Fresh blow for grooming gangs inquiry as Jim Gamble, last candidate publicly in running for chair’s job, pulls out<\/p>\n
Jim Gamble, a former police chief and former head the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Command centre, who was thought to be the last remaining candidate to chair the grooming gangs inquiry, has withdrawn from contention for the role.<\/p>\n
A Home Office spokesperson said:<\/p>\n
The grooming gang scandal was one of the darkest moments in this country\u2019s history.<\/p>\n
That is why this government is committed to a full, statutory, national inquiry to uncover the truth. It is the very least that the victims of these hideous crimes deserve.<\/p>\n
We are disappointed that candidates to chair that inquiry have withdrawn. This is an extremely sensitive topic, and we have to take the time to appoint the best person suitable for the role.<\/p>\n
The home secretary has been clear: there will be no hiding place for those who abused the most vulnerable in our society.<\/p>\n
At the start of the week Gamble was reportedly on a shortlist of two for the job. The other candidate, Annie Hudson, a former director of children\u2019s services for Lambeth, pulled out on Tuesday.<\/a><\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Key events<\/p>\n Show key events only<\/p>\n Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature<\/p>\n Western Balkans leaders have arrived at a summit on migration hosted by Sir Keir Starmer<\/a> in London, PA Media reports. PA says:<\/p>\n The prime minister greeted his counterparts from North Macedonia, Hristijan Mickoski, and Serbia, \u0110uro Macut, as well as Montenegro\u2019s premier Milojko Spajic, Albania\u2019s Edi Rama, and Borjana Kristo of Bosnia and Herzegovina, outside Lancaster House.<\/p>\n Kosovo\u2019s Albin Kurti, who has reportedly expressed a willingness to host migrant return hubs ahead of the summit, arrived earlier and was greeted by the foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper.<\/p>\n Keir Starmer greeting Edi Rama, prime minister of Albania, at the Western Balkans Summit at Lancaster House in London. Photograph: Kirsty Wigglesworth\/PAShare<\/a>Fresh blow for grooming gangs inquiry as Jim Gamble, last candidate publicly in running for chair’s job, pulls out<\/p>\n Jim Gamble, a former police chief and former head the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Command centre, who was thought to be the last remaining candidate to chair the grooming gangs inquiry, has withdrawn from contention for the role.<\/p>\n A Home Office spokesperson said:<\/p>\n The grooming gang scandal was one of the darkest moments in this country\u2019s history.<\/p>\n That is why this government is committed to a full, statutory, national inquiry to uncover the truth. It is the very least that the victims of these hideous crimes deserve.<\/p>\n We are disappointed that candidates to chair that inquiry have withdrawn. This is an extremely sensitive topic, and we have to take the time to appoint the best person suitable for the role.<\/p>\n The home secretary has been clear: there will be no hiding place for those who abused the most vulnerable in our society.<\/p>\n At the start of the week Gamble was reportedly on a shortlist of two for the job. The other candidate, Annie Hudson, a former director of children\u2019s services for Lambeth, pulled out on Tuesday.<\/a><\/p>\n Share<\/a>Starmer says he favours parliamentary scrutiny of Crown Estate leases, including Prince Andrew’s<\/p>\n Keir Starmer told MPs that he favoured a parliamentary inquiry covering Prince Andrew\u2019s housing arrangements at Royal Lodge \u2013 the mansion in Windsor which he leases from the Crown Estate on a deal that involves him paying no rent<\/a>.<\/p>\n But whether the PM is seriously calling for Andrew to be hauled to a parliamentary committee to give evidence in person is less clear.<\/p>\n Starmer was responding to a question from Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader. Davey said:<\/p>\n Given the revelations about Royal Lodge, does the prime minister agree that this house needs to properly scrutinise the Crown Estate to ensure taxpayers\u2019 interests are protected?<\/p>\n The chancellor has said these arrangements are wrong.<\/p>\n So will the prime minister support a select committee inquiry to take evidence from everyone involved \u2013 including the current occupant?<\/p>\n And Starmer replied:<\/p>\n Well, it\u2019s important in relation to all properties, Crown properties, that there is proper scrutiny, and I certainly support that.<\/p>\n Asked about this at the post-PMQs lobby briefing, the spokesperson just referred reporters to what Starmer said in the chamber.<\/p>\n In theory, Commons committees can invite whoever they want to give evidence to a hearing relating to an inquiry, and in theory people who refuse to turn up can be held to be in contempt of parliament. But many potential witnesses refuse to appear and \u2013 not least because the conventions that constrain parliamentary criticism of the royals<\/a> \u2013 it is fanciful to imagine that Andrew will be up before the public accounts committee any time soon talking about Royal Lodge.<\/p>\n That has not stopped the Liberal Democrats issuing a press released headed: \u201cPrince Andrew should give evidence to Parliament over Royal Lodge.\u201d<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Rayner thanks people in the party who have supported her through her career.<\/p>\n She says many of her \u201chonourable friends\u201d are real friends.<\/p>\n And she says she is grateful for the support she received from members of the public.<\/p>\n She ends saying:<\/p>\n I\u2019ll just finish by saying that in each generation it has fallen to a Labour government to strengthen the hand of working people.<\/p>\n In 1945 it was maternity pay and the NHS and homes for heroes out of the ruins of war.<\/p>\n In the 1970s it was Barbara Castle and the fight for equal pay.<\/p>\n And, in the 90s, it was the national minimum wage.<\/p>\n And, despite the opposition, because of the work of this Labour government, we have the opportunity to write a new chapter of justice and fairness for working people.<\/p>\n Now, as tough as politics can be, it is nothing, nothing compared to what thousands of my constituents and this country face every single day.<\/p>\n Backbench or frontbench, elected office is not about us, but about our chance to change the lives of others. From wherever I sit on these benches, I will fight with everything I have to do exactly that.<\/p>\n Share<\/a>Rayner says stamp duty error was ‘honestly made mistake’ in personal statement to MPs following her resignation<\/p>\n Angela Rayner, the former deputy PM, is making a personal statement to MPs now following her resignation last month.<\/p>\n She says she made a mistake about stamp duty because of trust arrangements relating to her disabled son. She says she hopes the publicity about this will help families in a similar situation who may face a similar problem.<\/p>\n She says it was \u201can honestly made mistake\u201d.<\/p>\n She says the tax she owes is being paid.<\/p>\n She goes on to talk about her own record in government. She says she knows how important being able to have a secure home is for people. The government wants to put that within reach for people.<\/p>\n She move on to accountability, and specifically mentions the Hillsborough law being passed by the government. She says she knows from her experience dealing with the Grenfell Tower tragedy how important it is to hold people in authority to account.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Nigel Farage took to a side gallery for this week\u2019s PMQs, instead of his usual seat next to other Reform UK MPs, claiming he is a \u201cmere spectator\u201d. As PA Media reports, the Clacton MP sat above the Labour<\/a> benches with Reform backer Arron Banks.<\/p>\n In a post on social media<\/a>, Farage said:<\/p>\n Every week at PMQs I am attacked by the PM and Labour MPs, but have no right of reply.<\/p>\n I am just a mere spectator.<\/p>\n So I have decided to spectate from the public gallery today instead.<\/p>\n Share<\/a>PMQs – snap verdict<\/p>\n Years ago, when I started doing this live blog and writing snap verdicts after PMQs<\/a>, I tried to consider how the proceedings might appear, not just to MPs in the chamber, but to a non-partisan, fair-minded, reasonable viewer \u2013 ie, to the public at large. Even then, that may have been naive. Now at least one of the main performers at PMQs does not seem to think such an audience exists.<\/p>\n That was clear today because Kemi Badenoch managed to put in what came across as quite a strong performance (Tory commentators liked it \u2013 see here <\/a>and here<\/a>, for example) without really trying to engage with the arguments at all. Calls for a grooming gangs inquiry took off in the new year (even though prosecutions have been going on for the best part of two decades, and various reports have explored this in considerable detail) because fresh reporting (mainly from GB News) revived a sense that there are grievance and injustices here that have not been fully addressed. It is a story that flourises online, and appeals to people innately suspicious of the state. For Badenoch, it is very comfortable territory.<\/p>\n The inquiry process is clearly in trouble (see 9.11am<\/a>), and the survivors who have left the oversight panel have clearly lost confidence in the process and it was reasonable for Badenoch to take up their concerns. And there was nothing wrong with gunning for Jess Phillips either. Phillips is under pressure because of this comment she made in a Commons UQ on the inquiry.<\/p>\n We are progressing as swiftly as thoroughness allows. Misinformation undermines this process. Allegations of intentional delay, lack of interest and a widening or dilution of the inquiry\u2019s scope are false.<\/p>\n Survivors on the oversight panel like Fiona Gooddard (one of the ones who resigned) say they were consulted explicitly on whether the scope of the inquiry should be extended. Whether or not that would be a \u201cdilution\u201d of the inquiry is arguable, but the government should explain why Phillips said the \u201cwidening\u201d claim was false \u2013 unless she meant it was false because, while it had been considered, it has now been ruled out.<\/p>\n But Badenoch did not question Starmer in detail on these issues. She could have done, but she didn\u2019t. Instead, she was content just to assert bad faith, over and over again.<\/p>\n And Starmer was trying to address the concerns raised by survivors. His opening statement did this, using similar language to Shabana Mahmood in the Times today. He announced a further, unspecified role for Louise Casey, which is always a sign of this government taking something seriously. (Perhaps she will combine this with being cabinet secretary \u2013 see 9.40am<\/a>.) He also had a good explanation as to why a judge-led inquiry would not be ideal, whacked the Tories on mandatory reporting (see 12.14pm<\/a>) and (rightly) defended Phillips\u2019s record on child protection (see 12.17pm<\/a>). A \u201cfair-minded, reasonable viewer\u201d would have concluded that he made a strong case, and that Badenoch should have taken yes for an answer. But God know if there are any of them still out there.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Harpreet Uppal (Lab) raises a knife attack in her constituency, and asks what the government is doing about this.<\/p>\n Starmer says the government has a strategy to tackle the root causes of knife crime.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Alex Mayer (Lab) says during the war Churchill changed the clocks to ensure there was more daylight in the evening. Will the government try \u201cChurchill time\u201d <\/a>again?<\/p>\n Starmer says he will consider the idea (in the tone of voice that implies he won\u2019t.)<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Rebecca Smith (Con) asks when the government will implement its pledge to reduce business rates. The Tories would abolish them, she says.<\/p>\n Starmer lists measures the government is already taking to help businesses.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Patrick Hurley (Lab) asks what the government is doing to support youth clubs. He particularly mentions the FAB charity.<\/p>\n Starmer praises the FAB charity, and says the government\u2019s youth strategy will be published later in the autumn.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Simon Hoare (Con) asks about the problems facing Jhoots Pharmacies<\/a>.<\/p>\n Starmer says customers and staff have been badly left down. He says officials are currently addressing whether councils and health boards need more powers to go after rogue pharmacies.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Julia Minns (Lab) asks about flood defences in her Carlisle constituency. Does the PM agree climate change-sceptic policies of the opposition parties are reckless?<\/p>\n Starmer says the Tories left flood defences in their worst state for years.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Starmer attacks a Reform UK council for bringing Reform into disrepute, which he says is \u201cquite something\u201d for a party whose former Welsh leader has been convicted for taking pro-Russian bribes.<\/p>\n Share<\/a>Starmer declines to rule out further delay in council elections because of local government reorganisation<\/p>\n Will Forster (Lib Dem) says it has been reported that local elections will be cancelled for a second year because of local government reorganisation. Can the PM rule that out?<\/p>\n Starmer defends the reorganisation. He says the timetable for the elections in Surrey will be set out soon.<\/p>\n He does not rule out a further delay.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Wendy Morton (Con) asks the PM to define when grey belt is grey.<\/p>\n Starmer says he can given an example of a car park being defined as green belt. That is the sort of place where development should take place.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Ellie Chowns (Green) asks if the PM accepts inequality, not immigration, is the reason for low living standards.<\/p>\n Starmer says, if the Greens want to tackle inequality, they should vote for Labour\u2019s measures to address this.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Daniel Francis (Lab), who represents Bexleyheath and Crayford, says the local Tory council does not want people to report potholes because it cannot afford to fill them in.<\/p>\n Starmer says that is \u201cludicrous\u201d.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a007.51 EDT<\/p>\n Davey welcomes Labour accepting Brexit has been ‘disaster’, and calls for customs union with EU<\/p>\n Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, asks if the PM agrees the Commons should properly scrutinise the Crown Estate, given the revelations about the Royal Lodge. Would he support a select committee inquiry, with Prince Andrew<\/a> giving evidence.<\/p>\n Starmer says he favours proper scrutiny.<\/p>\n Davey says Labour MPs are relieved they can finally call Brexit<\/a> a disaster. But that must not be just a means of attacking Nigel Farage, \u201chowever much he deserves it\u201d. Will the PM repair the damage by negotiating a customs union with the EU.<\/p>\n Starmer rejects that idea.<\/p>\n