Points of Order

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Tuesday 21st October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Minister.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I am not sure what the hon. Member is confused about. A victims panel was set up to look at both the terms of reference and the appointment of a chair. There is a variety of different groups of people. Some of them have done both; some of them have taken part in just one or the other, usually depending on time and logistics, as she might imagine. That has been managed by an organisation called NWG. I have not taken part in those sessions, other than to feedback on chairs. The feedback on the chair’s appointment comes to me. I do not have to go to that, but I go and sit and listen. Usually, that is the first time I know who has been on the panel, when they have been interviewing chairs. The process is entirely managed. Because of my years of experience, I happen to know quite a lot of the people, and so I do speak to some of the people who are on the panel because I have personal relationships with them and have supported them over the years. I hope that clears that up.

[Mr Speaker]

I thank the Minister for that.

Rape Gangs: National Statutory Inquiry

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Tuesday 21st October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris Philp (Croydon South) (Con)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Home Secretary to make a statement on the recent criticism of the statutory inquiry into the rape gang scandal.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

As stated in my previous statement to the House on 2 September and in my letter to the Home Affairs Committee yesterday, the Government remain resolute in delivering Baroness Casey’s recommendations following her national audit of group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse. These crimes committed by grooming gangs are among the most horrific imaginable. Baroness Casey’s report exposed more than a decade of institutional inaction, and we are determined to ensure that such failures are never repeated.

Central to our response is a statutory national inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005. It will oversee local investigations and will have full powers to compel evidence. It will also be time-limited to three years to ensure that victims and survivors receive answers swiftly. The inquiry will examine safeguarding systems, accountability and intersections with ethnicity, race and culture, identifying failures and good practice. The inquiry will work alongside Operation Beaconport, a national police operation.

The appointment of the chair is at a critical stage, and we hope to confirm its conclusion soon. Victims and survivors have been at the heart of the process, with trauma-informed opportunities to share their views. We have engaged with them on the chair appointment and the terms of reference, which will be shaped by the chair in public consultation with stakeholders. As has been widely reported in the media, victims and survivors are meeting prospective chairs this week—today, in fact. This process, contrary to the reporting, was managed not by the Home Office but by the independent child exploitation charity NWG Network. We are gathering views to ensure that the perspective of victims and survivors remains central.

We must avoid delays, as were seen in the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, and 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’s scope are false. The inquiry will remain laser-focused on grooming gangs, as Baroness Casey recommended.

[Chris Philp]

This scandal arose because young, mainly white girls were systematically gang-raped and it was covered up by those in authority because the perpetrators were mainly of Pakistani origin. It is all the more shocking that when calls for a national inquiry became public in January, the Prime Minister smeared campaigners as

“jumping on a far-right bandwagon”.

Comments like that are a disgrace and are what led to this scandal being covered up in the first place. Months later, just two days before facing a vote in Parliament, the Government finally agreed to the inquiry, but it is clear that they never wanted this inquiry and were forced into it. Perhaps that is why, months later, the Government have said nothing substantive publicly and their inquiry is descending into chaos.

What we have heard publicly is that victims and survivors on the liaison panel have no confidence in the Government or the inquiry. In the last 24 hours alone, two have resigned. Fiona Goddard resigned from the panel, saying that

“the secretive conduct and conditions imposed on survivors”

—by the Government—

“has led to a toxic, fearful environment, and there is a high risk of people feeling silenced all over again.”

Hours later, Ellie-Ann Reynolds also resigned, saying that the remit of the inquiry had been widened to

“downplay the racial and religious motivations behind our abuse.”

The Minister shakes her head, but that is what Ellie-Ann Reynolds said.

Fiona also raised the issue of Sabah Kaiser, who has been acting as a liaison officer on behalf of NWG. Just two years ago, Ms Kaiser described calling out the fact that the majority of perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage as “destructive, distracting, irresponsible”. Given those frankly appalling views and the complaints about them by survivors, will the Minister ensure that Ms Kaiser plays no further role?

Victims and survivors have also questioned the suitability of former police officers or social workers to chair the inquiry. They do not believe that people from the professions that failed them so badly are suitable. Will the Minister accept this feedback and appoint a judge to lead the inquiry? Will the Minister confirm that the scope of the inquiry will not be diluted, as both Fiona and Ellie-Ann say is now happening, and that it will focus on the cover-up of the rape gangs scandal because of the fact that the majority of perpetrators were of Pakistani origin?

Finally, Fiona said this yesterday:

“I just won’t be gagged and controlled by the Government while they turn this inquiry into a cover up.”

Will the Minister apologise to Fiona and Ellie-Ann?

[Jess Phillips]

The right hon. Gentleman cannot have listened to my remarks at all if he is suggesting that the Government have silenced anybody. The Government have not handled the process; it has been handled by a grooming gang charity. He cited and named a victim of crime.

If the right hon. Gentleman had done anywhere near the level of work that I have done, he would know that not all victims and survivors are of the same opinion. They are not one homogeneous group of people who all think the same thing, who all want the same exposure and who all want their identities known. I have spoken to Fiona Goddard many times, and I will continue that relationship with her, should that be what she wishes. Every single survivor who has been engaged with—there have been many—will have different feelings on the subject.

With regard to the right hon. Gentleman requiring a judge, Baroness Casey said to the House in the Home Affairs Committee that she did not want a traditional judicial-led inquiry. She was explicit about that. Can anyone in the House find me an institution that did not fail these girls over the years? That includes our courts, which took children away from the grooming gang victims and which criminalised some of them. There is no institution in our country that has not failed.

Today, I will meet many of the victims and get their feedback, and I will continue to progress with that in mind. I will engage with all the victims, regardless of their opinions, and I will listen to those who have been put in the media and are put in panels. I will always listen, and I will speak to all of them.

[Jim McMahon (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)]

Oldham has stepped forward to take on a local inquiry, and it has been waiting to understand what the move to the national inquiry means for its work. The same is true of victims and survivors, whose bravery and strength in the most difficult circumstances have been truly remarkable. What arrangements have been put in place to ensure that there is a clear front door, offering support that is fully independent of councils and police forces? While local deep dives are clearly essential, can we have an assurance that if the evidence takes an investigation beyond council and police force boundaries, it will be followed to the fullest extent?

[Jess Phillips]

I will not be chairing the inquiry, so I can only say to my hon. Friend that the terms of reference—I am not sure this is usual—will be consulted on in public. That is because of the issue of bad faith and the concern about transparency. The remit of the inquiry will be decided by the chair, living within those terms of reference. Having been part of various different inquiries or watched them from a distance, I know that no stone will be left unturned. Whoever chairs the inquiry will feel empowered to do what they think is best.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Phillips]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for both his tone and his approach. As per the Inquiries Act 2005, the terms of reference have to be set and consulted on with the chair. The chair is being decided on.

I have to say, it is not taking any longer than the covid inquiry or the infected blood inquiry, which I think each took seven months from their announcement to the appointment of the chair. I do not remember huge amounts of criticism or bellyaching about that, because we wanted to get those things right. Actually, getting this right means dealing with lots of different stakeholders and victims with different views. The process has to be followed that the terms of reference go through the chair. We have already done some of the work on the terms of reference with victims’ groups, but we cannot publish those—we will do that publicly, as I said—until a chair is appointed. I will not rush that, because I will take note of all the feedback I receive.

[Natalie Fleet (Bolsover) (Lab)]

Today, the Government have announced that they will take parental responsibility away where a child is born of rape. That will protect grooming victims. Children in this country will no longer be the only proceed of crime that criminals can have lifelong access to. Does the Minister agree that survivors were failed for too long by a Conservative Government who did not prioritise giving them justice? That party is led by the Leader of the Opposition, who did not mention grooming when she had the power to do something about it. Instead, survivors have had to wait for victims and activists to be on the Government Benches, and for the fiercest of advocates to be at the Dispatch Box.

[Jess Phillips]

I thank my hon. Friend. I think she mischaracterises me as the fiercest of advocates because she, as a grooming victim, with a child born of rape, is the fiercest and bravest. I could cry, I feel so proud that the Government sought to get her elected. I have been campaigning for the thing she has fought for with grooming gang victims for nearly a decade. I met with Ministers of the then Government and nothing was done. [Interruption.] The exact thing that she has campaigned for was asked for repeatedly and nothing was done. I am incredibly proud of her, as it is because of her and this Government that today I can say that that will change.

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

I have a copy of the Government’s response to the developments last night addressed to the Home Affairs Committee, and I find the response completely unacceptable. Are the Government seriously implying that Fiona and Ellie, who have been disbelieved and called liars by the British state their entire lives, are spreading “misinformation” about a process they have been directly involved in? That would be a deeply damaging thing for any Government to imply.

Worse, there is a line in the letter about the Government’s proposed inquiry in Oldham that says that the Government

“have been in discussions with Oldham Council about the right approach for Oldham”.

How can that possibly be right? How can the Home Office discuss the right approach with the very local authorities being investigated? It would be like the Post Office inquiry sitting down with the Post Office to negotiate how it should be investigated. Will the Minister explain how the Government will restore trust right now in the process, given the contents of the letter that she sent to the Home Affairs Committee last night?

[Jess Phillips]

Can I be completely clear? I am suggesting that I will listen completely and utterly to the feedback from the victims who were on the panel and those who still are. They are not spreading misinformation at all, but the hon. Member’s interpretation is a brilliant case in point.

I will be completely honest. The conversation with Oldham is: do we not think it might be better for Oldham just to take part in a statutory inquiry? It has absolutely nothing to do with the idea that Oldham is telling me what to do. The more people on the Conservative Benches—[Interruption.] Oh, the hon. Member can hold up his letter and have a smug face all he likes, but the fact of the matter is that there is no council in this country that will tell the inquiry where it can and cannot go. I have said that 1 million times from the Dispatch Box, yet the same thing gets peddled again and again.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

I know that the Minister will not want to comment on individual candidates to chair the national grooming inquiry. However, may I put on record that Jim Gamble is a highly regarded police officer with a long experience of dealing with this matter? His leadership of the child exploitation and online protection centre proved what a fearless and fiercely independent figure he was, with a real track record of tracking down sick paedophiles online and off. Does the Minister agree that the chair of the inquiry must be someone who can earn the trust of those who have been let down by those in positions of authority for far too long? Will she confirm—I hope that she will—that the inquiry will not shy away from issues of race or class and will follow the evidence wherever it leads?

[Jess Phillips]

First and foremost, I absolutely confirm that that will not happen. Not only that, but I confirm that the Home Office has asked police forces across the country to collect data on ethnicity. That was not done before. I will not be drawn into his point about the chair; it is not up to me. However, I will say that the gentleman my hon. Friend mentions resigned from a previous role in this field because he thought that the then Government were not invested enough in tackling child sexual exploitation.

[Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)]

The victims of these crimes were vulnerable children who were ignored, gaslit and dismissed. Two victims have now resigned because of the process, its failure and their lack of faith in it. Yet, I hear what appears to me to be an aggressive and defensive tone from the Minister.

[Jess Phillips]

Yes, that is because of you lot.

[Dr Johnson]

She should remember that those people are watching. Will she listen to the victims and does she regret that those two individuals have resigned from the process?

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Phillips]

I absolutely regret that they have resigned from the process. Funnily enough, in the particular instance of one of the people, I have had no involvement in that process. I do not know who are on the panels of victims; it is entirely independently managed by a grooming gang charity. One of my only interventions was to ensure that the names of some of the voices that I thought deserved to be heard were included. I have done that on a number of occasions.

I will, of course, listen to them. Actually, I am meant to be with those panels of victims, hearing their response, right now. As I have said, I will take the feedback of anyone, both publicly and should they want to speak to me, as I have approached them. I am always sad when victims feel that they cannot take part in a process—of course I am. There are many different victims and they have many different views. There are ones that we hear publicly. But I want to make it clear that there are many different victims and we have to ensure that all their voices are heard equally, whether they are part of the process or not.

[Peter Dowd (Bootle) (Lab)]

The Minister has reiterated time and again that victims must be at the centre of an inquiry. Will she tell us what she intends to do to ensure that that aim is fully implemented?

[Jess Phillips]

While the inquiry is ongoing, that will be a matter for the chair. However, I know from the inquiries that I have been involved in that were successful and victim-centric that there always has to be a system for supporting the victims, both with taking part in the inquiry and with the trauma that might be brought up. Usually, those two things are separate, but I will say this once again: I will not be the chair of this committee. Undoubtedly, it is about ensuring that victims are protected throughout the process. Should they want to go out and speak publicly both negatively and positively about that process, I would absolutely welcome that. People should never be prevented from speaking. We have to ensure that support is available, regardless of how they wish to gain it.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

There should be nothing more precious in the eyes of this Parliament than the protection of children, particularly those who suffered at the hands of these barbaric individuals. Many of us are parents, aunts, uncles and grandparents and this cuts very deep. I know that the Minister cares and is a caring person, but today we need decisive action. Given that one of the victims has walked away from the inquiry—

[Carla Lockhart]

Given that two of the victims have walked away from the inquiry, will the Minister clearly state how she will ensure that a fully independent inquiry can take place and that it prominently includes victims?

[Jess Phillips]

All I can say is that there is a reason that I cannot stand in front of the victims, who I am meant to be getting feedback from right now, and definitely say when the chair will come. I could have just put my finger in the air and picked out some random judge—we could have done that—but I am listening to victims’ feedback. Again, I have to stress that that process is not easy. There are difficult dynamics within groups of people and the people who we have asked to engage are dealing with difficult things, so undoubtedly, that is not uncomplex. As anyone who has worked with groups of people who have been wronged, shamed and treated badly will know, it would be a lie to stand here and tell them that there is a straight line and a simple answer—and I am not willing to do that.

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for her continued work. All victims and survivors have not had their voice heard for too long. We need to ensure that that happens and I am sure that the Minister is doing that. Will she confirm what resources are available to ensure that survivors are properly supported through the process? On system delays, we know that there are still issues with court delays and ensuring we go after all the perpetrators. Will she give an update on that and on the Jay inquiry recommendations?

[Jess Phillips]

I will chair an interministerial cross-Government group next week to push through the other recommendations. Baroness Casey made 12 recommendations, but people rarely speak about any of the others. This was not her most pressing one; instead, she gave primacy to the policing-related recommendation around Operation Beaconport. As I said in my previous statement on 2 September, the work on the 216 cases that moved forward is ongoing and runs alongside this. That is where justice will be served: in our courts—if only they had not been horrendously degraded so that rape victims wait for years and years.

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

I think we all agree that the voices of survivors have to be at the heart of this. It is worrying and concerning when two of those survivors do not feel as if the process is properly looking after them and ensuring their voice is heard. Will the Minister commit to speaking to both Fiona Goddard and Ellie-Ann Reynolds to try and encourage and reassure them that this is a process that really will listen to their voices?

[Jess Phillips]

That opportunity has already been presented to them and I would be more than happy. I know one of them but not the other. That opportunity is always available, and one of them has my phone number. On the idea that I do not listen and have not been making myself available, I have tried to keep the process fiercely independent of Government intervention so that it can happen and victims can feel safe in that, but of course I feel sad that this is how it has ended. Actually, I hope that this is not how it has ended and I will commit to making sure that this is not the end. My door is always open to them.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

In 2012, a Bangladeshi national was sentenced in my Carlisle constituency for attempting to recruit four girls, aged 12 to 16, into prostitution. In his summing up, the judge described how the man’s conduct had corroded

“the foundations of decency and respect by which all right-thinking people live their lives whatever their ethnic or religious background.”

Will the Minister take the opportunity to again reassure all right-thinking people that this inquiry will look at everything to find answers, including the role of ethnicity?

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Phillips]

I say again and again that it will not shy away from findings where they are present. Anybody who has done the work in this space will know that that is going to be found, as the case in my hon. Friend’s constituency highlights. There is absolutely no sense that ethnicity will be buried away. Every single time that there is an apparently needless delay—even though it took seven months to put in place chairs for both the covid inquiry and the blood inquiry, and nobody moaned about that—it gets used to say that we want to cover something up. That is the misinformation I am talking about. It will not cover things up. We are taking time to ensure that that can never happen.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

The hon. Lady has been an outspoken champion for the victims, and will continue to be so, but she must be concerned that two members of the panel have withdrawn, and we understand that one of the candidates to be chair of the inquiry has withdrawn. Clearly, there is concern across the House that institutions such as the police, social services, councils and the courts are all in a position where they have failed. Whoever chairs the inquiry must, therefore, have full rigour over services that they may have been involved in. So there is an issue of confidence. Can she update the House on how the inquiry will report back to the House and what scrutiny the House will have over the actions of the inquiry and the terms of reference?

[Jess Phillips]

I thank the hon. Gentleman, who is in a unique category of always asking a question that leads me to further questions that are pertinent. An inquiry does not usually report to the House while it is ongoing, but I will take that away to see if there is an appetite for that. All I can say is that there is no institution in the country, including this one here, that does not have skeletons. Do I think all politicians would not be robust in this? No, I do not. I think some would. I can guarantee that I can point at people, the hon. Gentleman included, who would show absolute rigour even against his own. The independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, IICSA, had a judge leading it and it lost the confidence of the victims. Three people lost the confidence of the victims. It took two years. There is not an institution that did not fail those girls. That is the whole point. There is no clean skin, but there are brilliant people who whistleblew and who tried, in every one of those institutions. That is essentially where we are left with this, but I promise rigour in the same way that, when I saw things happening in here, I was rigorous.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

I commend the Minister for her formidable personal leadership on this, and I am proud to sit on these Benches alongside other formidable campaigners, too. The Minister has reiterated that the inquiry must be trauma-informed, and I know from speaking to victims in my constituency just how vital it is that we are cognisant both of the initial trauma that they have experienced and also of the retraumatising effects of going through the process of seeking justice for themselves and others. Can the Minister set out more about how she will ensure that this trauma-informed approach is woven through the ongoing inquiry?

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Phillips]

As the inquiry is set up—as with previous inquiries with very vulnerable groups of people, such as IICSA—things will have to be put in place to ensure that people can freely give their evidence, and that will have to be done in a trauma-informed way. The twelfth of Baroness Casey’s recommendations was that all the recommendations should be fully funded by the Government, and this Government have absolutely committed to that. I very much expect that, when the chair is in place, those conversations about exactly how that will look will begin. The only thing I do control, I suppose, in any of this, is that this Government will pay for it.

[Lee Anderson (Ashfield) (Reform)]

The cover-up continues. We have a Prime Minister who never wanted a national inquiry, we have a Minister who never wanted a national inquiry and we have the Labour Back Benchers who never wanted a national inquiry. Does the Minister agree that the victims of these horrific crimes will never get the justice they deserve, as long as we have a Labour Government in charge?

[Jess Phillips]

It is quite impressive that the hon. Member says that after a grooming victim has stood up and spoken from these Benches, but I have learned to expect it. He talks about a cover-up—maybe he is doing it for clicks; I do not know—and I understand that he thinks he is doing God’s work in fighting this issue, but the idea that it is easy to find a chair or to find people who want to step forward and take part in this process, given the level of bad faith and when the issue is mired in political point scoring of the type he has just done! He should really question his own morality.

[Sarah Russell (Congleton) (Lab)]

Ellie Reynolds has said that financial dependency has made people stay silent when they should speak, and also alleged that people on the panel were isolated by having contact with each other discouraged. The Minister has been extremely clear that this is a fully independent process and has not had Government involvement, but how does she propose to handle the very complex relationship between the concerns that Ellie Reynolds has spoken clearly about and ensuring that the process retains the faith of everyone involved?

[Jess Phillips]

As I have said, I would very much hope to hear those concerns directly from Ellie herself and to see what can be done. I only know the victims who I have worked with—when they have been on the panel, they have spoken to me, because I have personal relations with them—and what I can say is that there are differing views about the levels of confidentiality. The confidentiality is not to silence people or prevent them from speaking about their own experiences. It is necessary because there are people in those rooms who have never shown their faces who are also victims. Having run an agency myself, I know about trying to manage that. I can see why somebody might say that we should not seek out people outside the meeting, because others might have said they do not want that, but they are not going to say that in public. I can imagine all those things. I am trying to get across the idea of how complex these situations are, but I am more than happy to listen to Ellie and see what has gone wrong in the process for her and seek to make it better. I am absolutely happy to do that.

[Mike Wood (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire) (Con)]

We have heard what the Minister said about diverse views among victims, but is she concerned that some survivors of these terrible crimes have described the process as a toxic, fearful environment and warned that there is a high risk of people feeling silenced all over again? What is she going to do to reverse that failure?

[Jess Phillips]

I refer the hon. Member to my previous answer. As I have said a number of times, I am going to speak to those involved and look into the process. It is not a process that I have personally been part of, and I can only speak to the victims who I happen to have known before, if they tell me that they are part of it—not the other way around. I cannot ask who is involved. That is confidential by its very nature. Of course I am going to listen to that feedback and, like I have said, I will speak to those victims involved.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

Victims must be at the heart of the grooming gangs inquiry. Does the Minister agree that getting the right chair is absolutely key to ensuring that that happens? Does she also agree that we have to avoid the scenes that we saw under the last Government, who appointed three chairs who then withdrew from the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse—an inquiry that took two years to start?

[Jess Phillips]

My hon. Friend, who I know has some experience of inquiries from her previous life, is exactly right. People do not remember it now, but there were victims going out in the press complaining about what was going on with IICSA. It went through numerous chairs. There is already much worse faith in this instance, both rightly and wrongly. For me to allow the same to happen during this inquiry would just make people shout “Cover-up!”, so we are trying to do everything possible to ensure that the mistakes made by the previous Government are not made again.

[Llinos Medi (Ynys Môn) (PC)]

The credibility of the national inquiry rests on placing the voices, experiences and needs of victims and survivors at its very centre. Can the Minister show victims in Wales how this inquiry will be guided by their best interests, given that survivors have such grave concerns that they feel they must resign from the panel?

[Jess Phillips]

To go back to the previous answer, the chair of the inquiry will set the tone for the inquiry. That is why we have to put in place the right chair and a system for victims who want to take part in the inquiry that will care for and look after them, and that is what we are working to achieve.

[Gurinder Singh Josan (Smethwick) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for her responses, and I absolutely agree that it is crucial to get this right, so can she be absolutely clear that the inquiry will not be watered down, particularly in its focus on grooming gangs and ethnicity, including on models of grooming where groomers focused on the ethnicity of victims, whether that be young white girls or even Sikh girls?

[Jess Phillips]

Absolutely. I absolutely pay tribute to the community response in my hon. Friend’s local area to recent incidences of very hideous sexual violence, and I put on record my love to the families and victims involved. I absolutely agree: this is a grooming gangs inquiry, and it will follow what Baroness Casey stated. As I said in my statement, it will be three years long, it will not shy away and it will be a grooming gangs inquiry.

[John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)]

I acknowledge the Minister’s commitment to get to justice on this issue, and I recognise the frustration that she expresses, because I was responsible for the infected blood compensation scheme, which involved meeting a diverse group of 40 different charities and representative bodies that did not agree with one another. However, I gently and respectfully say to her that we face a credibility gap on this issue, and I urge her to examine how she can get ahead with the communications so that she can continue to demonstrate her commitment to get to justice. Frankly, we as Members of Parliament have to come to this place when things get into the media and public concerns are expressed. I understand her frustration, but getting the communications right and maintaining a pathway to the delivery of justice is critical.

[Jess Phillips]

I do not disagree with the right hon. Gentleman. Most of what I see reported on anything in this space is largely inaccurate and often comes with an agenda, more so than in the case of the infected blood scheme, although I absolutely take my hat off to the job that he had to do. There is a balance between wanting to give a complete and utter running commentary on a very complicated thing and making sure that people feel like something is going on, because nature abhors a vacuum and so does misinformation.

[Chris Murray (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab)]

The Minister has heard me implore her many times to move as speedily as possible to address the challenges of the victims of these awful crimes, but on this occasion I implore her to take the right time to find the right judge. It is not a normal public appointment; this is someone who has to command the confidence of the House, the public, and most importantly, survivors. They must leave no stone unturned and investigate everything, whether that is ethnicity, class-related or institutional, and make the Minister’s life harder if they have to do so. Will the Minister take the time to find the right judge and not repeat what we saw with the child sexual abuse inquiry several years ago?

[Jess Phillips]

I absolutely will, and my hon. Friend gives me the opportunity to say that, no matter who is picked, there will be people unhappy with it. Like most politics that we deal with, let us just call a spade a spade and stop pretending that there is a perfect situation. There is only the best situation we can have. Funnily enough, in the conversations that I have had with some of the prospective chairs, the main thing I have wanted them to take away is the feeling that, if they have to slag me off all day long, then that is exactly what they should do, and I would say the same to the victims.

[Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)]

The Minister obviously feels very deeply about this issue. I think we all agree that anyone who was involved in these awful and horrific crimes must be held to account, and we must shine a light on anyone who turned a blind eye and ensure that it does not happen again. Can the Minister provide a commitment that the inquiry will not be politicised, particularly after multiple local authorities have attempted to block investigations? That is a really important question, because we see that happening. Everyone needs to be investigated on this—it does not matter which party they are from; this is too important.

[Jess Phillips]

Absolutely—100%. Far be it from me to speculate about where I would like the inquiry to go, but if I had my way and I was the chair, I would have grave concerns about the area where I live—Members will not be surprised to hear—because that is where I worked. The fact that it has a Labour council would not stop me from wanting to look there. In fact, if the House will excuse my unparliamentary language, I could not give a toss about—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am sorry the Minister felt she had to push it. She is doing an excellent job. She does not need to push it; she is better than that. I call Alison Hume.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alison Hume]

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Every survivor’s experience of abuse is unique. Does the Minister agree that taking the time to find the right chair will enable them to ensure that every story will be fully told?

[Jess Phillips]

I really hope so, but I am not going to do what other people seem to want to do in this circumstance and pretend that there is a guarantee and that I have some sort of magic weapon. That is the process that I am undertaking: I am trying to get the very best chair, who is supported alongside the victims who have been taking part in the process.

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

Getting this right is both important and extremely difficult. I have two questions for the Minister. If, when she meets Fiona and Ellie-Ann, she finds that they are right and that there is something wrong, what powers does she have to intervene? Secondly, will she provide assurances that the inquiry will not be staffed—she may be able to comment on her powers and the power to influence—by individuals who previously dismissed the concerns of survivors and campaigners as racist slurs?

[Jess Phillips]

In answer to the first question, I have every power to intervene in the panel’s process, but the decision I made was that it should be independent of me and my offices, and would be better handled by experts in the field. When I speak to those involved, of course I can raise things and make decisions about how this goes forward. I very much hope that we will be drawing to a conclusion and that soon I will have much less involvement.

To the right hon. Gentleman’s other question, victims and survivors of this crime all have different political opinions. They all have different views on the substantive. They have different views about whether it should be called “grooming” or whether it should be called “grouped”. They have different views on all these things. I will not stand here and say that I would eliminate any victim or survivor working on this based on their political views, and I will continue to say that as it is. Many of them do not like me very much. Imagine if I just did not let the people who did not like me very much have their voices heard. Well, frankly, I would be guilty of a cover-up.

[Joani Reid (East Kilbride and Strathaven) (Lab)]

The Minister has made it clear that women and girls were failed by every institution, and it is a positive step that the failure has now been acknowledged by Government and that the acknowledgment is leading to action after years of inaction. But in Scotland we have had absolutely no acknowledgment or action. What advice would the Minister give me and others across Scotland who are becoming increasingly angry that the Scottish Government are doing all they can not just to block an investigation, but to block any kind of independent scrutiny or case review of organised child exploitation?

[Jess Phillips]

First, while the inquiry is in England and Wales, one of the victims who we have been hearing about today—Ellie—lives very much in the borderland of our two great countries of England and Scotland. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that some of the things that may get found in the inquiry will have findings across the border. Unfortunately, the trafficking of young girls does not follow lines on a map as easily as we might think it does when we administer inquiries. My hon. Friend should continue to work with survivor groups up in Scotland to push for what exactly it is that they want to see in Scotland.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for her answers. I know her heart is in this to get justice, and I do not think that there is any doubt about that. However, it is difficult to hear the news that these victims, who have already been denigrated and treated as voiceless and worthless during their initial abuse, have been made to feel that way once again in this inquiry, and the Minister will understand that it is also difficult for us to accept that this is taking place on the Government’s watch. Does she agree that the inquiry is not getting this right? Will she instruct that immediate action is taken to give those young women their voice back to ensure that justice is served and that safeguards are in place to prevent such abuse from taking place on British soil ever again?

[Jess Phillips]

I absolutely share the hon. Gentleman’s upset and frustration on the matter. He knows that when I say that I will do whatever I can to ensure that these problems are sorted out, where they can be, that is what we will seek to do, and we will continue to try to do that. What we have to do with this inquiry is not just look at what went wrong and hold people to account; we have to ensure that it cannot happen again.

[Sam Carling (North West Cambridgeshire) (Lab)]

I say to Opposition Members that their relentless politicisation of the issue is no doubt making it much harder to find a chair because it will be putting candidates off.

As the inquiry gets under way, we must keep up progress on implementing the recommendations of the Jay IICSA inquiry. I raised concerns on Report during the Crime and Policing Bill that the Government’s proposals to implement mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse do not go quite as far as IICSA wanted, and those concerns were raised again in the other place last week by Baroness Grey-Thompson. Will the Minister ask her colleague Lord Hanson to meet me and Baroness Grey-Thompson to discuss how we can remedy that in a way that works for everyone and that protects children?

[Jess Phillips]

The simple answer is yes. My hon. Friend is absolutely right on his first point. What we should all seek to be doing throughout this is to try to grease the wheels so that we can have the best possible inquiry. We should all be seeking to do that while holding people to account with as much scrutiny as is needed. I will absolutely do that, and obviously I have met Lord Hanson a number of times. Getting mandatory reporting right is vital and, much like in the survivor group, there are different views on either side.

[Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)]

Blackpool continues to live with the scars of Charlene Downes and Paige Chivers, two young girls in Blackpool who never came home and were subject to grooming. Will the Minister confirm to my constituents that the grooming gangs inquiry will be thorough and comprehensive, and committed to a full and transparent investigation, ensuring that every avenue is examined to uncover the truth?

[Jess Phillips]

I absolutely will. Funnily enough, this morning I spoke to one of my hon. Friend’s constituents, a grooming gang victim, to assure her of similar things. Quite a lot of this process causes quite a lot of nervousness, and there is a need to manage lots of different people’s emotions, but I absolutely make that commitment to him, as I made it to one of his constituents this morning, and I make it to the House.

Group-based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd September 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

I would like to update the House on the progress being made to deliver Baroness Casey’s recommendations following her national audit on group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse, which was published before the summer recess.

The sexual exploitation and abuse of children by grooming gangs are the most horrific and despicable crimes. Girls as young as 10 were exploited, abused and brutally raped by gangs of men, and then disgracefully let down again and again by the authorities that were meant to protect them. These despicable crimes have caused the most unimaginable harm to victims and survivors throughout their lives and are a stain on our society.

Baroness Casey’s report chronicled more than a decade of inaction on these appalling crimes by previous Governments, despite repeated warnings and recommendations. But this Government will not lose any more time in pursuing truth and justice for victims and survivors, who deserved so much better. That is why, on 16 June, the Home Secretary made it abundantly clear that this Government will accept all 12 of Baroness Casey’s recommendations, including the establishment of a new statutory national inquiry into group-based child sexual exploitation, and a new national policing operation to get more perpetrators behind bars. Since then, we have made significant strides in laying the foundations for a robust, survivor-centred national inquiry and in establishing a national policing operation, while continuing to drive forward the major workstreams that were already well under way to tackle those abhorrent crimes.

I will first update the House on the progress made to establish a new national policing operation to get perpetrators who exploit, abuse and harm children behind bars, where they belong. Today, I can announce that Operation Beaconport has been established. It will be overseen by the National Crime Agency and delivered in partnership with policing, including the National Police Chiefs’ Council, the CSE taskforce and the tackling organised exploitation programme.

For the very first time, this new national policing operation brings together all the relevant policing partners under one operation, to ensure a swift and specialist law enforcement response to grooming gang offending. This collaborative approach ensures that a long-term investigative capability is built across policing and that best practice is standard, ending an unacceptable postcode lottery for victims and survivors. The new national operation will eliminate inconsistencies on how cases are handled across forces and will ensure that there is no hiding place for perpetrators. Victims and survivors are central to the operation, and trauma-informed practice will be at its core. Over the summer I have been meeting survivors and their support organisations on the issue.

This work is already well under way. In January the Home Secretary asked police forces to identify cases involving grooming and child sexual exploitation that had been closed with no further action, to pursue new lines of inquiry and to reopen investigations where appropriate. As a result of that commission, 1,273 cases have now been identified for formal review, and the new national operation has identified 216 highest priority cases—those that involve an allegation of rape—which are being accelerated as a matter of urgency.

We expect policing to meticulously pore over those cases and work with associated victims to relentlessly pursue perpetrators who should be behind bars. That includes the ongoing investigation relating to South Yorkshire Police’s handling of reports into child sexual abuse and exploitation in Rotherham. Following discussions between the Independent Office for Police Conduct, South Yorkshire Police and the National Crime Agency, I can confirm that it has been formally agreed that the investigation will now be carried out by the NCA, under the direction and control of the IOPC.

Alongside these ongoing reviews, Operation Beaconport will also provide additional support for police forces to conduct complex investigations, and to ensure that specialist best practice is being adopted consistently across the country. I thank the CSE taskforce for the work that it has done in preparing the way forward for these investigations. I can announce to the House today that in the first year that this Government were in office, from July 2024 to July 2025, the taskforce contributed to 827 arrests nationwide, an 11% increase on the previous year.

To bolster this vital work, I can update the House that last month I announced that the Government would be injecting £426,000 of new funding to the tackling organised exploitation programme, in addition to the £8.8 million that we are already investing in the programme this year. The new funding will enable TOEX to extend access to its suite of cutting-edge investigative apps and digital tools, stored within its secure capabilities environment, to all police forces in England and Wales. Following my announcement of a further investment, in addition to the 15 police forces that are already utilising TOEX tools, a further 10 forces are currently onboarding.

The TOEX expansion crucially supports the first phase of Operation Beaconport. Police officers will be able to access the AI-enabled tools to assist with detecting and investigating child sexual abuse and exploitation, including TOEX translate, a tool for bulk translation of foreign language text from seized mobile devices, which has enabled savings of an estimated £25 million so far, and the data analysis and review tool, which analyses large amounts of digital data to identify communications patterns and relationships between suspects. Further announcements on Operation Beaconport will be made by operational partners shortly. A comprehensive update is expected in the coming weeks, setting out the full scope of the operation and the support available to those affected.

We will never shy away from the facts in these cases. Following Baroness Casey’s audit and her conclusions on the disproportionate role of Pakistani-heritage gangs, and building on the work that the Home Secretary had already commissioned to improve ethnicity data in relation to those crimes, we have also committed to making it a requirement to collect ethnicity and nationality data of suspects who commit child sexual exploitation and abuse offences. The Home Secretary has written to chief constables to signal that the current data collection across ethnicity and nationality is unacceptable, and that this data must be improved as a matter of urgency. Work is now under way looking to amend the annual data requirements to support this process, and we are looking at legislative options to drive forward these improvements.

Finally, Baroness Casey recommended the establishment of a new statutory national inquiry that could compel targeted investigations in local areas, to get truth and justice for victims and survivors, and to drive meaningful change in local systems and structures that had failed so many people in the past. I can confirm that the national inquiry into group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse will place victims and survivors firmly at its heart. Crucially, it will ensure trauma-informed, accessible engagement for victims and survivors that reflects diverse lived experiences and minimises the risk of re-traumatisation.

The inquiry will examine how effectively local and national safeguarding systems protected children from group-based sexual exploitation and abuse, and hold institutions accountable for past failures. As the Home Secretary said in June, its purpose must be to challenge what Baroness Casey’s audit described as continued “denial”, “resistance” and “legal wrangling” among local agencies. The inquiry will consider intersections with ethnicity, race and culture, and assess the safeguarding duties of public services, identifying both failures and examples of good practice.

I know that everyone in the House and beyond wants to see the inquiry begin its work at the earliest opportunity. Colleagues will know that that requires the appointment of a chair and the agreement of terms of reference. Following a recruitment process over the summer, Home Office officials, the Home Secretary and I have met with prospective candidates for the chair of the inquiry and we are now in the final stages of the appointment process. Most importantly, the chair must have the credibility and experience to command the confidence of victims and survivors, as well as the wider public. Meaningful engagement with victims and survivors is paramount. To support that, a dedicated panel of victims and survivors has been established to contribute to the chair selection process. This is a critical milestone, and once an appointment is confirmed, the House will be updated at the earliest opportunity.

Members from across the House will understand that this process must be done properly and thoroughly. We must avoid a repeat of what happened with the efforts to appoint a chair of the original independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, when three chairs were appointed and subsequently withdrew, from July 2014 onwards, prior to the eventual appointment of Professor Alexis Jay in 2016, a full two years after the original chair was named. We are determined to ensure that that does not happen again.

In line with the Inquiries Act 2025, the appointed chair will play a central role in shaping the commission’s terms of reference. These will be published and subject to consultation with stakeholders, including victims and survivors. The inquiry is expected to run for two to three years, enabling it to examine a broad range of issues, while honouring Baroness Casey’s recommendation that it must be time-limited to deliver answers swiftly, a key request not just from victims and survivors, but from Members from across this House.

The inquiry will begin by identifying priority areas for review, conducting targeted local investigations and reporting findings at both local and national levels. These reviews will be tailored to the specific context of each area and may involve a wide range of organisations, including children’s and family services, police, the Crown Prosecution Service, health and education providers, youth services, third-sector organisations and central Government Departments, whose actions and decisions have affected what has happened at a local level. Where appropriate, the inquiry will issue recommendations at both local and national levels. We will continue to keep Members of the House, the victims and the public informed of all appointments and the terms of reference.

The Government remain unwavering in their commitment to ensuring that this inquiry is robust, transparent and capable of delivering truth, accountability and meaningful change. As we have said from the outset, we are determined to ensure that every survivor of grooming gangs gets the support and justice they deserve; that every perpetrator is put behind bars; that every case, historic or current, has been properly investigated; and that every person or institution who looked the other way is held accountable, as that is a stain on our society that should be finally removed for good. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. Given that the Minister has just taken 12 minutes, I will be extending the time allowance to the shadow Home Secretary to six minutes and to the spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats to three minutes. I call the shadow Home Secretary.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Phillips]

I partially thank the shadow Home Secretary for his tone, but I will correct the record. I did not say that he had done nothing: I said that Baroness Casey said that there had been

“a decade of inaction on these appalling crimes by previous Governments”.

That is exactly what I said.

I answered in my statement many of the questions that the right hon. Gentleman asked. His office may have spoken to some of the Oldham victims today; I spoke to some of them personally last night, so I keep in touch with lots of victims. What I will not do—what I will never do—is make it so that they are not involved. It takes time to ensure that this process is completely victim centred. Frankly, I am sure that is what he and other Members on the Opposition Benches who have written to me with that request want to see, and that is the process we are undertaking.

In answer to the right hon. Gentleman’s question, no local authority area can turn the inquiry down. The Home Secretary and I have said a number of times that it is a full, powerful statutory inquiry. I have seen some scaremongering, and victims have written to me to say, “This will not cover Government officials or people who covered things up.” That is absolute nonsense. Let me be very clear, and let it be taken away by everybody who I am sure has the best interests of victims at heart, that it will cover what it needs to cover to uncover the truth, and no stone will be left unturned. That will make for difficult conversations for people.

If people are found by our court system to have undermined and disgraced public office, they should of course be sent to prison. However, that has never happened to date in these cases. I very much hope that we uncover the kind of social workers that the right hon. Gentleman refers to, and I hope that they face the full force of everything that they deserve to face, but there is absolutely nothing that says that anybody can avoid this inquiry. It will be up to the inquiry, which is independent and statutory, to look at and work with areas about where this will be.

[Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for her statement. No one doubts her, and her team’s, absolute commitment to addressing the root causes of the abuse and exploitation that so many women and some boys have experienced. In my contact with women this morning—I speak on their behalf—I heard that they are absolutely committed and understand and reflect the commitment of my hon. Friend, but they are keen to know a bit more detail about when the chair can be appointed and about the relationship that the national inquiry will have with the local inquiries.

My hon. Friend quite rightly said that victims and survivors should be engaged and involved in the appointment of the chair, and that is so important. Will she say more about how we will ensure that there is locality-specific representation as well? There are slight differences according to locality.

[Jess Phillips]

There absolutely are. My hon. Friend is exactly right that there are differences, so it will be for the chair, a panel and a commission to do that work in localities and ensure that victim engagement is really location specific.

With regard to the specific issue in Oldham, we have been engaging very closely with Oldham for some time, including with victims and survivors. As I said, I spoke to some of them last night about wanting them to be part of the terms of reference for the national inquiry. Our offer for a full and local independent inquiry in Oldham remains in place, and we are in discussion with them about how they want to proceed in the context of the national inquiry. We do not want to have victims having to do a repetitive exercise, but I assure my hon. Friend that we are speaking to officials in Oldham very regularly.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

I am grateful as always to the Minister for advance sight of her statement. In every single conversation about this issue in this House, our first thought must always be with the victims and the survivors. No child should ever suffer the devastating trauma of sexual exploitation or abuse. These crimes are abhorrent and an assault on the very values of our society. We carry a responsibility to act, to secure justice for victims, to ensure that offenders answer for their crimes and to build a future in which such suffering is not repeated.

In 2022, Professor Alexis Jay published her independent inquiry into child sexual abuse. In June, Baroness Casey released her report on group-based exploitation. I am really grateful to the Minister for her update on the progress being made, but when does she expect to have implemented the crucial recommendations from both reports?

Baroness Casey was clear about one of her key recommendations: the Government must end the practice of out-of-area taxis by introducing stronger national standards for taxi licensing and driver regulation. Across Greater Manchester, we know that problem all too well; for years, drivers have exploited the fragmented system by securing the easiest licences to obtain from councils in one area and then operating elsewhere. As a result, many taxis working in Greater Manchester are licensed 100 miles away in Wolverhampton. What work is the Minister doing to address that specific issue? It feels like there is an opportunity to do so this afternoon through the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, but that opportunity has not yet been taken. If an amendment to the Bill is the way to achieve that aim, will the Minister work with colleagues across the House to ensure that this important recommendation from Baroness Casey can be delivered?

Finally, I turn to an issue that I and others have raised repeatedly, and on which some progress was hinted at in recent press reports. Could the Minister confirm when Parliament will see legislation for a Hillsborough law, as promised many times by the Government, to guarantee that public officials and authorities co-operate fully with a duty of candour in cases such as this one, including in the upcoming national inquiry?

[Jess Phillips]

I met the Department for Transport on the issue of taxi licensing last week—this is about looking for a legislative vehicle. The Government have said that we will undo some of the harm caused by the deregulation legislation of the past, including the dangers that have come about related to safeguarding and taxi licensing. The hon. Lady invited Members to work across the House. In every interaction—there have been many—that I have had with victims of this crime since the last time I or the Home Secretary stood at the Dispatch Box making a statement, they have asked if we could just work together and stop throwing mud at each other. I will happily work with anyone on this issue. We are currently looking for legislative vehicles, but we do seek to legislate.

We expect the Hillsborough law shortly; I am sorry that that is not a very prescriptive answer, but that law is very much expected.

[Charlotte Nichols (Warrington North) (Lab)]

The last Government failed to implement a single recommendation from the IICSA report, and Professor Alexis Jay herself spoke of the huge anger and disappointment at their response. Baroness Casey’s work rightly focuses on the future and I am grateful for today’s statement, but can the Minister please reassure me that the extraordinary work of Professor Jay and all the brave victims and survivors who contributed to her inquiry will not be forgotten and that the Government will implement the IICSA recommendations in full, including its recommendations on the criminal injuries compensation scheme? Currently, that scheme excludes far too many victims of group-based child sexual exploitation and leaves them without adequate support to rebuild their lives.

[Jess Phillips]

I praise my hon. Friend for her long-term commitment in this space. The Government have given a number of updates on IICSA. I expect to come back to this House soon—one way or another—with further updates on progress in that area. Much of the progress we are seeking to make is through Bills that are currently passing through Parliament and are over in the other place, but my hon. Friend makes the very important point that we must not undermine the two-year piece of work that has already been done by Professor Jay. We will make sure that all those findings and recommendations, which Casey included as well, and any intelligence that is sent to us feeds into the new national independent inquiry.

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

Over the summer, Lord Cryer said that there was a deliberate attempt to silence his mother, Ann Cryer, when she first bravely raised the issue of grooming gangs in Keighley more than 20 years ago. Ann Cryer was, of course, one of my predecessors as Member of Parliament for Keighley.

Lord Cryer said that he was

“absolutely certain there has been a cover up on a local level”,

and that Bradford needs to be examined as part of the inquiry. Unfortunately, Bradford council and others in this House are still saying that they will only support a focus on Bradford if that is deemed necessary by the inquiry chair. That is not the same thing as saying that they will actively lobby for that outcome, so does the Minister share my concern that Bradford council’s reluctance for an inquiry to take place in our area has not changed, despite the voices of so many victims and others demanding one?

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Phillips]

I pay tribute to Ann Cryer, a woman I am incredibly fond of—personally as well as professionally—for her immense bravery. I have no doubt that none of us would be sitting in the Chamber today talking about any of this had it not been for her; she deserves absolute credit.

I do not recognise the characterisation that the hon. Gentleman has given. I have not had any particular pushback, or heard anywhere suggesting that the inquiry should not be looking into certain areas or giving any sense that they will resist it, but I would say to all local areas: resistance is futile.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome today’s update on the national inquiry into grooming gangs, particularly the way in which the Minister has made sure that victims and survivors are definitely going to be at the heart of whatever happens. During the trial of seven members of a Rochdale grooming gang earlier this year, it emerged in court that the social workers involved had referred to one of the victims—who was 13 at the time—as a prostitute. Other victims, who were 10 at the time, were also called prostitutes. I know the Minister will agree that the criminalisation of young girls as prostitutes causes them further trauma later in life. These girls were victims and the state should recognise them as such, so what steps will the Minister take to ensure that such convictions for prostitution are disregarded as swiftly as possible?

[Jess Phillips]

Often in this debate, we discuss how people felt nervous or anxious about ethnicity, when what is also evident in every single case—regardless of the ethnicity of the perpetrators—is the ability of agencies to look at women and think of them as something else, and to treat young girls poorly. That is exactly what my hon. Friend is talking about. The Crime and Policing Bill, which is going through Parliament, is going to disregard any child prostitution convictions. We are working with the Ministry of Justice to find the wider cohort of victims, and with bodies in the criminal justice system to identify and review cases and to support victims. It will not always have been prostitution charges; I have met many victims who have been criminalised for a variety of things that they probably should not have been. That will be a much more complicated process, but it is one that we have set in train.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I am glad that the Minister wants to put victims and survivors first, and I hope the whole House will join her in that. It is absolutely right that we all do so. She will be aware of the Tom Crowther inquiry, which highlighted 1,000 victims over 30 years in Telford and in some parts of my constituency. Earlier, the Minister said to the House that we do not want victims to have to undergo “a repetitive exercise”. I understand why she said that, but would she support the national inquiry going back to Telford to ensure that things that should have been done, but that still have not been done, will be done? Will she also ensure that the Labour council—forgive me—in Telford and Wrekin will not stand in the way of that progress?

[Jess Phillips]

On the contrary: very few people have written to me more throughout this process than the leader of Telford council, who has talked about how they want to continue to make progress. I am very familiar with what happened in Telford. Quite a lot of the evidence shows that people in Telford were groomed where I live, in Birmingham, yet the Telford inquiry—while brilliant—did not lead to any changes in neighbouring areas. That is exactly what we hope the national inquiry will do, so although I cannot direct where it must go, I absolutely want it to look at prior work that has been done and some of the gaps that have been identified, exactly as the right hon. Gentleman says.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

I welcome my hon. Friend’s statement. This is yet another example of the state turning its back on working-class people—in this case, young girls. I also welcome the fact that cold cases are going to be investigated and that those cases will be reopened if there is any evidence of criminal activity, but in the past when an inquiry has been announced, we have seen police suspend until the outcome of that inquiry investigations that they have been undertaking. Can the Minister assure us that that will not happen in this case?

[Jess Phillips]

Yes. My hon. Friend makes an important point that we have to make sure that the inquiry is not used for further state inactivity. There have been cases where that has happened before. As we are undertaking a new national policing operation in Operation Beaconport at the same time as the national inquiry, I give him my absolute assurance that I will ensure that the two work closely together so that such a situation cannot happen, unless it would cause such judicial issues that it would have to happen.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

I truly thank the Minister for putting vulnerable girls first and central in her statement. As we all know, victims of sexual abuse are too often disbelieved by the authorities, whatever the circumstances. Speaking out takes immense courage, and people pay an immense cost only too often. I welcome her announcements regarding the national inquiry, but can she assure me that the Government’s delayed violence against women and girls strategy will clarify how victims will be supported to rebuild their lives, and can she please say when it will be published?

[Jess Phillips]

There has been some reporting that the violence against women and girls strategy will not include child abuse victims and grooming gang victims. I can stand here and say that is utter rubbish; it absolutely will, and it will be published very shortly. Any delay is only out of my own perfectionism—I think that is what I will call it. This is a 10-year strategy that will last until at least the next Parliament, and it has to be right. Huge parts of it will absolutely be about support for victims.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend not only for her statement, but for the care and determination she has brought to this role to centre the discussion and action around victims and young girls, and to work in collaboration with others—not just in this House, but those who are directly affected. May I just add to the points that the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) raised about loopholes in taxi licensing? One of the biggest issues that comes up in my constituency, both from taxi users and women’s groups, as well as from the vast majority of decent, hard-working taxi drivers, is that these loopholes, and ineffective and outdated taxi licensing, give a bad name to the system as a whole. I urge the Minister to work with her colleagues and to ensure that as we proceed with the national inquiry, we also proceed with the updating of legislation to give protection to all.

[Jess Phillips]

Absolutely. Long before Baroness Casey was pointing out the safeguarding issues, I was being lobbied by decent, hard-working people about the failures of the taxi licensing system as it stands. We will consider all options. As I have said, we have committed to legislating specifically on this point, but we are also looking at including out-of-area working, as well as national standards and enforcement, and at consulting on making local transport authorities responsible for licensing.

[Esther McVey (Tatton) (Con)]

What a disappointment. I came to the House today to listen to the Minister’s statement in the hope that we would get some detailed information about the Government’s statutory inquiry. What have we had today? A long statement and little information. In fact, I would go so far as to say that what this Government are doing with the rape gang inquiry is a masterclass in procrastination. What did we hear from the Prime Minister? That it was a right-wing bandwagon. What did we hear from senior Ministers? That it was a dog whistle issue. We want to know what the terms of reference are and when they will be put on the Government’s website so that we can all inspect them. When will this conclude—or does the Minister hope that it will go on and on past the next general election?

[Jess Phillips]

I am not sure the right hon. Lady wants to hear my hopes about the next general election. As I said earlier, the victims of this crime have sat in front of me with tears in their eyes and said that they hate it when we shout at each other about these things and that they wish we would work together. Just to tell her the details again, I outlined that 1,273 cases have now been identified by the new policing investigation, which was recommendation 1 of Baroness Casey. Of those, we are expediting 216 cases. The terms of reference will be published and consulted on, and I would very much welcome the right hon. Lady’s opinion. She has never asked for a meeting with me, and I would love to have one. If she would like to be involved in how we build those terms of reference up, please get in touch with my office. I have to say, however, that hers is not the voice I am most concerned about hearing—those people I am speaking to.

[Chris Murray (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab)]

One of the most shocking indictments in Baroness Casey’s evidence to the Home Affairs Committee was the long list of inquiries and speeches, and the shocking lack of action that had followed, so I welcome the announcement that the Minister has made about action to tackle these issues. Can she update us on the establishment of the child protection agency, how it will be set up as this inquiry goes on, and how it will adjust and evolve as learnings from the inquiry come out?

[Jess Phillips]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, because Baroness Casey pointed out how many of her recommendations hinge on there being a good child protection authority, and that work is being done by Department for Education colleagues. I have been involved, along with Alexis Jay, and I have ensured that she has been in meetings with them. The authority will evolve, because what we do not want to do, contrary to the views of some in the House, is to wait forever to set it up or to try to get it exactly right first time when it is a complicated thing. It will evolve along the way, but all those involved in the inquiry, across both local and national bodies, will have the opportunity to feed in their views about what it needs to look like.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

I am wholly supportive of this Government-commissioned report into group-based child sexual exploitation, but the Government must not be distracted from the places where child sexual abuse occurs most frequently. The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children reports that 90% of young people who have been sexually abused said that the perpetrator was someone they knew. Around a third of child sexual abuse is perpetrated by young people under the age of 18, and the NSPCC says that in relation to sibling sexual abuse:

“The number of children affected by this hidden harm is far greater than is acknowledged by…policymakers”.

Is the Minister certain that the Government will not be distracted from abuse within schools and within families?

[Jess Phillips]

I praise the hon. Gentleman for saying that, because familial abuse and child exploitation not by groups but by families or peer groups are, I am afraid to say, not uncommon. I know that from my years of experience. Those victims feel as if their voices are being marginalised. This piece of work that we have announced today is part of a much broader child abuse body that sits within the Home Office and works on all those things. The recommendations of the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse keep us on that track, but we must not lose sight of all the abuse, especially that happening among young people against other young people and online.

[Katrina Murray (Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for her statement today and for the recognition that a process that is supported by those people who should be at the heart of it is always difficult. We must take time to ensure that any inquiry has the faith of the people at the centre of it, because it will never be possible to do that again, as they have been failed too often.

We have discussed before how child abuse and exploitation does not stop at Gretna. Will the Minister outline what engagement there has been with the devolved Administrations on how we can make this a truly national inquiry?

[Jess Phillips]

My hon. Friend is right. As I said earlier, there is likely to be border-crossing between Birmingham and Telford, which was mentioned in the earlier inquiry. We continue to discuss this with the devolved Administrations. The Scottish Government can set up a specific national inquiry under the Inquiries Act, as we have, but any cross-border findings will of course be shared, action will be sought, and, potentially, recommendations will be made.

[Sir Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

At the start of the summer, there were some horrendous reports about rapes and assaults committed by South Yorkshire police. I welcome the decision to involve the National Crime Agency and strip responsibility for those investigations from the force, but can the Minister confirm that the national inquiry will examine the role of the police not only in cover-ups but in the crimes themselves?

[Jess Phillips]

South Yorkshire police should never have been left to investigate themselves in this matter, and moving those investigations to the NCA is absolutely the right thing to do. I would be lying if I said that over the years I had not met girls who talked to me about how police were part of not just the cover-up but the perpetration. We must ensure that victims can come and give that testimony. It is harder to give than other testimony because it brings fear and a lack of trust, but if that is where the inquiry takes us because that is what victims say, that is what will happen.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

The crime of group-based child sexual exploitation is probably the most heinous imaginable. It is so brave of victims to speak out, seek justice and drive change so that other young lives are protected from such crimes. Can the Minister tell us more about how the national inquiry will engage with victims and survivors and ensure that their voices—and the voices of those who previously bravely contributed to investigations and inquiries—are central to the recommendations? Unlike the criminal law, the criminal injuries compensation scheme does not recognise that children cannot legally consent, and excludes those who have been deemed to consent from compensation. Will the Minister work with the Victims Minister—the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones)—to right that injustice?

[Jess Phillips]

I absolutely commit myself to working with the Victims Minister. The issue of consent, and the age of consent, was a huge part of Baroness Casey’s review, and a number of Members have mentioned making this a victim-centred process. These are words that we say, but it is much harder in reality. We are talking about people who have been very badly wronged and whose level of trust has been badly affected. This is not something that happens easily. It is not a process in which every one of the victims will get on with the others. We will ensure that in both the national policing inquiry and the national statutory inquiry there are systems to enable as many voices as possible to be heard as comfortably as possible, but I do not think we should lie to the public about how easy those procedures are. I speak as someone who has worked in this field for a very long time. We are talking about very traumatised and distressed young people, and this will take considerably more effort and patience than I think they have been shown in the past.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

Grooming gangs are entirely abhorrent, as are all forms of grooming leading to sexual exploitation. This summer I met a Torbay resident whose 15-year-old adopted son had been groomed online and then prostituted online. Can the Minister please tell us how she intends to tackle all forms of grooming that lead to sexual exploitation?

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Phillips]

My hon. Friend the Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) mentioned the importance of drawing attention to the fact that, especially in the context of the online crime of sexploitation, boys are at greater risk. That is the only area of exploitation in which most of the victims are teenage boys, and it is a new and growing phenomenon. I say to the hon. Gentleman that in both the national inquiry and Operation Beaconport, the Home Secretary and I have been pushing at every stage for recognition of the fact that this process cannot just rake over historic coals. It must be grounded in recognition of the way in which abuse is happening now and improving police forces’ responses to it, and undoubtedly it is now happening online. The most frightening statistic that keeps me awake at night is that last year 53% of child sexual abuse was perpetrated by children aged between 10 and 17.

[Barry Gardiner (Brent West) (Lab)]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for what has been a lifetime of work protecting women and girls. I welcome what she has said about updating the ethnicity data, which will enable the public debate to take place on the basis of data and fact rather than the prejudice and scaremongering of which she has spoken, but does she think it might also help to engender trust in the debate if she were to take this opportunity to acknowledge that there was a completely unacceptable woke reluctance to offend certain communities, and that this culture of deference, where it persists, must be stamped out?

[Jess Phillips]

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words, and I will certainly take that opportunity, because I have seen this with my own eyes in cases in which I have been involved. People have said, “Oh, it might cause trouble.” That was not stopping them doing it, but they would not have even mentioned it to me in other circumstances.

What we have to do, and what we all owe to the victims of these crimes, is to call it what it is, but also not to use our own political agendas in relation to their very delicate and harmed lives, whatever form that takes. We do not want a backlash causing the police to go on thinking, “Oh gosh, this is going to open a can of worms.” We must all act responsibly in respect of these issues. However, I have definitely seen this, and it should never have been allowed to happen.

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

I recently met Dr Joanna Kerr, an extremely brave survivor of child sexual exploitation and abuse in Scotland. As it stands, the national inquiry will not cover Scotland, and the Scottish National party Government will not launch their own. I ask the Minister again: will she commit herself to extending the national inquiry to cover all parts of the United Kingdom including Scotland, or do victims like Joanna not deserve justice?

[Jess Phillips]

It is not that victims like Joanna do not deserve justice; they absolutely do deserve justice. I do not know about Joanna’s case, but I should be more than happy to meet her and talk to her about it. The body that must hold a national inquiry into events in Scotland is a body in the devolved Government, because both policing and child protection are devolved issues. However, as I said to one of my hon. Friends earlier, I am more than happy to look into this. People who are Scottish, or who live in Scotland now, and have been abused in an area covered by the inquiry will absolutely be able to take part.

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

One of the questions that haunt Baroness Casey’s audit is, “Why?” Why was this type of offending allowed to grow seemingly unchecked for so long? Will the Minister, whom it is good to see in her place, give an assurance that serious and credible research on all the factors that drove and enabled the horrendous crime of gang-based child sexual exploitation will be commissioned and will operate without fear or favour?

[Jess Phillips]

Absolutely. One of Baroness Casey’s recommendations was for a piece of research on exactly that: the “why” about things that were covered up and the “why” about communities but also institutions. The Home Office is currently working with various academics to commission such research, and it is fundamental.

While a huge amount of discussion—and, as I have said, I agree with it—has concerned the “why” issue on ethnicity, with the nervousness, the wokeness or whatever we want to call it, another “why” is about class and the way in which the systems treat these young women when they come forward, and, indeed, the way in which they treat plenty of other women when they come forward in relation to any of these issues.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

It is a pity that the Government have had to be dragged screaming into granting this inquiry into Pakistani rape and grooming gangs, but the inquiry is welcome. However, given the fact that nobody has been appointed yet, the terms of reference have not be determined and we do not even know how long the inquiry is going to take, I am sure the Minister will understand why victims will be looking for what can be done immediately to address their concerns. For those cases where police officers, social workers and council officials have been identified as covering up, can we be assured that their cases will be dealt with ahead of any inquiry? For those who have been put in jail, can we ensure that they serve out their sentences, unlike the Oxford Six, who were released early despite the recommendations?

[Jess Phillips]

I did actually say in my statement that, as outlined in Baroness Casey’s review, the inquiry should take around two to three years and be time-sensitive. All I can say to the right hon. Gentleman is that in order to make sure that we are doing this right, we will shortly be providing an update on the chair of the inquiry. I gently remind him of the two years it took to find a chair for the child sex abuse inquiry—two years and three failed attempts. I do not want to do that to people this time, so that is why we are taking the time.

[Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)]

We all want to see an end to grooming gangs, and justice for victims and survivors, because exploiting the most vulnerable is about as despicable and heinous as it gets. We all know that perpetrators come from different backgrounds and communities, but certain politically motivated individuals are trying to blame particular communities, which is why they try to gloss over that fact in their effort to sow division and discord. We certainly cannot be politically correct about this either, because no one, regardless of race or religion, is above the law. We cannot allow such an important issue to be treated like a sectarian political football by those who seek to sow division. Can my hon. Friend the Minister outline what the Government will do to root out this evil with this second national inquiry? How will it remain focused on victims and survivors, and how will she ensure that this debate is conducted in a sensible, sensitive manner?

[Jess Phillips]

I stand here as a vessel of the victims who have spoken to me. They have not necessarily used the word “sectarian”, but they hate this issue being used as a political football. Baroness Casey, in the media that she did post releasing her report, said the same: she felt that politics was not meeting the moment in some of the responses. We have got to do better, and the very first thing that I would say is that I welcome the involvement and look forward to the engagement on the terms of reference, which will be published for consultation with every single Member of this House, regardless of what they might have said before or whether we might have fallen out on other occasions. I welcome the inquiry, and I want to make sure that we show the very best of this place, because that is the least that victims deserve.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

The Minister will be well aware that many of the victims of this disgraceful, despicable type of activity were originally taken from broken homes and put into the care of a local authority, and then groomed ruthlessly. Social workers turned a blind eye. Managers told social workers to turn a blind eye. The police, in many ways, were complicit. One of the problems is that the whistleblowers who came forward to tell the stories were all sacked. What action will the Minister take to ensure not only that the victims are protected, but that the whistleblowers who come forward and tell the truth of what was going on are similarly protected as part of this inquiry?

[Jess Phillips]

I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman—he is not a man I have fallen out with before. I heard from some whistleblowers this week that some of their testimony was not published by IICSA. When dealing with the terms of reference, we have to ensure that there are robust safeguards for whistleblowers. I have worked with one of the whistleblowers, Sara Rowbotham, who lost her job in Rochdale. I have met her and her Member of Parliament to talk about exactly some of that and how we need to get this right—not just in the inquiry or in Operation Beacon Port, but in the future.

[Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)]

On 6 August, the Minister described certain councils that do not believe that they have a problem with grooming gangs as “idiots”. Can she explain if that also applies to the Government, given the enormous pressure it took for them to implement this inquiry and the disparaging comments previously made by the Prime Minister?

[Jess Phillips]

It would be playing a very long game to say that I have been taken kicking or screaming into this issue. Sarah Rowbotham was one of the whistleblowers, and I wrote a book about her and this particular issue about nine years ago. I have also set up many, many support services for victims of these crimes. I will always do what I think is best in these cases, and I took the advice of Baroness Casey. Trying to see bad faith, or to score political points, is not what we should do.

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

I pay tribute to the Minister for her work and thank her for her statement.

This crime is absolutely abhorrent. Every single victim and survivor of this crime must get justice, no matter the perpetrator—Pakistani, Indian, English or anyone—so can we please dial down the politicisation and the inflammatory rhetoric in this place, and show total compassion and empathy when we work together to tackle this scourge in our country for every single victim? May I ask the Minister for a meeting with me and my colleagues so that we can learn how we can support the work of the Government in this space?

[Jess Phillips]

Of course I will meet the hon. Gentleman and, like I say, any colleagues who wish to take part in this work. As somebody who represents a large and diverse community, I have to say that the Pakistani part of my community has been most fervent in wanting the truth to come out, because harm has been done to them by the alleged wokeness that has been talked about.

As I finish my statement, let me take this opportunity to say that we have to make sure that we have the facts and do not feel squeamish about the perpetrators. At 6 am on Monday morning, I met victims of this crime who are black, white and Asian. We must not silence those victims by only ever talking about one type of victim. The victimhood in group-based abuse is not just one type, apart from one thing: they are all girls.

Bills Presented

Sentencing Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Secretary Shabana Mahmood, supported by the Prime Minister, Secretary Angela Rayner, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Secretary Peter Kyle, presented a Bill to make provision about the sentencing, release and management after sentencing of offenders; to make provision about bail; to make provision about the removal from the United Kingdom of foreign criminals and the processing of information about foreign criminals for immigration purposes; and for connected purposes.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time tomorrow, and to be printed (Bill 299) with explanatory notes (Bill 299-EN).

Vehicle Registration Marks (Misuse and Offences) Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Dr Al Pinkerton presented a Bill to make provision about offences relating to the misuse and illegal copying of vehicle registration marks; to require the Secretary of State to introduce measures to reduce incidences of such misuse and illegal copying; to make provision about support for victims of any such offences; and for connected purposes.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 12 September, and to be printed (Bill 298).

Violence against Women and Girls: Pornography Prostitution

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd September 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

Thank you, Sir Desmond, for thinking of the time that I might have to respond. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship.

I thank and commend my hon. Friend the Member for East Kilbride and Strathaven (Joani Reid) for securing this debate. She is clearly very passionate and informed about the topics in question. That absolutely shone through in her speech. It would be hard to listen to much of the testimony from women who have been abused in this way and feel anything else. My hon. Friend was one of a number of speakers to have referenced the challenges around pornography in the debate on violence against women and girls that I responded to at the start of the year. I am grateful to her and to all Members who have contributed today.

This is not the first time that Members of Parliament are considering the impact of pornography on violence against women and girls; the general themes have been long-standing subjects of concern. However, it does feel that the issues around pornography are taking on greater significance all the time, for many of the reasons that have been identified today. In lots of ways, that is inevitable given how universal the internet has become and the massive proliferation of online devices, especially among young people. Similarly, prostitution is another established area of focus for discussion in this space, and I note the points that have been made.

I will return to those issues shortly, but I want to couch my response in the Government’s mission to halve violence against women and girls, because of the fundamental recognition of the damage that is being done by these kinds of abuses, many of which we have heard about today. As a society, we must do much better, and we will. The Home Secretary, the Prime Minister and I are all committed to ensuring that these issues are dealt with once and for all.

On the points raised, as Members are aware, and as has been covered today, the online space is a significant enabler of sexual exploitation, and our response needs to reflect that. I would say that today the online space is the most significant enabler of sexual exploitation of both adults and children. It becomes an ever-increasing concern.

Online platforms must be responsible and held accountable for content on their sites, including by taking proactive steps to prevent their sites from being used by criminals. We are implementing the Online Safety Act 2023, which sets out the priority offences, including sexual exploitation and human trafficking offences. Online platforms now have a duty to assess the risk of illegal harms on their services, albeit this issue has a globally challenging element to it, and obviously our laws apply within the UK. As my hon. Friend the Member for East Kilbride and Strathaven pointed out, many of the cases that she highlighted were US-based.

As of 17 March, online platforms need to take safety measures to protect users from illegal content, as set out in Ofcom’s code of practice, or face significant penalties, which OnlyFans has, as my hon. Friend pointed out. We are going further: schedule 13 to the Crime and Policing Bill will equip law enforcement officers with new tools to disrupt sexual exploitation that is facilitated through online platforms. They will be able to apply to the court for an order to suspend internet protocol and domain names for a specified period, up to 12 months, if they are used for serious crime, including the offences relating to sexual exploitation and modern slavery—anything that is illegal, essentially.

Through operational activity aimed at tackling modern slavery threats and targeting prolific perpetrators, the Government are further supporting law enforcement to tackle the drivers of trafficking for sexual exploitation. I will take away from the debate the point about the specific model. I have seen the work of law enforcement in respect of adult websites—I have seen women who were found on those sites being supported and taken to safety. I have also seen perpetrators criminalised—nowhere near as many as I would like, but that is an evergreen statement—in relation to violence against women and girls. However, I take my hon. Friend’s point about the specific model used by OnlyFans and the need to get behind what might not be able to be seen, and to ensure that that is possible. I will absolutely take that away and ask those questions.

The Government will continue to keep under review policies to tackle online enablers of sexual exploitation, and we want to ensure that online companies fulfil their duty to eradicate exploitation from their sites. If necessary, we will take further action to do that.

More broadly, Baroness Bertin’s independent review of the impact of pornography has given us valuable insights into the role of pornography. Nobody wishes to seem prudish; what we wish to do is safeguard the women who may be abused in this manner and the children in our country. There has been an exponential increase in the scale of pornography, but it has also become increasingly violent, degrading and misogynistic. We should all be seriously concerned, as my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato) said, about the ideas of stepchildren, child-based hooks, “barely legal” and so on. We absolutely must focus on that.

We are already working to change things. In July, we oversaw the coming into force of measures under the Online Safety Act that require all websites that show pornography and are accessible in the UK to have highly effective age-assurance checks. That means, quite rightly, that children should not be able to access pornographic content online. Ofcom has launched an enforcement programme to help to ensure that that is the case. We continue to monitor how well that works.

It is so important that children—both boys and girls—are supported to understand the potential dangers of pornography, and to understand how to form positive relationships. That is why the Government have committed to ensuring, through education on healthy relationships, sex and health, that we have a curriculum that equips young people with the knowledge and skills they need to build positive relationships. The new content was launched on 15 July, and it explores many of the things that we would want to see in happy, healthy relationships.

I assure my hon. Friend the Member for East Kilbride and Strathaven and other Members that the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and I, along with many other ministerial colleagues, are looking across Baroness Burtin’s review for inspiration and action. On the ask to include this issue in the violence against women and girls strategy, I do not just hear it; I believe it—and I think I can confirm that it will be.

I have absolutely no doubt about the harms to the individuals involved in the pornography that my hon. Friend outlined, and also about the cross-fertilisation to other sites through algorithms. I remember my son telling me, when he was 14, that he had been watching the Sidemen—there is a sea of blank faces in Westminster; the Sidemen are very mainstream online influencers—and they had been roller-skating with a load of women from OnlyFans. That was painted as being completely legitimate. My son said it to me as if there was nothing in it at all. I am grateful that I have that relationship with my son, but I can also see that there is danger in that cross-fertilisation of the expectation that violent, misogynistic porn is the kind of sex or relationship I would want my sons to grow up with. I hear my hon. Friend’s cries and look forward to working with her.

Question put and agreed to.

Director of Labour Market Enforcement Annual Strategy 2025-26

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Monday 21st July 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

Alongside my hon Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Employment Rights, Competition and Markets (Justin Madders), I am publishing today the labour market enforcement annual strategy for 2025-26, submitted by the DLME Margaret Beels OBE. The strategy will be available on www.gov.uk.

The Director’s role was created by the Immigration Act 2016 to bring better focus and strategic co-ordination to the enforcement of labour market legislation by the three enforcement bodies which are responsible for state enforcement of specific employment rights:

The Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate (EAS);

His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs National Minimum and Living Wage enforcement team (HMRC NMW/NLW team); and

The Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA).

Under Section 2 of The Act, the Director is required to prepare an annual labour market enforcement strategy, which assesses the scale and nature of non-compliance in the labour market and sets priorities for future enforcement by the three enforcement bodies and the allocation of resources needed to deliver those priorities. The annual strategy, once approved, is laid before Parliament.

The Director is a statutory office-holder independent from Government, but accountable to the Department for Business and Trade’s Secretary of State and the Home Secretary.

In line with the obligations under the Act, Margaret Beels submitted this strategy for 2025-26 on 31 March 2025.

This strategy continues from the 2024-25 strategy by reinforcing the same four themes to provide an assessment of the scale and nature of non-compliance: improving the radar picture; improving focus and effectiveness; engage and support; and better joined-up thinking. The strategy also notes sectors where the risk level has changed and assesses that agriculture, hand car washes, construction and adult social care are the highest risk sectors for non-compliance.

The strategy also includes an additional theme on the Fair Work Agency (FWA) and the opportunities arising from implementing the FWA.

The creation of the FWA is central to this Government’s mission to grow living standards in every part of the UK by the end of this Parliament. It will bring together, in one place, the labour market state enforcement functions and the strategic oversight role currently undertaken by the DLME. This will address current fragmentation and improve accountability and effectiveness. In doing so it will level the playing field for the vast majority of employers who do right by their workers and ensure that those who don’t no longer have the leeway to exploit their workers.

The Government will carefully examine the recommendations emerging both from the strategy and the accompanying engagement with stakeholders, and will take these into account in the formulation of detailed plans for the FWA, as well as ongoing policy development on tackling illegal working and labour market exploitation.

I thank the DLME for her strategy and in particular her commitment to supporting the creation of this important new body.

[HCWS863]

Identification of Victims of Modern Slavery: Call for Evidence

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Wednesday 16th July 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

The national referral mechanism is the framework used in the UK to formally identify and support victims of modern slavery and human trafficking, in line with the UK’s legal obligations. Effective identification of victims of modern slavery in the UK is critical for ensuring that victims can be protected and provided with appropriate assistance and support towards their recovery from exploitation.

The Government are taking steps to improve this identification system, such as by recruiting new staff to reduce lengthy decision-making times, which has reduced the backlog to half the size it was at its peak. The Government have also updated the form used by first responders to refer potential victims of modern slavery into the NRM to make it easier to upload information and to include more trauma-informed language.

While progress has been made, the Government recognise the need to do more by designing an effective identification system that is fit for the future. That is why I am pleased to announce that the Government today are publishing a public call for evidence on identification of victims of modern slavery.

This was something that I committed to on 27 March 2025 in a House of Commons debate marking the 10th anniversary of the Modern Slavery Act 2015.

The call for evidence focuses on definitions of a victim of modern slavery, identification and decision-making processes, and future-proofing the modern slavery system. A key aim is to strengthen the system, both now and for the future, ensuring that it effectively serves victims of modern slavery and is resilient to future changes.

The call for evidence on identification of victims of modern slavery—  https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/identification-of-victims-of-modern-slavery  —will run for a 12-week period and provides a valuable opportunity for the public and a wide range of groups with experience of the NRM to have their say, including victims and survivors of modern slavery, NGOs, police, local authorities and researchers.

A copy of the call for evidence will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses and published on gov.uk.

[HCWS826]

Oral Answers to Questions

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Monday 7th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)]

5. What recent discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government on protecting domestic abuse victims from the perpetrators of that abuse with whom they share a joint tenancy.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

The Renters’ Rights Bill will allow individuals to end joint tenancies, supporting domestic abuse victims to leave their abuser if they share a home. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has announced a £30 million increase to the domestic abuse safe accommodation grant, raising the total funding in 2025-26 to £160 million.

[Alison Hume]

My constituent Molly is trapped in the house where she was violently attacked in front of her children. She is confined to living upstairs, because going into the room downstairs triggers her post-traumatic stress disorder. Despite the perpetrator of this abuse rightfully being in prison and having a restraining order of five years, Molly’s landlord has told her that they cannot take him off the lease, so she cannot move. Can the Minister confirm that the Government are taking steps to ensure that victims of domestic abuse, like Molly, can move on with their lives?

[Jess Phillips]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising Molly’s case—our hearts go out to her and her children for the trauma they are living with. Her case raises many issues, including the need for early intervention in domestic abuse cases, the need to improve therapeutic support for victims and, as my hon. Friend has said, the desperate need for reform of the rules around property rights in cases of economic and domestic abuse, so that women are not trapped. I cannot give my hon. Friend immediate answers on all those issues today, but I can promise that they will all be included in our upcoming strategy on violence against women and girls.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

While I have every sympathy with Molly and the millions of women who experience domestic abuse, according to the ManKind Initiative, one in five men are also victims of domestic abuse. My constituents Mark and Adam are victims of serial female abusers who engage in not only psychological, physical and financial abuse, but sexual abuse as well. What is being done to make sure there is space for men in refuges, and that there is training for police to ensure they believe these men? Often, they are burly chaps who have been in the Army, and people simply do not believe that they have been victims, which only compounds the problems they face.

[Jess Phillips]

We often refer to violence against women and girls, as the term refers to a group of crimes that are majoritively suffered by women at the hands of men, but of course men are also victims—both from other men and from women. The £30 million of extra funding that I mentioned in answer to the substantive question is for councils to provide accommodation in cases of domestic abuse under part 4 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. Local areas should be looking at the needs in their area and acting accordingly.

[Damian Hinds (East Hampshire) (Con)]

6. What recent assessment she has made of trends in the incidence of fraud.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

14. Whether she has had discussions with the Scottish Government on the national inquiry into grooming gangs.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

As the hon. Member will be aware, child protection and policing are devolved to the Scottish Government. We regularly engage with them on a range of issues, including the national inquiry into group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse that was announced by the Government. On 26 June, officials met to discuss the Government’s approach to the national inquiry, its remit and the expectation that relevant findings and lessons learned will be shared with the devolved Administrations, and we will continue to discuss this matter with our Scottish counterparts to ensure a comprehensive UK-wide response.

[John Lamont]

Senior Scottish advocate Sandra Brown has said that grooming gangs could be operating in every town and city in Scotland. This scandal affects the whole of the United Kingdom, so when will the Government extend the grooming gangs inquiry to Scotland? Surely all victims across all parts of the United Kingdom deserve justice.

[Jess Phillips]

Of course. I agree with the hon. Gentleman, but he should take up that issue with the Scottish Government, as it is devolved. As I have said, we will make sure that all learning is passed on to the devolved Administrations.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)]

The comments from my hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) relate to the question of whether it will be a national inquiry, rather than a co-ordination of a few local inquiries. All the victims and survivors deserve justice, so can the Minister please confirm for us today that every town and city with a grooming and rape gang will be part of the inquiry, including and especially where local authorities may not wish to be part of it?

[Jess Phillips]

To the hon. Lady’s question, whether a local authority wishes to take part is not up for debate. The inquiry will be decided by the chair of the inquiry, as would happen in a statutory independent inquiry, and that work will go on. When we have inquiries, we have to make sure that we actually live by the recommendations of those inquiries. That is why I ask the hon. Lady why she voted against mandatory reporting and making grooming an aggravated factor—those were recommendations from the last inquiry—when she was asked to vote for them.

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

T8.   The nationally recognised BRAVE—Building Resilience and Valuing Emotions—programme supported adult survivors of domestic abuse in Berkshire, but after our Conservative police and crime commissioner cut its funding by 25%, the scheme was left unviable. Does the Minister share my deep disappointment about this cut?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

Yes, I do. I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting the important work that BRAVE has done in Berkshire. Grassroots organisations are at the heart of work to support domestic abuse victims and the communities they live in. Tackling domestic abuse is at the heart of the Government’s mission and, I should hope, the mission of every police and crime commissioner.

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

The Mercure hotel in Stanwell in my constituency is used to house asylum seekers, and I have had multiple reports of asylum seekers there working illegally. Will the Department please put that on immigration enforcement’s radar, so that it can take the appropriate action?

--- Later in debate ---

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

T10. To what extent does the Minister agree that reform of the European convention on human rights, which can block us from deporting some foreign criminals, including paedophiles, should be a priority for the Government?

[Jess Phillips]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that it should be for Parliament and the Government to decide who has a right to remain in our country. As set out in our immigration White Paper, we intend to clarify these issues and the application of article 8 rights in the UK.

[Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)]

Less than three weeks ago, the Home Secretary whipped her Back Benchers against new clause 43 to the Crime and Policing Bill, which had cross-party support and would have criminalised the harassment of women and girls. Her Ministers promised at the Dispatch Box and elsewhere that the new clause was not necessary because the matter would be dealt with in the violence against women and girls strategy, which was meant to come out before the recess. We now hear that it is not coming out before the recess. Did Ministers misspeak at the Dispatch Box, or are they incompetent?

[Jess Phillips]

If the hon. Gentleman wishes to read the National Audit Office’s report on the previous Government’s violence against women and girls strategy, he will see that the strategy was found totally wanting.

[Mike Martin]

What about your strategy?

[Jess Phillips]

I will come to it. It was also undeliverable and untested. I want to ensure that the violence against women and girls strategy that goes out in this Government’s name is the best it can possibly be.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

One of my constituents found that, despite taking precautions, their identity had been assumed, and their PIN for online banking was changed. That was repeated across other accounts, and thousands of pounds were stolen. What steps is the Department taking to combat sophisticated cyber-crime and ensure that, in particular, older constituents like mine remain protected?

Crime and Policing Bill

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 18th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Nick Timothy]

I do not know whether the Minister is allowed to intervene, but she would be welcome to do so. [Interruption.] She has been here longer than I have.

[Jess Phillips]

We did discuss whether or not I was allowed to intervene. I have been involved with cases of harassment and malicious communications involving antisemitism and anti-Jewish hatred. Is the hon. Gentleman suggesting that criticising Jewish people should be allowed?

[Nick Timothy]

No, I think the Minister has misunderstood my point. Actually, I was about to move on to a related issue, which is that hating people and discriminating against them on the basis that they are Muslims, or indeed members of different religious groups, is already a crime. If someone were harassing Jewish people in the way that the Minister has just described, that would be a criminal offence, even if my amendment passed. However, as I was saying, Islamophobia is a made-up and nonsensical concept that elides the protection of individuals from hatred with the protection of ideas and beliefs, and—in my view—is therefore completely unacceptable in principle.

Prostitution and Sex Trafficking: Demand

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Tuesday 10th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) for securing the debate. The depth of her knowledge and passion about this issue was obvious as she spoke. The men she spoke of in her opening remarks, and the reviews that she read out—she could have read out some that were considerably worse, so the House may appreciate the editing—are utterly despicable. Those men disgust me in their attitude towards women generally, and the suggestion that they should be able to pay for somebody’s horror and then give them a bad review should not sit well with anyone.

Like my hon. Friend, I have a long-standing interest in these issues. I have worked for many years with women trafficked for sex, women sold into sexual slavery from childhood and women forced into sexual exploitation essentially through their circumstances. Today, I still very regularly meet such people. I met some women who were in that situation, or had been in it historically, just last week. We all want to be driven by their voices. I am deeply grateful to everyone who continues to advocate for action to tackle demand for prostitution and sex trafficking and for better support for victims and survivors to recover. The idea that people should be criminalised for it is something that worries us all.

Before I respond to some of the specific points, it is worth outlining that sexual exploitation can take different forms. The trafficking of individuals for sexual exploitation is modern slavery. The demand for sexual services is undoubtedly driving that horrific crime. The profit that criminals are making from that exploitation makes it even more sickening. For too long, women and vulnerable people have been trapped in sexual exploitation under the guise of prostitution. The daily abuse that they suffer is truly horrific, and my hon. Friend spoke to that.

Any individual who wants to leave prostitution, or who has been sexually exploited, must be given the opportunities to find routes out and to recover. Let us be clear about the scale of this problem; the nature of it makes it difficult to accurately estimate the numbers, but it is something that we have looked at. Research commissioned by the Home Office and conducted by the University of Bristol found that it is not possible to produce a single prevalence estimate for prostitution; however, it assessed a number of existing estimates made over the last 25 years, which range from 35,882 to 104,964 people.

We know that potential victims of trafficking for sexual exploitation make up a large proportion of referrals to the national referral mechanism, which is the framework for identifying and referring potential victims of modern slavery to appropriate support. The most recent statistics show that in 2024 sexual exploitation either partly or wholly accounted for 3,266, or 17%, of all referrals. Of those who are sexually exploited, the majority were female, at 79%. However, prosecutions under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 do not reflect that.

I am determined to see more trafficking offenders brought to justice. In my modern slavery action plan, I have set out actions we will take together with criminal justice system partners to improve criminal justice outcomes for all modern slavery offences, including the trafficking of individuals for sexual exploitation. Prostitution offences and modern slavery are complex and multifaceted crimes, which are often linked to other offending, and people are often victims of multiple elements. Because of that, we have a multifaceted approach, including the tackling violence against women and girls strategy, a commitment to halve violence against women and girls crimes within a decade, and our modern slavery action plan. We will continue to tackle the threat from all angles.

It is clear that much more must be done. We must go further to prevent sexual exploitation by supporting law enforcement to identify and prosecute exploiters and by disrupting the sexual exploitation that is facilitated by online platforms, as hon. Members have mentioned. More broadly, through Safer Streets, we have committed to halving violence against women and girls in a decade. That effort will be underpinned by the new VAWG strategy to be published this year. I do not want to step on its toes and say what will be in it, as it has not yet been published. I would also probably be fired if I did—actually, I do not think I would be. For the first time, adult sexual exploitation, and the proper understanding of it, will be reflected. As we develop the new strategy and work to tackle modern slavery, we are considering how to tackle the issues raised today and ensure that victims and survivors are supported to recover.

I suspect that everyone in this Chamber is aware of the ongoing debates about the legislative approaches that have been mentioned. I look forward to having further conversations with my hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi)—I have already spoken to her many times about this—when the Crime and Policing Bill reaches Report stage next week. Anyone who has worked with me on such issues knows that my primary focus is on outcomes that improve lives.

I want to stress this clearly: legislation alone does nothing. It is illegal to commit domestic abuse—welcome to the world. Twenty-five per cent of referrals to the national referral mechanism come from children being forced into slavery for drug trafficking, but drugs are illegal. The idea that we can write something into legislation that, in and of itself, will solve this problem overnight is absolutely for the birds. The illegality of drugs has not stopped the trafficking of children for drugs in our country, so we have to look at legislative models and at what will actually work. I am only interested in actual outcomes.

As the Minister, I will use every lever available to me to clamp down on sexual exploitation. The Government’s position will be informed by the views of victims and survivors, the voluntary and community sector, which works directly with victims and survivors, the police and others.

In the time I have left, I want to talk about adult service websites. As Members are aware, the online space is a significant enabler of sexual exploitation, and our response needs to reflect that. Online platforms must be responsible and held accountable for the content on their sites, and must take proactive steps to prevent criminals from using their sites. We are implementing the Online Safety Act 2023, which sets out priority offences, including sexual exploitation and human trafficking offences. Online platforms now have a duty to assess the risk of illegal harms on their services. As of 17 March, they need to implement safety measures to protect users from illegal content, such as that set out in Ofcom’s codes of practice, or face significant penalties.

We are going further. Clause 13 of the Crime and Policing Bill will equip law enforcement with new tools to disrupt sexual exploitation that is facilitated through online platforms. Law enforcement will be able to apply to the courts for an order to suspend the IP and domain names for the specified period of up to 12 months when they are being used for serious crime, including offences relating to sexual exploitation—it will not take us very long to find one that is. We are in the foothills of this legislation being rolled out, but I look forward to some clear action being taken.

The Government are further supporting law enforcement to tackle the drivers of trafficking and sexual exploitation through operational activity aimed at tackling modern slavery threats and targeting prolific perpetrators. The Government will keep policies to tackle online enablers of sexual exploitation under review. We want to ensure online companies fulfil their duty to eradicate exploitation from their sites, and we will take further action to achieve that if necessary.

To those sites—those of us who have worked in this area know what they are—I say this. We are coming for you; the law is not on your side. You must be cleaned up or further regulation will have to come. We cannot have sites on which people can buy and sell human beings.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh North and Leith for securing this debate, and I look forward to the debates that we will have as the legislation progresses.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jess Phillips Excerpts

Monday 2nd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)]

8. What steps her Department is taking to help tackle violence against women and girls.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

We are already taking significant steps to make sure that violence against women and girls is treated as the national emergency that it is. That includes launching our domestic abuse protection orders, and investing almost £20 million this year in specialist services for victims and in projects to help prevent VAWG and improve our response to it. Later this year, we will publish our cross-Government VAWG strategy, which will set out our long-term plan to tackle the crisis.

[Joe Morris]

For some families of victims, further review of release decisions can provide some solace, but it cannot do so for my constituent Doreen Soulsby. Her daughter’s murderer was released before the Victims and Courts Bill passed through this place. Will the Minister meet Doreen and me to discuss clause 61 of the Bill and the release of life prisoners?

[Jess Phillips]

Yes, of course. As my hon. Friend knows, I have had a strong bond with Doreen for many years. Of course I would be delighted to meet him and her.

[Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)]

Research undertaken by Women for Refugee Women has found that banning work for women seeking asylum leads many women, sadly, to stay in unwanted and abusive relationships. Will the Minister consider lifting the ban on asylum seekers working, and will she specifically include women seeking asylum in the Government’s upcoming strategy to tackle violence against women and girls?

[Jess Phillips]

It is well beyond my remit as safeguarding Minister to make asylum policy, but I can absolutely guarantee the hon. Lady that migrant women and their experiences will be part of the violence against women and girls strategy; this issue has received some of the money from the recent uplift in victim services. Working together with by-and-for services across the country, we will always take account of the experiences of all women and girls in our country.

[Mr Speaker]

I call shadow Minister Katie Lam.

[Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)]

On 28 April, the Minister was clear with this House that the framework for local grooming gang inquiries and Baroness Casey’s audit would both be published in May. It is now June. Presumably there is a new timeline for publishing them, so will the Minister share it with us, please?

[Jess Phillips]

I thank the hon. Lady for her question and I apologise for the month’s wait. I waited 14 years for anyone to do anything. Baroness Casey has requested a short extension to her work from the Home Secretary, and the Home Secretary has informed the Home Affairs Committee of this. We expect the report very shortly, and when we have it, the Government will respond to it, and will lay out their plans with all the evidence in hand.

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

9. What steps her Department is taking to help tackle knife crime.

--- Later in debate ---

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

12. If she will establish a national statutory inquiry into rape gangs.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

Child sexual exploitation and abuse are the most horrific crimes, and the Government are taking decisive action to ensure that victims and survivors of grooming gangs get the justice that they deserve. We are delivering on the key recommendations of the seven-year independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, including the recommendation on mandatory reporting; we have asked all police forces in England and Wales to review historical cases in which no further action was taken, and to reopen investigations; and we have commissioned Baroness Louise Casey to conduct a national audit of the nature and scale of grooming gangs and this offending in this country. We will leave no stone unturned in the pursuit of truth and justice.

[Graham Stuart]

Senior figures in the Catholic Church and the Church of England were found to have conspired to cover up child abuse by priests. Senior figures in the Labour party are now opposing local inquiries in places such as Bradford, London and Wales, and Ministers here oppose a national rape inquiry. We have also heard from a former Labour Member of Parliament, Simon Danczuk, that he was told not to raise the issue of the ethnicity of some of the perpetrators. When will Labour put aside its electoral interests and stand on the side of the abused?

[Jess Phillips]

The idea that I or the Prime Minister have ever put anything other than the interests of the victims of grooming gangs at the heart of everything that we have ever worked for is, frankly, for the birds. We have increased the number of arrests of the perpetrators that the right hon. Gentleman talks about. We will continue to pursue these violent, abusive, vicious abusers through the courts—through justice—and I will continue to take my counsel not from him but from the victims in this country.

[Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)]

15. Whether her proposal to increase the standard qualifying period for settlement to 10 years would apply retrospectively.

--- Later in debate ---

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

At a recent roundtable on violence against women and girls hosted by the Mayor of West Yorkshire, we heard from local organisations that do outstanding work but are hampered by short-term funding, as well as from a brave survivor who shared her experiences. They specifically asked for the Government to commit to strategic investment. Will the Minister review contracts with the sector so they are multi-year and take a long-term view of service delivery and preventive work?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

My hon. Friend makes an important point that short-term funding massively hampers the sector. The vast majority of violence against women and girls funding comes from local authorities and, in fact, other Departments, but I will absolutely commit to looking at how the Home Office manages its contracts to ensure sustainability.