The United Kingdom’s national inquiry into grooming gangs has reached a dramatic crossroads, with a wave of resignations and political infighting threatening its credibility and future. On October 23, 2025, four survivors—members of the inquiry’s victims liaison panel—resigned en masse, demanding the resignation of safeguarding minister Jess Phillips and citing a breakdown of trust, poor consultation, and concerns over the inquiry’s direction. Their departure, the latest in a string of setbacks, has left the government scrambling to restore faith in an investigation designed to address decades of institutional failures in protecting vulnerable children from group-based sexual exploitation.
According to Sky News, the four survivors—Ellie-Ann Reynolds, Fiona Goddard, Elizabeth Harper, and a woman known as Jessica—addressed a letter to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, expressing their frustration and sense of betrayal. They wrote, “When we agreed to join this panel, we did so in good faith, believing that after decades of being dismissed, silenced, and called liars by the very institutions meant to protect us, things might finally be different. Instead, we have watched history repeat itself.” The letter went on to accuse the government of fostering a “toxic, fearful environment” where survivor concerns were ignored or publicly contradicted.
The survivors’ demands are unambiguous: Jess Phillips must resign, an independent judge should lead the inquiry, survivors must be genuinely consulted on the appointment of a new chair, and the inquiry’s scope must remain tightly focused on grooming gangs and group-based child sexual exploitation. They also called for the replacement of the current victim liaison lead with a mental health professional and insisted that victims be able to speak freely without fear of reprisal. As the panelists stated, “We will not participate in an inquiry that repeats those same patterns of dismissal, secrecy, and institutional self-protection.”
The government, however, has stood firmly behind Jess Phillips. Education minister Josh MacAlister told Sky News that Phillips “has the full backing of the prime minister and the home secretary.” He described her as a “lifelong advocate and champion for young girls who’ve been abused,” adding, “She has already shown that she’s properly engaging with the survivor community.” Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer echoed this support in the House of Commons, stating, “Alongside her will be Louise Casey, these two individuals have spent decades, decades, standing up for those who have been abused and sexually exploited, and I absolutely think they’re the right people to take this forward.”
Yet the rift between survivors and officials has only deepened. Ellie-Ann Reynolds, one of the resigning panelists, told The Times that the “final turning point” was the government’s push to broaden the inquiry’s remit, which she said risked downplaying the racial and religious motivations behind the abuse. Leaked documents confirmed that such discussions had indeed taken place, despite Jess Phillips’s denial in a letter to the Home Affairs Select Committee: “It has been reported that the government is seeking to dilute the focus of the inquiry, either by instructing it to take a regional approach to investigations or by expanding the scope beyond ‘grooming gangs’. This is also untrue.” For survivors, being publicly contradicted by a government minister was, as they wrote, “a betrayal that has destroyed what little trust remained.”
The political fallout has been swift and severe. Former Labour minister Tony McNulty joined calls for Phillips to step down, telling Times Radio, “The inquiry is more important than the minister and the minister should go.” He added, “The issue around the inquiry on grooming is far, far too important to risk by salvaging the reputational post of an individual.” Meanwhile, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch accused Labour of “attacking the victims” and claimed, “Labour never wanted this inquiry, we demanded it.” She pointed to Labour-run councils in Trafford, Bradford, and Blackpool as examples of local authorities that “tried to suppress the truth.”
The crisis deepened further when Jim Gamble, a former police officer and the only remaining candidate to chair the inquiry, withdrew from consideration on October 22, 2025. In his public withdrawal letter, Gamble cited a “lack of confidence” from some survivors due to his previous occupation in law enforcement. He criticized politicians for “playing games” and prioritizing “their own petty personal or political issues” over the needs of victims. Speaking to Sky News, Gamble said, “I think the growing level of toxicity and the fact that in the midst of lots of misinformation, I think many of the victims and survivors were being disrespected and misinformed, and have a genuine feeling that some of that was about people using and abusing their position and influence with them.”
Gamble’s withdrawal followed that of Annie Hudson, a former director of children’s services for Lambeth, who reportedly stepped back after survivors raised concerns about her links to social services. With both candidates gone, the government now faces the challenge of finding a new, acceptable chair for the inquiry. A Home Office spokesperson acknowledged, “We are disappointed that candidates to chair that inquiry have withdrawn. This is an extremely sensitive topic, and we have to take the time to appoint the best person suitable for the role.”
In a bid to stabilize the inquiry, Sir Keir Starmer announced that Baroness Louise Casey, a respected government troubleshooter, would be brought in to support the probe. Baroness Casey’s previous work includes a national audit of group-based child sexual exploitation, which found that organizations often avoided discussing “ethnicity or cultural factors” for fear of appearing racist. Her findings prompted the creation of the current inquiry. Starmer told Parliament, “It will examine the ethnicity and religion of the offenders, and we will find the right person to chair the inquiry.”
Survivors and advocacy groups, however, remain wary. Lucy Duckworth of The Survivors Trust urged the government to implement the recommendations of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) before launching another investigation. She emphasized, “Spending £180 million … speaking to 7,500 survivors for the IICSA will not be in complete vain.” None of the IICSA’s key recommendations have been implemented, she argued, despite their clarity and urgency. Duckworth lamented the “shameful politicisation of survivors and their voices,” warning that the real impact of abuse risks being lost amid political maneuvering.
As the inquiry stalls, survivors warn that—without fundamental changes—it risks becoming “yet another exercise in protecting the reputations of failed institutions rather than seeking truth and justice for victims.” Their demands for a judge-led, survivor-focused process are not mere procedural quibbles; they are a litmus test for whether the UK can finally break the cycle of institutional self-protection and deliver justice to those who have suffered most.
For now, the future of the grooming gangs inquiry hangs in the balance. The government’s refusal to meet survivors’ conditions has left the panel gutted and the investigation’s credibility in question. Whether the inquiry can recover and fulfill its promise to survivors remains to be seen, but one thing is certain: the voices of those most affected will not be easily silenced again.
