bill it is attached to.
So with today’s action it is possible for Labour to try to argue that it is all about the Tories and Reform trying to kill the Bill while the Tories and Reform can try to keep the focus purely on the inquiry issue.
The Tories also oppose the Bill because it takes the axe to the freedom of academies:
Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott told Sky News: “Academies are being abolished in all but name as part of this Bill and we completely oppose that and everybody should.”
The Tory frontbencher argued that the Bill would strip academies of many of the freedoms they currently have on things like teacher pay and admissions.
Elon Musk kept the pressure on this morning, tweeting: “Now why would Keir Starmtrooper order his own party to block such an inquiry? Because he is hiding terrible things. That is why.”
Independent Oldham Councillor Abdul Wahid has said Keir Starmer needs to “stop deflecting” from the issue of grooming gangs by “calling everybody far-Right”, adding: “Why would anybody with an ounce of humanity deny the public a fair and independent inquiry?”
Stop Press: MPs voted by 364 votes to 111 against Kemi Badenoch’s call for a new inquiry.
Watch Kemi tell Parliament that Starmer “doesn’t want questions asked of Labour politicians who may be complicit“. (Though Farage pointed out that “as Women and Equalities Minister from 2022 to 2024 [Badenoch] didn’t meet a single victim of these rapes and never raised the issue once”.)
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
These idiots are fast approaching my debanking/defunding list. We are members, but I am sick of their morbid stupidity, endless simpleton wokisms, racisms, and climate bollocks. Just take care of the god damn buildings and heritage sites and shut the hell up. Or watch your membership dwindle.
Ferd I’m amazed you haven’t left yet. The NT has always frozen their property in aspic, a form of living death.
The problem is, whether or not I remain a member, The National Trust does own large swathes of coastline in the South West and it is this National Trust coastline that keeps us a members, otherwise I think I would leave.
I did not renew my membership after purchasing one of their leaflets describing walks around Hawkshead in the lake district.
In the leaflet they described Vikings as Scandinavian refugees.That was the last straw for me.Even the kids asked what on earth are they on about?
Presumably, that’s because they believe the refugees of today are repeating what the Vikings did in the past.
:->
Yep———-Ironically the Swedes today are now paying for their multicultural dogma as 20 times more sexual crimes are committed by the latter day rapists than by indigenous Swedes. —-But so determined are they that this isn’t true that they make it a crime to talk about it.
Yes I believe the Vikings were put up in castles at taxpayers expense, and I had always thought they were rapists and pillagers. Sorry I now admit I was wrong and that we should pay money for past injustices to all red haired people.
The NT has set its course and there is no rowing back for them now despite your displeasure or any number of members displeasure. There is no way that their proscribed agenda will be allowed to be perceived by the public to have been overturned by a members revolt. Money will be found either from lottery, government or billionaire funding sources to ensure that a popular revolt of this kind fails – God forbid, the people may apply the same democratic principle to all manner of things.
“Patrick Begg, outdoors and natural resources director at the trust”
Who the F. thinks these job titles up? Doubtless another waster on a couple of hundred grand a year. He belongs in the bottom block. A complete Next Tuesday.
Probably a relation of the useless lefty economist David Begg. He was one of the crazies desperate to bounce UK in to the euro. Essentially a useful idiot. Once yr in the woke aristocracy these sinecures become rather easier to obtain.
Thanks
I think there should be a competition for the most ridiculous job titles in the wake of the climate alarm, HP.
You are right Aethelred.
Former member of NT here. The main threat to ‘their’ properties is haemorrhaging support. They keep telling us about the slave-owning history of the builders and owners of the houses – so why don’t they burn them down to demonstrate their contempt more fully?
A Minister for Management of Civilisational Decline would be more useful.
Congratulations Minister. Yours is the only department to achieve its targets.
The Ministry for Silly Talks?
I suggest a Minister for Deaeration of Woke Windbags.
Thanks for then new word.
Maybe the droughts and wildfires will be offset by the floods. It just needs a longer term perspective than most marketing plans.
Make no mistake, this is marketing and not true concern for environments that have suffered all these “hazards” in past years.
Not yet another bloody government department about the climate alarm. We need that new Argentinian prez Javier Milei to do one of his – “Ministry of Climate Adaptation? OUT!” actions. Honestly, the NT are losing it…drought, heavy rain, wildfires? But not today or tomorrow but by 2060! For god’s sake, just get a deckchair and some wellies.
Why the hell are we worrying about 2060. The so-called Tory dupes have caused enough damage to this country these past fourteen years. It’s 2023, can we pay attention to NOW?
Apparently the planet might be a couple of degrees warmer by 2100. Well if anybody is still on this planet in 2100 lucky them, personally I would appreciate those two degrees NOW.
And I won’t be here in 2060 so actually I CGAF about effing global boiling, flooding, freezing or whatever other nonsense they come up with.
Today’s problems need today’s solutions. Tomorrow can look after itself.
https://documents.nationaltrust.org.uk/story/annual-report-2023/page/2/1
I haven’t had a good look yet but I am sure this will be interesting
Today’s problems need today’s solutions. Tomorrow can look after itself.
Tomorrow is something the people of tomorrow will have to deal with tomorrow. People who claim they are solving the problems of tomorrow by creating problems today just want to distract from the latter. They don’t know anything about the real problems of tomorrow and the people of tomorrow obviously haven’t appointed them as their representatives. Conveniently, they just cannot yet object to what’s supposedly being done in their name.
Excellent
It’s a shame that they appear to be jumping onto the bandwagon using “climate change” in lieu of normal extreme weather events and the need to maintain various structures, both old and new. I am actually a member of it. The original reason why I joined was doing the sums for parking at a number of their sites. In effect, paying up front, but less than non-members have to pay given the number of times I go to them.
I’ve often parked without paying. Don’t think their fines are enforcible anyway. I feel eternal shame that I belonged to this organisation for a couple of decades. I should be flayed like Henry the second was in Canterbury cathedral and be forced to sleep on the floor with no blanket.
..and lo the grift continues unabated.
….”“the single biggest threat” to the charity’s mission”, is your organisation’s woke-ism, Mr Begg.
I used to be a member. I looked at moving my subscription to the RSPB, but they’re almost as bad.
Do not support any of them.
I don’t. I want to support the wildlife, our heritage etc., but unfortunately, no organisation can be trusted it seems.
The charity […] said approximately 71% of the places it looks after could be at medium or high risk of climate hazards by 2060.
Attempt to translate this into English: Hazard means risk. Hence, the last bit is
climate risks in 37 years.
Combining this with the bit in front of it yields
above-average risk of climate risks in 37 years.
Then, we have the could, a subjunctive, ie, another risk. We’re now at
there’s a risk of above average risk of climate risks in 37 years
Filling in the last bit now gives the complete sentence:
Modelling has shown that there will be a risk of above average risk of climate risks for about 3/4 of the places the National Trust is currently administrating in 37 years.
What’s that’s supposed to mean – beyond No climate-related damage expected until at least 2060 – is anybody’s guess. Presumably, the point is to repeat risk combined with climate as often as possible to convey the impression of a serious danger. Someone demanding anything based on a statement like this should be unceremoniously shown door and told not to come back until he has at least managed to make up his mind about what he’s actually afraid of.
So far the evidence is the greatest danger to the fabric of the buildiungs and their contents arises from the incompetence of the NT which allows them to burn to the ground.
Interesting that they demand a minister for climate adaptation. In some ways I agreenm with adapting to changes in our environment. Stop wasting huge resources on trying to change the temperature, which is impossible but, as required, adapt to changes – which is what humans have always done. Is the National Trust finally bending to the obvious?
We need to “tackle” Climate change…..so give us some more money.
It’s hilarious how they use “adaptation” and not ‘mitigation’, as these clowns think we can control the weather.
Translation: Systems going well…. Send more money.
Where does this National trust gets its information from? ——-Do they ever question any of it? ——-Very unlikely. Rent seekers question nothing. After all if you need money for something, being alarmist about climate is a great way to get it. If you are a coral island in the pacific what better to get big sums of money from the eco socialist western world than claim you are going to vanish beneath the waves. If you are animal rights activists who think we should all eat vegetables and locusts, what better way to stop people killing animals for food than to claim the animals destroy the climate. If you build turbines or smart meters, what better way to farm all the subsidy than claim your products save the planet. etc etc etc………”Climate Change” —–The gift that keeps on giving. But the gifts are all paid for by us.——– And it is costing trillions.