Sarah Champion
Main Page: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)Department Debates - View all Sarah Champion's debates with the Home Office
(1 week, 2 days ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Indeed. The hon. Member has some knowledge, as I do, of the situation north of the border. The point is well made—I shall come to it shortly—that this crime is no respecter of where in the United Kingdom someone lives. Only by prioritising the identification of unreported abuse can we begin to address the true scale of the problem, rather than merely documenting its aftermath, retrospectively.
The petition makes particular reference to “gang based crime”. Many hon. Members will be aware of previous inquiries into this particular offence and its severity, which should not be undermined. However, we must remember that children can be sexually abused in many different ways by different people and in different places and situations. I think that is precisely the point to which my Scottish colleague, the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont), alluded.
I thank the hon. Member for the reasoned caveats that he lays out, but in the case of Rotherham, the gangs that were grooming and abusing young children in my constituency were predominantly of Pakistani heritage. That mattered because, had we recognised it early on, we might have been able to disrupt and prevent some of the abuse. In specific cases, we need this data and we need to be transparent. Sometimes all the caveats in the world just dilute what should be a laser focus on protecting children.
Wise words indeed.
To turn to the point that my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) touched on earlier, in England and Wales alone almost half of all child sexual abuse offences reported to the police in 2021 and 2022 took place in the family environment. That means the abuse was by parents, siblings, grandparents or anyone considered one of the family. After sexual abuse by a parent, harmful sexual behaviour by siblings is the second most common form of sexual abuse within the family environment that is reported to police.
My point is that we must be cautious about framing child sexual abuse as primarily an external or culturally othered threat, when the evidence shows that it is most often perpetrated within existing relationships of trust and care. I suggest that overemphasising outside narratives risks distorting public understanding and could distract from the full range of contexts in which abuse occurs.
That is shameful. I am delighted that my right hon. Friend brought that up; that is why it is essential that today’s debate rectifies that situation.
Missing from Baroness Casey’s recommendations was the vital need for data collection on religion and immigration status—factors that surely need to be understood so that if they are found to be related to higher offending rates, strategies for protecting children can be that much more targeted and effective. As Baroness Casey acknowledges in her audit, for too long the authorities have shied away from the ethnicity of people involved, and “blindness”, “ignorance” and “prejudice” led to repeated failures, over decades, to properly investigate cases.
If we had complete and consistent data, we would be able to answer more questions with greater accuracy. Are certain types of exploitation increasing? How are offenders operating? Are those from certain ethnic backgrounds more likely than others to commit certain sorts of crimes? If we understand what patterns exist, we can improve policing, bring more survivors the justice they deserve and stop these horrendous crimes happening again.
Other questions need to be answered, too. Why are institutions so adverse to collecting and reporting such data? The Jay report, published in 2014, documented a reluctance to discuss offender ethnicity openly. We know that the Labour-run councils of Rotherham—
I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for referring to the Jay report on Rotherham. She will be aware that the frontline staff were gathering that data; management and the upper echelons were blocking it. She is absolutely right to ask why that happened, and what the consequences were—I put it to her that there were not many.
I thank the hon. Member for all her work on this matter over many years. I know the abuse that she went through for standing up for those girls.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I begin by thanking all Members who contributed to the debate, the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) for bringing forward this important petition, and the more than 260,000 people who signed it. I pay tribute to those victims who have lived through some of the most horrific issues and incidents and are bravely doing so much to support others and prevent this from happening to others.
The scale of support for the petition demonstrates the strength of feeling on this issue across the country. Child sexual exploitation and abuse are among the most horrific crimes that can be committed. The offenders are the most vile, sick and evil individuals among us; their actions leave lasting scars on victims and destroy young lives. Our first duty, as legislators and as a society, is to do everything possible to prevent these crimes and bring perpetrators to justice.
For many people who signed the petition, this debate is inseparable from the grooming gangs scandal that has scarred towns and communities the length of this country. We saw not only despicable actions by offenders, but the failure of institutions. Vulnerable children were abused while too many warning signs were missed, too many concerns were ignored, and too many difficult questions went unasked. That failure remains one of the darkest chapters in this country’s history. The crimes themselves were horrific, but what makes this even more shocking is that, in too many cases, victims were failed by the very institutions that existed to protect them. If we are serious about ensuring that such failures are never repeated, we must be willing to gather the evidence, confront the facts and learn the lessons, however uncomfortable they may be for some.
At its heart, this petition asks whether we are collecting enough information about those who commit these crimes to properly understand who they are and stop them. The truth is that we need to know who is committing the crimes. The more accurate information we have, the better informed this House, this Government, the police and safeguarding agencies will be when deciding how to prevent them.
Does the hon. Member share my frustration that the petition did not include victims and survivors? I know from my experience that the vast majority are white British girls, but a particular sect of Sikh girls is also being very aggressively targeted. It would be good to include them so that the police can do more protection work.
The hon. Lady is entirely right. As many people have said, sunlight is the best disinfectant. We need to be more transparent and know who the victims and perpetrators are so that we can seek solutions and give victims the support they require.
As Baroness Casey’s recent audit highlighted, there have been significant shortcomings in the collection of data relating to perpetrators of group-based child sexual exploitation. I welcome the fact that the Government have now accepted her recommendation that ethnicity and nationality data be collected more consistently. However, accepting the principle is only the beginning. The real question is whether, how and when that commitment will be delivered in practice.
This is not a new issue. During the passage of the Crime and Policing Act, I and colleagues tabled amendments that would have required greater transparency around the collection and publication of ethnicity data relating to sexual offenders and grooming gangs. The purpose was simple: to ensure that collection of this information did not depend on changing priorities or varying practices between police forces. Those proposals were resisted by the Government. I therefore welcome their change of position, but I wish it had come sooner.
We need to confront the failings now and not wait for another report, another scandal or another public outcry. For too long, a lack of proper data has meant that legitimate concerns were dismissed and public confidence was undermined. A striking feature of this debate is that independent researchers have often been able to identify trends and patterns that official systems have struggled to capture. It cannot be right that academics can sometimes build a clearer picture of offending patterns than the institutions responsible for recording and responding to the crimes. The state should know what is happening within its own criminal justice system.
This debate is not about stigmatising communities, but about protecting victims and confronting the facts, wherever the evidence leads. Baroness Casey’s audit contained one particularly troubling example. She described finding a children’s case file in which the word “Pakistani” had literally been Tipp-Exed out. Whatever the reason for that, it is not how safeguarding should operate. We cannot protect children if information is ignored, obscured or left unrecorded. As Becky Riggs, the national policing lead for child protection and abuse investigation, has acknowledged, this data helps police to understand risks, vulnerabilities and where resources should be targeted, which is why improving its quality and completeness matters so much.
The Government have accepted the principle; the question now is how quickly, comprehensively and consistently it will be delivered across every police force in the country. The public need to be confident that the authorities are prepared to ask difficult questions, collect evidence rigorously and publish findings honestly.
I welcome the Minister to her place, and I would be grateful if she addressed three specific points. First, what discussions have the Government had with chief constables and police leaders about improving the collection of ethnicity, nationality and other relevant data relating to group-based child sexual exploitation? Secondly, how will progress be measured? What expectations will be placed upon forces, and how will compliance be monitored? Thirdly, when will Parliament next receive an update on progress so that we can assess whether the commitments that were made following Baroness Casey’s review are actually being delivered on?
Better data alone will not solve the problem—we also need effective policing, strong safeguarding, successful prosecutions and proper support for victims and survivors—but it is an essential part of the solution. The lesson from every review, every inquiry and every survivor testimony is the same: difficult facts do not disappear because institutions choose not to record them. The failures of previous generations of authorities to tackle child sexual exploitation are a stain on this country’s record. We owe it to survivors to do better. That means putting safeguarding before institutional reputation, putting evidence before ideology, and being prepared to follow the facts, wherever they lead.
The victims of these appalling crimes deserve justice, truth and confidence that every possible lesson has been learned. For that reason, I welcome this debate and thank the petitioners for bringing the issue before Parliament. I hope that the Government will now ensure that the commitments they have made on transparency and data collection are fully and consistently delivered. Let us deliver justice for victims, hold perpetrators to account and do everything we can to prevent these crimes from ever happening again.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Natalie Fleet)
It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers, and I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak on this most important issue. I am also grateful to all Members who have contributed with such passion, sensitivity and care for the victims—those brave women—who are with us today, as well as those who are not. At the heart of this debate has been the theme that when women and girls come forward, we must absolutely believe them, and I thank hon. Members for that.
I thank the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone), who provided a clear and balanced account of the petition’s main arguments. I also thank the petitioners for the role that they have played in bringing us together—including the 598 signatories from Bolsover—and in allowing us to have this cross-party debate with so much consensus.
This is my first opportunity to respond to a debate as Minister for Safeguarding, and it is absolutely one of the most important issues that we face as a Parliament. I pay tribute to my predecessor, the hon. Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), for her tireless work in supporting victims of these heinous crimes. The grooming gangs scandal is one of the darkest moments in our nation’s history. Every time I meet one of the survivors, I hear the same story. Not only were the girls abused by these predators, but they were ignored, belittled and even blamed. Too many endured years of being told that the crimes against them did not matter, and therefore, they did not matter either. And now, as women seeking truth and justice, there are still those who seek to exploit them with lies and misinformation, spread daily by people claiming to represent the victims’ best interests. We keep seeing too many people who are not interested in victims, but only in themselves. Their lies do nothing but undermine the hard work happening to uncover the answers that survivors have long searched for.
I am so proud to be a Minister in the Government who are fighting to get and deliver those answers. My policy responsibilities are broad, but they are connected by a single, sacred thread: the state’s responsibility to keep the most vulnerable in our society safe. There has been a lot of talk about data and evidence, and I will come to that shortly, but first, I will say a word for the victims and survivors of all the different types of abuse that we have been talking about. The testimony that we have heard has been absolutely horrendous, and I thank every Member who has brought it and every victim and survivor who has shared it. We will never forget the terrible suffering that you have endured. That is why I will be part of a team and a Government who will strive relentlessly to prevent others from going through what you have. That will be my focus every single day in this role as we drive forward the Government’s mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. To meet that goal, we must tackle all forms of child sexual abuse and exploitation while taking every possible step to protect children from harm.
Let me turn to the crux of this debate and the specific points that have been raised. As Members are aware—this has been mentioned often—in February 2025, the Prime Minister and the then Home Secretary commissioned Baroness Louise Casey of Blackstock to evaluate the scale, nature and drivers of group-based sexual exploitation and abuse. The Government immediately accepted the 12 recommendations from Baroness Casey’s audit. That included making it a requirement for police to collect the ethnicity and nationality data of individuals suspected of being members of grooming gangs or perpetrators of other group-based sexual exploitation.
Can the Minister give clarity on whether the Government will also accept the 20 recommendations made by the IICSA inquiry?
Natalie Fleet
I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention, and I absolutely will come to that as part of this speech.
Let me assert once more the Government’s unwavering commitment to delivering all the recommendations set out in Baroness Casey’s national audit, which exposed more than a decade of institutional failure. This was, without question, one of the darkest episodes in our country’s history, and every part of the state bears a responsibility to ensure that this is never repeated.
Baroness Casey was rightly clear that the collection of suspect ethnicity data in grooming gang cases is poor. We agree and we are acting. That is why in July last year, the then Home Secretary wrote to all chief constables setting out the expectation that ethnicity data should be collected from all suspects in child sexual exploitation cases, and to urge them to make sure that they are fulfilling that obligation. We continue to work with policing colleagues to improve data collection and analysis. But incredibly importantly, we are legislating to give the Home Secretary the power to mandate the collection of ethnicity data by police officers. The police reform White Paper, published in January, set out our intention to put data standards for policing, including in this area, on a statutory footing.
I say clearly to all those who signed the petition: the Government will legislate to ensure that we fix this issue. Baroness Casey was clear that given the evidence available in some local areas, we need better ethnicity and nationality data at a national level to strengthen understanding and accountability. We will follow that evidence without fear or favour, and we will not let cultural sensitivities stand in our way. The Home Secretary said it best last December:
“We must root out this evil, once and for all. The sickening acts of a minority of evil men, as well as those in positions of authority who looked the other way, must not be allowed to marginalise or demonise entire communities of law-abiding citizens.”—[Official Report, 9 December 2025; Vol. 777, c. 179.]
Members will be aware that the Government set up the independent inquiry into grooming gangs earlier this year. I am proud to be part of a Government who are delivering on this incredibly important work to uncover the truth. The inquiry has begun its crucial work to give survivors of these horrific crimes long-awaited answers. It will have a laser focus on grooming gangs, including the role that ethnicity, religion and culture played in these terrible crimes. It has a budget of £65 million, and the chair has confirmed that the funding is sufficient to deliver the inquiry. The inquiry has been designed to be time-limited for three years. That is long enough to go deep into where it matters the most, with a definitive end date to get the answers that victims and survivors need.
Separately, the Government are also making sure that everything we do is underpinned by evidence. I welcome Members sending me any additional research and information they have in this area. If the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills (Tessa Munt), could send me that it would be fantastic.