[ad_1]
There were two statements by Braverman in the Commons. Only one of them really matters and it’s not the one who made the comment. This is the Home Office’s official response to IICSA’s final report and 20 recommendations for an effective and comprehensive system to protect children from what the inquiry chair described as “national epidemic” of abuse. This inquiry was established in March 2015 by Mrs. May after evidence that many institutions were not only failing to protect children from sexual abuse but actively endangering them. It produced 52 reports on various bodies: churches, authorities local, schools, care homes, sports bodies etc. No body can be considered safe for children, even those prepared to help them. The scale of evidence taken is amazing: more than 6,000 victims, 725 witnesses and 325 public hearings The last report was published last October. The government has had 7 months to consider the recommendations and prepare its response. On Monday, Suella came to the Commons to tell what the government will do.
And what is that action? Well, not very frankly. Like Braverman’s statement to the House, it amounts to nothing more than a bunch of well-crafted platitudes, promising to think about some recommendations, consider them, go out for consultation, accept some others”in principle“but subject to more”assessment“so that we can take more evidence, reviews, talk, words and waffles. But from the actual actions and implementation of the Recommendations, there is a precious little sign. Is seven and a half years and IICSA extensive research and evidence not enough? Apparently not.
The government has not accepted all these recommendations or not watered them. It has not even implemented the recommendations of the previous report.
- Take the recommendation to have a special Minister for Children: this was rejected, the presence of the Education Secretary was considered sufficient. We have had 10 Education Secretaries in 13 years (5 in the last year) with the likes of Gavin Williamson and Nadim Zahawi in the role. How can this department properly focus on preventing child sexual abuse?
- What about the Child Protection Authority? No – more thought is required.
- Same with the proposal for a compensation and therapy scheme for the victims.
- Even the proposal to ban “pain compliance technique” has been rejected because this can be used correctly if there is a suitable procedure. Of course they can.
This is an unfortunate response to what has been – and continues to be – a serious problem, one of the worst crimes ever committed – and against one of the weakest and most vulnerable groups in our society. It is no surprise that the Chairman of IICSA and the Victims and Survivors Consultation Panel stated “deep disappointment“Said that the government’s response”will not provide the protection from sexual abuse that our children deserve.“Sarah Champion MP could not contain her anger in the Commons saying that”accepting the need to act is not the same as acting“. That sums up this government’s approach to everything. Act like a passerby at the scene of the accident, wringing his hands while expressing how ghastly it all is. Don’t they know that they have the power, they have the majority and not only can they act but they really want to?
In recent years, there have been many questions about bad behavior. It has all been an exercise in kicking embarrassing stories into the long grass until everyone concerned has died or given up and the politicians/administrators in charge have moved on, in a face-saving exercise to create the illusion of action. That’s pretty much what’s going to happen to those who are still going: those involved in the blood contamination scandal, for example, because of the report this fall. Or the Post Office. This will happen with the latest police report, although the Met deserves a medal for ensuring that, on the day the Mayor announced the establishment of the London Police Council (which “Londoners with diverse life experiences” – as opposed to those unlived large – invited to apply), the first police officer will be disciplined (rightly) in relation to failure through Wayne Couzens is a woman. (His actions – failing to properly investigate the indecent exposure at the fast food restaurant before the crime killed him and then lying about it – were unprofessional. As was the failure of those who hired him, failure to do due diligence, failure to act. on the flag red earlier, failed to investigate previous sexual allegations against him and promoted him for the past three years. Should we bet on how many of them will be severely disciplined?)
What makes the inaction by the Home Office so despicable is the contrast with the way politicians jump on these issues when they think they look good or that they can attack their enemies. Suella Braverman did just that with recent comments about grooming gangs and ethnicity, admitting that political correctness prevents action. But when given the opportunity to act his department did nothing. Starmer’s response was to raise in the Lords a man who used false allegations of child abuse to attack his political opponents. A miscarriage of justice by anyone but an appalling ex-DPP.
Rishi Sunak likes to talk about “our children are precious“. Yes, they are expensive. They depend on us to do it right. They sacrifice us for the future. They deserve more than this.
Cycle free
[ad_2]
Source link