Familiar pattern
Grooming gangs inquiry , Issue 1662 WITH the national grooming gangs inquiry imploding before it can begin amid controversies over who chairs it and what its scope is, not to mention questions about its independence and survivors losing trust and complaining of being controlled – it could be 2015 all over again.

Five of the survivors' liaison panel members have already stepped back amid calls for safeguarding minister Jess Phillips to resign, while another five have said they will only stay if Phillips does.

All this appears to be mirroring the chaotic £186.6m Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), which opened a decade ago.

Professor Alexis Jay published her report in 2022. It found institutional failings enabling a child sex abuse epidemic and set out a roadmap for child protection reforms.

However, having put 6,000 victims through the ordeal of giving evidence over seven bitter years, characterised by infighting and alleged political interference, the government has so far implemented just two of Jay's 20 recommendations.

Institutional failings
The grooming inquiry promises to investigate how, where and why gangs of men – largely but not exclusively Pakistani – were able to groom and abuse thousands of the country's most vulnerable children, many in the "care" system.

It will examine institutional failings, by successive councils – many Labour-run – and governments that shied away from the delicate ethnicity issues at the heart of it all, until it became a grotesque political football kicked around by the likes of far-right agitators Elon Musk and Tommy Robinson.

Explaining why she had lost trust in the inquiry, Fiona Goddard, who was abused by a gang in Bradford, cited conflicts of interest on the panel and poor relations with ministers and officials who used "condescending and controlling language". She said there was a fear it would "turn into another IICSA" with victims forgotten.

Code of silencing
Sharon Evans, who was a survivor member of that earlier panel, says she was bullied, silenced, trolled and briefed against when she tried to break free from a centrally controlled "collective" narrative to expose serious issues she felt were being overlooked or covered up.

The former BBC and ITN news reporter was selected by the secretariat for her lived experience of abuse and expertise gained from the media and from running a Home Office-backed charity which helped primary school children to disclose abuse.

She told the Eye: "The way I was treated throughout that inquiry and the aftermath retraumatised me and resulted in me being targeted online and through my charity. It pains me to see other victims being brave enough to put themselves out there and going through similar things."

Concerned that history would repeat itself, she wrote to Baroness (Louise) Casey in June after her audit into child sex exploitation recommended a statutory inquiry into grooming gangs. Sharon offered to meet her privately, but did not receive a response.

She says the grooming inquiry has again failed to demonstrate its independence from the institutions that let victims down. The first two potential chairs – Jim Gamble, a former deputy chief constable, and Annie Hudson, a former council children's services director – have withdrawn their candidacies over concerns raised about their impartiality.

Similarly, the first two chairs of the IICSA, Baroness Butler-Sloss and Fiona Woolf, resigned due to their personal connections to the establishment.

Fear and gaslighting
Fiona Goddard described a toxic and fearful culture which left her feeling gaslit. Others said they were being told who they could speak to and what they could say.

Sharon said: "That reflected my experiences exactly. It was not a safe environment; we were not allowed to speak publicly. I was rebuked for airing my concerns about the process and how it might adversely impact victims."

Some survivors also believe plans to widen the scope beyond street-based grooming would "water it down".

"Similarly, some of us felt the Home Office was controlling the scope to cover up what was really going on, not bring it out into the light," Sharon said. "Victims need to know, what is the grooming inquiry really about? Does the government genuinely want to identify failures, heal the hurt and keep children safe?"

Survivors let down
Essex University lecturer Dr Danny Taggart, who was principal psychologist on IICSA, said he had seen similar issues in abuse inquiries he has served on or studied around the world.

He said: "Survivors are often brought in without clear remit, agency or support and expected to understand how to operate in a highly politicised and public landscape. They are unequivocally central to any abuse inquiry, yet the process can leave them feeling disempowered if they sense they are being used as moral cover.