Calls by opposition councillors for a government-led public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham were defeated at another fiery town hall meeting.
The Failsworth Independent Group (FIP) had tabled a motion at full council which asked the chief executive to write to the Home Secretary and Minister for Housing, Communities and Local Government requesting a ‘fully independent and broad ranging’ public inquiry ‘as soon as is practically possible’.
It also called for a cross-party steering group to be established to work alongside the inquiry.
However the Labour group had tabled an amendment to the motion which removed the section about a public inquiry, which was then adopted and approved – to the fury of opposition councillors who voted against it.
At the meeting on Wednesday night Conservative member Robert Barnes described it as a ‘travesty’, adding it was ‘the night that democracy died in Oldham’.
The three hour meeting was turbulent from start to finish, with the public gallery again filled with many angry residents. Several held protest signs and frequently banged the plastic partitions which were installed as Covid-19 measures, as well as heckling and shouting over councillors.
The motion was the third call that has been formally made for a government-led public inquiry into historic sexual abuse in the borough, but the first to be tabled since the long-awaited assurance review was published last month.
The review, carried out by experts Malcolm Newsam and Gary Ridgway, found that vulnerable children in Oldham had been failed despite efforts to protect them between 2011 and 2014.
A specific case dating back to 2005 involving ‘Sophie’, a 12-year-old girl who was repeatedly raped, was singled out for intense criticism for the way authorities dealt with the investigation into her assaults by strangers, and for the failure to take action when she was being groomed online.
The report stated that it found no evidence of a widespread cover-up of child sexual exploitation (CSE) in the borough, and between the years 2011 to 2014 services endeavoured to prevent at risk young people from being taken advantage of.
But the authors said that while strategies were good on paper, they frequently did not translate into protecting children on the ground from abuse.
Moving his party’s motion, Councillor Brian Hobin from the Failsworth Independents said: “We’ve had the review which highlighted what some of us thought all along, that failings had happened and there was grooming going on.
“The public meeting that we had has still left lots of questions unanswered. We found out that the review was restricted, too narrow, too few cases looked at.
“A victim declared the review as not fit for purpose. We need answers and the victims need answers, and the public need answers and until we get them this cloud above the administration will not move.
“We can’t move on. Multiple failings have happened – general apologies; no good. We need a public inquiry, an independent one to tell us who failed and why, to tell us who knew and why and who did nothing about it and why.”
The Labour amendment stated that dedicated resources should be recruited or redeployed to support the work of Operation Sherwood in investigating historic sexual exploitation allegations and seek convictions.
Operation Sherwood is the name of the police investigation launched following the publication of the review report to pursue perpetrators of historic and recent abuse in Oldham.
The amendment also said that support given to victims of ‘historic and current’ abuse would get independent support from organisations such as the Sexual Assault Referral Centre and Keeping Our Girls safe, which would also provide advice on how to make complaints and seek reparations.
It agreed with the original motion that a cross-party steering group should be established, which would work with panels dedicated to improving children’s social care and responses to safeguarding, which would scrutinise their activity and report back to the public on progress.
However members of the FIP argued the amendment should be rejected as they said it went against the council constitution by rewriting the substantive principle of the motion. The borough’s solicitor and the Mayor Elaine Garry said it had been accepted as within the constitution.
Council leader Amanda Chadderton, who moved the amendment, said: “Since the publication of that report two weeks ago I have spoken to a number of victims, they came forward and rang me. The victims that were referenced in that report but also the victims of other CSE in Oldham.
“And speaking to those people and how it has affected their lives. I move the amendment, and that’s not because we don’t understand the level of concern Oldhamers feel about this issue, but it is because we want to take action.
“We want to see improvements for children and young people and see the people that committed these disgusting crimes brought to justice.
“The original motion doesn’t explain what benefit at all a public inquiry would have, either providing improvements to our assurance for today’s children and young people or seeking justice for historic victims of abuse.”
She told the meeting the Home Office had been twice briefed by the council, including after its publication, which raised ‘no concerns about the conduct or outcome of the review’.
Coun Hobin interrupted, telling the chamber his opponents’ speech was ‘blah blah blah and waffle’. “Sit down, let’s vote on it,” he added.
However Coun Chadderton responded, saying: “The people calling for the public inquiry are doing so, not because they’ve got real concerns about current practice or concerns about seeking justice but because they want a different answer to the questions raised by the review.
“Those people will not be happy until they get a report that backs up their view of the world.”
However Liberal Democrat councillor Sam Al-Hamdani told the chamber the amendment was ‘not enough’ and said that Greater Manchester Police specifically had questions to answer about how it provided information to the review.
“I couldn’t tell you honestly whether a public inquiry would be the right thing or the wrong thing to do, but by just removing all indication that there should be something that continues afterwards, I do not agree with that amendment,” he told the Labour group.
“There are still further failings and you need to engage with that and find ways to progress with that. What you are doing at the moment comes across, regardless of intention, as defensive and ignoring some of the issues.”
The amendment was accepted and approved by a majority of councillors – all Labour – despite all opposition councillors from the Failsworth Independents, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats voting against.
A separate motion put forward by the Lib Dems, which stated it wanted the council to be required to consider the implications on the potential risk of harm to children when making decisions, was approved unanimously in an amended form.
READ NEXT:
