Child Sexual Offender Data

Robbie Moore Excerpts

Monday 1st June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dame Siobhain. I congratulate the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone), who opened the debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee; the lead petitioner, the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe); and the many campaigners who have fought tirelessly, and continue to fight, for justice for the victims of child sexual exploitation.

The petition is asking for

“a statutory requirement on councils, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and all other related institutions to collect, record and publish the nationality, ethnicity, immigration status and religion of child sexual offenders, including gang based crime”,

and rightly so. It believes that to properly protect children and prevent the mistakes of the past, it is essential to collect and record all that information. I agree with the petition, which states that data would

“protect children and inform public policy…allow for better understanding of offender demographics, ensure transparency, and support targeted safeguarding strategies.”

It also states:

“Without this information, critical patterns may be missed, weakening efforts to prevent abuse and protect vulnerable children.”

I agree with this narrative, and I join the over 260,000 people who have taken the time to sign the petition.

Although I appreciate that the petition covers several areas, I would like to start by focusing on the importance of the retention of data in cases of grooming gangs and child sexual exploitation. In her audit published in June last year, Baroness Casey rightly recommended a full national inquiry into grooming gangs. As part of her recommendations, as is set out clearly on page 151, Baroness Casey rightly said that it should be mandated that all local authorities, police forces and other relevant agencies retain all relevant records. Any evidence or data that could help the national grooming gangs inquiry should be retained, and the Government should be mandated to inform that retention.

After much back and forth with various Home Office officials, the previous permanent secretary at the Home Office, the previous Safeguarding Minister and the previous and current Home Secretary, I learned that it took the Home Office 212 days to issue that direction to our police forces and other key Home Office agencies instructing them to preserve those records after Baroness Casey’s report was published in June last year. That is nearly seven months after publication. I then learned that it took eight months for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to write to local authorities with the same instruction. That is a staggering failure at the heart of this Government to address a key recommendation from Baroness Casey.

My first question to the Minister is “Why such a delay?” Secondly, what kind of records are likely to have been lost, or potentially destroyed, in the seven months that it took the Home Office to issue the specific instruction to police forces and the eight months that it took MHCLG to issue the same instruction to local authorities? That question is worth asking, because the reality is that many local authorities up and down the country resisted more openness and transparency on this issue for years—for decades—including Bradford council, whose area my constituency is in.

Another key issue in cases of organised child grooming gangs is not only the lack of data, but the lack of certain types of data. In her audit, Baroness Casey stated:

“The appalling lack of data on ethnicity in crime recording alone is a major failing over the last decade or more. Questions about ethnicity have been asked but dodged for years. Child sexual exploitation is horrendous whoever commits it, but there have been enough convictions across the country of groups of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds to have warranted closer examination.”

I have seen that for myself in my Keighley constituency, within the Bradford district, where the vast majority of convictions have been of men of Asian ethnic background, whose offences were predominantly against white young girls.

We have to be sensible when talking about this issue because, as Baroness Casey rightly found in her audit, only 37% of suspects had their ethnicity data recorded. That is simply not good enough, and addressing it is a key recommendation by Baroness Casey. I welcome the recommendation that the Government mandate the collection of ethnicity and nationality data on all suspects in child sexual abuse and criminal exploitation cases; I only wish that it had come sooner. In my view, the very same approach should apply to the immigration status and religion not only of the victim, but of the perpetrator, so that we can get to grips with the complexity of this issue.

A national inquiry is now taking place. The areas subject to local investigations will be announced by 13 July. Why on earth is that taking so long? I commend the work done by the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth, but is the information collected by his inquiry being fed into the national grooming gangs inquiry led by Baroness Longfield? It is crucial that that information is considered.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rupert Lowe]

rose—

[Robbie Moore]

I will also take the next intervention.

[Rupert Lowe]

The hon. Member has made a very good point. We have been in touch with the Government and Baroness Longfield and have said that we will help them, but so far nobody has actually made contact with me.

[Robbie Moore]

The point is that all hon. Members in this place have a duty to represent our constituents and to feed any information that we have to Baroness Longfield, as the chair of the national grooming gangs inquiry, so that we can make sure, now that the terms of references have been set, that the local inquiries that form part of that national inquiry take place in the right areas.

That brings me to my key point. Keighley and the wider Bradford district is an area where people have been ignored and abandoned, at a local and national level, for far too long. For years people there have fought hard for our area to be included but they have been ignored. Since I was first elected to this place to represent the people of Keighley and Ilkley, I have stood alongside victims and survivors such as Fiona Goddard and alongside leading child abuse lawyers such as David Greenwood to call for one simple thing: a full independent inquiry should take place across Keighley and the wider Bradford district. These heinous crimes did happen and are happening right now. For decades, child sexual exploitation and gang-related grooming have haunted communities that I represent. Lives have been shattered. Trust has been broken. Far too often, those crying out for justice have been met with silence.

My second question for the Minister is: will she announce in this debate that Keighley and the wider Bradford district will be included as part of the national grooming gangs inquiry? If the Government were confident enough in January 2025 to announce that Oldham would be included, why on earth are they not confident enough today to announce that Keighley and the wider Bradford district will be included? As I have said many times before, I fear that the scale of the issue across the Bradford district will dwarf that in places such as Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford and Oldham, where previous inquiries took place. Bradford has been referenced a lot in relation to child sexual exploitation, and many victims and survivors have unfortunately been trafficked through the city. I would therefore like to hear a positive response from the Minister.

My final point is about the cost of the national grooming gangs inquiry. The Government have allocated £65 million to that inquiry, but we are yet to understand which local areas will form part of it. My third question to the Minister is: will the Government expand the allocation of funds to the national grooming gangs inquiry if the inquiry’s chair, Baroness Longfield, deems that more money is needed because more areas need to be looked at as part of the inquiry?

[Sir Julian Smith]

I pay tribute to the amazing work that my constituency neighbour has done over many years on this issue. The issue of taxi networks in the north of England, particularly those operating in Bradford and Keighley and in my area of Skipton and Ripon, is an example of the fact that analysing broader issues properly will require more funding.

[Robbie Moore]

I completely concur with my right hon. Friend. I do not want the Government’s independent inquiry to be restricted by the amount of funds that it has been allocated. We need to make sure that the inquiry is robust, transparent and open, and that no stone is left unturned.

[Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)]

I agree with much of what the hon. Gentleman said about the importance of gathering data, but something that has not really come out in this debate is an acknowledgment of the significant cuts to public services over the past decade, including cuts to youth services. I was a youth worker in Norfolk for many years, where I was the lead for child protection. Our services were decimated by cuts, and it is youth workers who very often spot signs of abuse and stop it. The hon. Gentleman is calling for additional funding; would he support money for youth work in hotspot areas so that we can protect children?

[Robbie Moore]

I absolutely concur with the hon. Member’s point. Youth services are a key indicator. Many of those who work for local authorities engage with victims and survivors, and of course they have a safeguarding responsibility and an ability to spot the signs of abuse. If youth services are one of those mechanisms, and if certain local authorities say that funding is an issue, then yes, of course—if that results in the right outcomes.

My final point is that there is always much focus on the national grooming gangs inquiry, but it seems that there is less focus on the report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, which was an excellent piece of work by Professor Alexis Jay. It made 22 recommendations, but here we are, 22 months into this Government, and only six of those recommendations have been acted on. I fully acknowledge that the report came out in 2022 and that the previous Administration did not make enough progress on the recommendations in the 20 months that they had to act on them before the general election, but we are now 22 months into the new Government. My fourth question is: what additional progress are the Government making on implementing all 22 IICSA recommendations? I acknowledge and welcome the progress that has been made.

[Mr Brash]

Some of the Jay report recommendations were implemented by the Government through the Crime and Policing Act 2026, which came before the House recently. How did the hon. Gentleman vote on it?

[Robbie Moore]

The Crime and Policing Act did not go anywhere near far enough to provide the safeguarding mechanisms to protect vulnerable victims and survivors who have experienced heinous crimes of child sexual exploitation. I will not vote for poor, badly thought-through legislation introduced by this Government.

Beyond the six that have been acted on already, what additional progress will be made on the 22 recommendations? I conclude by advocating that the Minister include Bradford and Keighley in the national grooming gangs inquiry.

--- Later in debate ---

[Natalie Fleet]

We have all seen the impact of 14 years of cuts to services. There are lots of things that need improving, so I cannot speak specifically to that point.

On the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (Luke Myer), the inquiry will look at any current offending. As raised by the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore), from the moment the inquiry was announced in June 2025 organisations already had legal obligations to protect relevant information. A letter from the Government was not required to make that case.

[Robbie Moore]

If that was the case, why did Baroness Casey feel strongly enough to include this issue as part of a recommendation in the report?

[Natalie Fleet]

It also made sense to wait until a draft term of reference, setting out the scope of the inquiry, was developed and published in December ’25. At that point, the chair of the inquiry wrote to the Cabinet Secretary, and the Home Office wrote to the National Police Chiefs’ Council and Home Office-sponsored arm’s length bodies in January 2026 to emphasise the importance of retaining documents.

The hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley also raised the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse. The Government have set out a clear plan for how we will deliver against the IICSA recommendations. That includes reforms to the Disclosure and Barring Service, a new mandatory reporting duty, a removal of the limitation period for child sexual abuse civil claims, establishing a new child protection authority, and rolling out the child house model across England to improve support for victims and survivors, with £50 million additional funding. Where we have been able to move quickly, we have. However, many of the recommendations require systemic and legislative change. We are moving as quickly as due process allows, and we have recently introduced a tranche of measures in the Crime and Policing Act. Where we are not currently taking forward recommendations, we have been clear about the reasons for that.

The hon. Member also made the case for including Bradford and Keighley in the independent inquiry. It is not for me to decide that, as set out at length to him by the chair of the inquiry on 19 May at the Home Affairs Committee. The inquiry will shortly set out its plans.

On the funding of the inquiry, the chair has been clear that they are determined to deliver on time and budget, and that the inquiry believes that is achievable.

[Robbie Moore]

Will the Minister answer two questions? If the Government were confident enough to announce Oldham more than 18 months ago, why are they not confident enough to announce that Bradford and Keighley will be part of the national grooming gangs inquiry? On the £65 million cost, are the Government challenging the independent chair of the inquiry, Baroness Longfield? Last week she stated to me, in front of the Home Affairs Committee, that she felt that £65 million was about right, yet she has not announced which local areas, or how many local areas, the inquiry will look at.

[Natalie Fleet]

It is absolutely right that it is an independent inquiry, and it is not for me to decide where the local investigations will be. The hon. Member will find out shortly whether his area will be included.

Before wrapping up, I will make some further general points. First, I reiterate that we are working closely with police forces to strengthen how suspect ethnicity data is collected, to identify gaps and to drive improvement so that our evidence base is clearer, more consistent and better supports action. We are strengthening how safeguarding agencies and key institutions work together to identify, disrupt and prosecute group-based child sexual exploitation. That includes bringing together police, local authorities, children’s services, schools and health partners to share intelligence, spot patterns and act faster. We are also reinforcing our expectation that all agencies play their full part so that the national police response and the statutory inquiry draw on the fullest possible evidence and are supported by a co-ordinated, intelligence-led system that leaves no gaps for offenders to exploit.

Regarding the questions raised by the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers), we have committed to legislate through the police reform Bill. Measures for tracking and enforcement will be introduced as part of that process.

On rape gang inquiries, I again want to pay tribute to victims and survivors who have shared their experiences. I recognise how difficult and how personal that is. Their courage in speaking out is absolutely extraordinary and these issues cannot and will not be ignored. The independent inquiry into grooming gangs is an official statutory inquiry established under the Inquiries Act 2005.

The inquiry has a clear mandate to uncover the truth and to deliver justice for victims and survivors. I want to be clear that if the rape gang inquiry encounters any evidence of criminal conduct as part of its work, that evidence should be passed on to law enforcement. I welcome the previous commitment of the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth to work constructively with the statutory inquiry.

I again thank the petitioners and all hon. Members who have taken part in this debate. There is no doubt that this is an important subject. It is right that we expose it to the full scrutiny of Parliament. Like my predecessor as Minister, I will not shy away from having tough conversations. We have had them in this debate, and we will no doubt have more. I welcome them all. I have always been guided by an unshakeable belief that the protection of the most vulnerable in our society, especially of children, is one of the state’s most vital responsibilities. Where that duty has not been upheld, the consequences are devastating. This Government are taking action to ensure that the failings of the past are never repeated.