Oral evidence: Child sexual exploitation and the response to localised grooming: follow-up, HC 203Tuesday 9 September 2014

Oral evidence, 9 September 2014.

Witnesses

Martin Kimber, Chief Executive, Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, and Joyce Thacker, Strategic Director for Children, Young People and Families, Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, gave evidence on oath.

Chair

May I ask colleagues to ensure that for these witnesses, we accept for the record the information that has been given so far. Mr Kimber and Mrs Thacker, the Committee has decided that all witnesses giving evidence today should be put on oath. Under the Parliamentary Witnesses Oaths Act 1871 and the Perjury Act, false evidence given to the Committee under oath will be the subject of penalties for perjury and the Clerk will now administer the oath to both of you.

Joyce Thacker

I swear by Almighty God that the evidence I shall give before the Committee shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

Martin Kimber

I swear by Almighty God that the evidence I shall give before the Committee shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

Chair

Mr Kimber, yesterday you announced your resignation as the Chief Executive of the council.

Martin Kimber

I did, sir.

Chair

Why did you resign, Mr Kimber?

Martin Kimber

I had attended a Cabinet meeting the week before. It was a deeply emotional meeting. I was horrified at the scale of the sexual abuse that had been uncovered across Rotherham. I feel terribly sorry for all of the victims, all of their families. I asked myself whether I felt I could have done any more. I accept my share of responsibility. I felt that in the context of Rotherham people—and the town has been badly, badly shaken by this—that it would be far easier for the town to be able to come out of the grieving process and begin healing if it has visible new leadership, and that is why I took that decision.

Chair

Indeed. The Committee welcomes that decision. On reflection, do you think you should have resigned when your leader of your council resigned as soon as the report was published?

Martin Kimber

No, on reflection I don’t, because I think the report says some positive things about what has happened within Rotherham during my tenure. I did want time to reflect on the report and, as I have already indicated, one of the questions I have asked is whether I felt I could have done more. Certainly I would have wished to have done far more, so I think I took the decision at the right time.

Chair

Yes. You are currently on a salary of £130,000 a year.

Martin Kimber

No, it is more than that, sir. It is £160,000.

Chair

£160,000?

Martin Kimber

That is right, sir.

Chair

So you will resign in December with a full pension, is that right?

Martin Kimber

I have pension entitlement. I have not decided whether I shall take that or not. Under the pension rules I have broad flexibilities. I have given my resignation, three months’ contractual notice, which of course—

Chair

Are you entitled to any compensation for that?

Martin Kimber

There is no compensation. I have had no such discussion and neither would I, just for the record.

Chair

Now you say you take your share of responsibility, which as I say the Committee welcomes, but you went before the council and you talked about other officers and the way in which the council has dealt with this matter over a number of years. I appreciate you became Chief Executive in 2009 but some of this relates to the period 2009-14.

Martin Kimber

It does, sir, yes.

Chair

It does, yes. You found that there was insufficient evidence to refer any individual—including, for example, Joyce Thacker—for disciplinary hearings. Is that right?

Martin Kimber

In the context of the report, which is very general, that is correct. The report provides an evidence base for me to look at a range of other things and I am currently looking at a range of other things.

Chair

But you understand the concerns of the public, and indeed Parliament. Here we have a situation where we have heard of industrial scales of child abuse, the resignation of the leader of the council, your own resignation because you feel you are partly responsible for what has happened and the failure to act. But at the end of the day, nobody is disciplined, nobody is referred for further action. Mrs Thacker retains her position, which she has held—which has been intimate to these discussions—over a long period of time. You have not recommended anyone being suspended. You have not criticised anyone. You have not disciplined anyone. You have taken it all on your shoulders and you are waiting until December to finally give up. It is an orderly transition. It is not a kind of emergency decision like Councillor Stone’s, is it?

Martin Kimber

No, sir.

Chair

You understand the concern of the public: nobody seems to be held to account.

Martin Kimber

No, sir, that is not the position. As I have indicated, the report provides information to enable me to undertake further inquiries but, of itself, it does not give me sufficient information to be able to consider disciplinary action. So I am in the process of doing a number of things—

Chair

Sorry, insufficient evidence. Whose advice did you take on that? Because you are the Chief Executive, presumably you will have taken legal advice—

Martin Kimber

I have indeed.

Chair

—as to whether or not people have done so.

Martin Kimber

I have indeed taken—

Chair

Is that internal advice from your borough solicitor?

Martin Kimber

No, I have taken legal advice twice from leading counsel on the approach that I should follow.

Chair

Is it your worry that if you start disciplining people—like, for example, Mrs Thacker or somebody else in the council who is intimately involved in these matters—that they might then turn around and take the council to court? Is that the worry you have?

Martin Kimber

I have no worries, sir. During the course of my tenure there have been several disciplinary actions, including people working within Children and Young People’s Services. They have always been undertaken properly, having regard to the council’s policies and of course employment rights, and so—

Chair

We understand the employment issues, please do not misunderstand me. We are concerned with what Professor Jay said that there was a collective failure of political and officer leadership.

Martin Kimber

Yes.

Chair

That is more than Mr Stone and you, is it not? You are not the entire officer leadership.

Martin Kimber

We are dealing with a period of time here that stretches across 17 years.

Chair

Sure, but in the period that you have been chief executive. We are not talking about prior to 2009. Even though it may be that you knew about Rotherham Council, we cannot hold you responsible for that. In respect of 2009 to 2014, you were the chief executive but there were other officers. Professor Jay is not just talking about you, is she?

Martin Kimber

No, but Professor Jay, when she talks about collective leadership, is not talking about the period from 2010 to 2014, where indeed she acknowledges there has been substantial improvement. She is talking about a prior period of time across the full range of her study from 1997 through to 2013.

Chair

Sure. But in the report of 2005—the Rotherham child abuse report that led to the famous seminar—this is the conclusion, “Nobody could say I didn’t know about child sexual exploitation”.

Martin Kimber

Yes, the report does say that.

Chair

Joyce Thacker, who is sitting on your left, who is the head of Children’s Services, chaired an organisation called Risky Business. This Committee has heard compelling evidence from witnesses in private—including the head of Risky Business, Jayne Senior—in which it is very, very clear that Joyce Thacker had in her possession detailed reports about child sex grooming in Rotherham, and nothing was done about it.

Martin Kimber

That is the first time that knowledge has come before me today.

Chair

So there is other information that you do not have?

Martin Kimber

It appears so, and indeed—

Chair

You mean you never asked about Joyce Thacker’s position on Risky Business? You did not know she was chair of the steering group?

Martin Kimber

I am sorry, sir, I wasn’t avoiding—

Chair

No, no, it is okay, you can wait until the bell finishes. We have plenty of time. Mr Kimber, we are going to adjourn the Committee. You can have time to reflect on my question and I will come back and ask it to you again. We will then be seeing Commissioner Wright after you and Mrs Thacker. Thank you. The Committee is adjourned for 10 minutes. Sitting suspended for a Division in the House. On resuming-

Chair

I call the Committee back to order now that we are quorate. Mr Kimber, I put to you, I asked you whether you knew that Joyce Thacker was the chair of the steering group of Risky Business. Did you know that?

Martin Kimber

I didn’t, sir, no.

Chair

You didn’t?

Martin Kimber

No.

Chair

Have you heard of Risky Business?

Martin Kimber

Yes, I know it well.

Chair

How often do you meet Joyce Thacker?

Martin Kimber

I meet with Joyce on a daily basis.

Chair

Has she ever disclosed to you that prior to becoming the Director of Children’s Services, she chaired the steering group of Risky Business?

Martin Kimber

I am testing my memory, sir, because I don’t want to mislead. I don’t think that has ever been expressed to me but I am testing my memory.

Chair

What I and other members of the Committee and the public must think is here is Mr Kimber; he is a decent man; he has taken his share of responsibility; he is stepping down as chief executive in December; he has not decided whether or not to take his full pension, he is going to think about that; but he has come along to the council and he has said, “All other council officers seem to have behaved sufficiently well for nobody to be referred for disciplinary action”. On the other hand, we have a very big and substantial report from Professor Jay that talks about collective failures of political and officer leadership over a number of years. We have the Home Secretary coming before the House of Commons announcing another inquiry into Rotherham. We have everyone saying how dreadful the situation is and how they have failed to act in an appropriate way, but the head of children’s services is still in place. We are talking about very serious allegations of abuse going over a number of years, of course some very recently—we have just heard from the Chief Constable, 25 new cases since the Jay Report was published—but you have suspended nobody. You have asked nobody to stand aside even temporarily; you have referred nobody for disciplinary action at all. Irrespective of the Jay Report, your instinct has not been to try to clear out the stable. Why is Joyce Thacker still in her position, bearing in mind the Committee and the public have heard so much about the problem with children’s services?

Martin Kimber

My instinct, sir, is to do things properly. As I have already indicated to you, I have taken advice on the appropriate approach. The Jay Report provides me with some base information but it lacks specificity and the reason for that is to protect anonymity, as you would expect. Consequently I am doing a number of things to add to the information base, including having asked Professor Jay a number of questions to assist me.

Chair

No, we are not talking about the criminal investigations. We are talking about the job that you have, for which you are paid £160,000, to be able to reassure the public that your chief officers are doing their job properly. The Home Secretary has announced an inquiry into Rotherham and the person who presumably controls the files of children’s services in Rotherham is one of the people who presumably is going to be subject to the most intense scrutiny, Joyce Thacker, but you have left her in place. This is what I can’t understand. You have not even said, “Will you stand aside while this inquiry is going on?” You have left her and all of her colleagues in their positions. I find this very hard to understand.

Martin Kimber

I have indicated, sir, that I am in the process of going through to take additional information. You can be reassured if that additional information tells me that I need to do anything, I will do it. I have evidence in place that I have taken such decisions in the past and I will do so in the future if I need to, quite properly—

Chair

Sorry to speak over you, Mr Kimber, but since you gave evidence to this Committee two years ago, tell me how many senior council officers involved with children’s services have been asked to leave by you as chief executive? Not now because of the Jay Report but since the articles by Andrew Norfolk appeared and since our last report 18 months ago, tell me the name of one officer who has been asked to leave.

Martin Kimber

No one has been asked to leave, sir, but as I have already indicated to you, there is a range of evidence, including the Jay Report itself, which indicates that at least since 2010 services have been fit for purpose, albeit clearly there needs to be improvement. It is also clear from the report that there have been some very severe failings in the past.

Chair

We know all the good news because that was the first line of your press release. We read that. Joyce Thacker, you have been involved in Rotherham Council since 2006 when you joined as deputy head of children’s services.

Joyce Thacker

Yes.

Chair

What responsibility do you take as a result of this damning report by Professor Jay?

Joyce Thacker

Firstly, can I say that we commissioned this report in Rotherham? We wanted to lay bare what had gone on for years and years and this was an opportunity to do that, Chair. It has been very hard over the years to get this as a priority in the council, to get it understood, and we were very grateful to Andrew Norfolk for his exposé in The Times. It might not have felt like that at the time but it enabled us to get it on the agenda and then we commissioned this report so we could understand the scale of the issue. Quite frankly, the scale of the issue is shocking. We didn’t know that, but we wanted this report commissioned so we could understand what had gone on for many, many years in Rotherham.

Chair

Are you telling this Committee that until this report was published you knew nothing about the scale of child grooming, irrespective of the report published by this Committee 18 months ago, irrespective of what you yourself knew as chair of the steering group of Risky Business, when a report, this file, was passed to you containing a huge amount of information about the crime of grooming that was taking place while you were chair of Risky Business? You are telling me and this Committee that you needed Professor Jay to tell you this; you did not know yourself?

Joyce Thacker

I have known ever since I have been involved in Rotherham, and indeed chaired the Risky Business project, that there was a huge issue of child sexual exploitation in the town. There was a small group of people in a small project, a youth line project, who were desperately trying to get their voice heard, and I agreed to take on chairing this as the independent chair so I could help pull partners together. They were finding it incredibly difficult to get people to listen to them and have their voice heard.

Chair

If you knew about this, what have you been doing about it since 2006 when you have had an enormous amount of power as the head of children’s services? For part of that time your lead councillor was Shaun Wright, who is now the police and crime commissioner, who will be giving evidence shortly to this Committee. You and Shaun Wright knew about the scale of child abuse. Is that right?

Joyce Thacker

We knew about child sexual exploitation, child abuse, admittedly, but we did not know about the scale of it. We had reports from Risky Business annually that set out who they were working with. Those reports were regularly brought to the Area Child Protection Committee, as it was, and then into the Safeguarding Children Board. Those reports came regularly and set out what the priorities were in the work that we were trying to do. Since you have asked me what I have done, I have worked hard to improve things in Rotherham, to make sure that it was understood that it was everyone’s business tackling this.

Chair

Yes, but, Mrs Thacker, I don’t think the Committee thinks that you have done enough over the years. My question to you is: why are you still in post, bearing in mind you were the deputy head of children’s services from 2006; you became the head of children’s services; prior to that you headed Risky Business. You have known about this all along. You are one of the threads in respect of what has been happening. Why are you still in post? Why have you not gone to Mr Kimber and said, “Given the responsibility that I have as the head of children’s services, I will step aside while this inquiry that has been commissioned by the Home Secretary takes place. Either I will resign, like Mr Kimber has done, or I will step aside because I control all the files and all the information in this department”? Why have you not resigned?

Joyce Thacker

I have given that a lot of thought, I can assure you, Chair, and I am not stepping aside for the simple reason that I remain accountable to the people, the children and families of Rotherham. I take personal responsibility for every incident of child abuse and I work tirelessly with my staff. When I first took on my position there was 43% vacancies in children’s services. Every post was covered by agency workers and I have worked extremely hard to make sure that we are now, for example, at 4% vacancy level. I have made sure that our staff take their responsibilities seriously.

Chair

Mrs Thacker, we have heard you before, 18 months ago when we knew about this, and you said everything was going fine. We have had evidence today that you knew about this even earlier, hence the file that the Committee has obtained. You knew about all this. How could you be accountable to the people of Rotherham and the children of Rotherham when you have failed them in such a way. Shouldn’t you in all decency and honesty step aside from your post to allow others to be able to do a proper investigation into what has happened? You clearly have not been able to do anything in this job for all these years. Why do you think you are going to do things now?

Joyce Thacker

I am sorry, Chair, I do not accept what you are saying. I have worked extremely hard to improve services in Rotherham. I have made sure that we have brought in good, resourced services. I have fought hard to protect front-line social care when budgets were under desperate pressure. I have made sure that we have a fully accomplished child sexual exploitation team. I have worked hard with colleagues to make sure we have a good offer today. It clearly has more to improve on, but I do think I take my responsibilities very seriously and, no, I do not intend to resign from my position.

Chair

In 2005, a report written said, “Nobody could say I didn’t know about child sexual exploitation”. You are just telling the Committee today that you do not think your voice was heard, so who was not listening? Was it Mr Stone? Was it Mr Kimber? Was it Mr Wright, who previously was the lead councillor? Who was not listening to you, Mrs Thacker? Who is responsible? If you are not responsible, who did not listen when you tried to raise this issue?

Joyce Thacker

I actually took the position in Rotherham. I did not have to come and work in Rotherham.

Chair

No, sorry, I want to know who did not listen to you. You have just told the Committee that you tried to do something but people were not listening. Who was it? Was it Mr Kimber? Was it his predecessor? Was it Councillor Stone? Was it Mr Wright? Was it other councillors? Was it the police chief? Was it the Crown Prosecution Service? Who failed you?

Joyce Thacker

Locally, at the time, when I was chair of Risky Business for I think it was 2005—I cannot recollect exactly the day I started chairing Risky Business but I think I started chairing from about 2005—I can remember vividly—

Chair

No, who failed you? Your memory is very—

Joyce Thacker

I am trying to explain to you, Chair, how it works.

Chair

No, I want to know who you think. I know how it works. I think the Committee knows how it works. We have looked at this issue for a number of years. Who failed you? Who did not act when you turned up at those meetings with Mr Kimber and you said, “Look, Mr Kimber, why don’t we take appropriate action?” Who did not do what you wanted: Mr Wright, Mr Kimber, Mr Stone, the Chief Constable? Who did not do what you wanted?

Joyce Thacker

Mr Kimber has always taken appropriate action. He has supported us in the improvements that we have made since 2010. When Mr Kimber arrived—

Chair

Okay, so it is not Mr Kimber. Is it Mr Wright, then?

Joyce Thacker

Mr Wright received reports. I remember in July 2008 when I became responsible for Children’s Services—

Chair

So he knew?

Joyce Thacker

He knew. He received reports, an annual report, I recollect, in July 2008 on Risky Business, on the work we were doing, the extent of the work we were doing at the time.

Chair

So Mr Wright is responsible. What about Mr Stone? Did he know?

Joyce Thacker

I do not know if Mr Stone knew. The reports—

Chair

He is the leader of the council.

Joyce Thacker

I always work through my Cabinet Member. My Cabinet Member received reports.

Chair

Was it Mr Wright?

Joyce Thacker

It was Mr Wright.

Chair

So it is Mr Wright?

Joyce Thacker

I would take decisions where those reports would go.

Chair

If you were pointing a finger at who did not listen to you, it would be Mr Wright?

Joyce Thacker

Mr Wright received reports.

Lorraine Fullbrook

You have known about child exploitation generally in Yorkshire since 1998 when you worked for Barnardo’s.

Joyce Thacker

I did not work for Barnardo’s, sorry, to correct you.

Lorraine Fullbrook

Were you not one of the key people promoting the national launch in Bradford of Barnardo’s “Whose Daughter Next?” campaign?

Joyce Thacker

That is right. I was a partner with Barnardo’s.

Lorraine Fullbrook

Okay, sorry, a partner with Barnardo’s. You have known about child exploitation in Yorkshire since 1998?

Joyce Thacker

Yes.

Lorraine Fullbrook

In 2007, you commissioned a report for Shaun Wright, who was then the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, followed up by away-days and so on. There are paper trails. There is monthly information and intelligence, which were shared with all partners and key stakeholders. Knowing that nothing was being done about the work you had been doing all of these years, how many times did you make a complaint to South Yorkshire Police that nothing was being done?

Joyce Thacker

I did not formally make a complaint, but the first ray of hope came when Matt Jukes started in South Yorkshire as the District Commander in Rotherham. Matt Jukes took this issue extremely seriously. He was a really good person to work with and began to understand the severity of the issues. I commend Matt Jukes as someone who understood the issues because before that, quite frankly, people were finding it difficult for the police to take any notice of this issue.

Lorraine Fullbrook

When was this? When did Matt Jukes take over?

Joyce Thacker

I think Matt Jukes came in around 2006-2007.

Lorraine Fullbrook

But the former chief constable claims not to have known anything about this, so obviously your message was not getting through.

Joyce Thacker

Absolutely, and I heard what he had to say, but trying to work locally with the borough commanders at the time, clearly it was not being taken seriously. There were junior officers coming to meetings at Risky Business who were not taking things forward, I suspect, clearly to the previous South Yorkshire police chief.

Lorraine Fullbrook

We have heard that there was a dereliction of duty by the former chief constable. Do you think that you have been responsible for a dereliction of duty in your role?

Joyce Thacker

I look back and I think could I have done more and absolutely, yes, I could have done more. The benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I can assure you that I did try hard to maintain this on the agenda in Rotherham. I felt acutely aware of the issue. I have known about child sexual exploitation for longer than 1998. I worked in Keighley when Ann Cryer was there desperately raising this issue. I fully am aware of the impact of child sexual exploitation and I saw it as my duty to keep reminding people in Children’s Services that this was a serious issue.

Lorraine Fullbrook

You accept that there was a dereliction in your duty and that you have never made a complaint to South Yorkshire Police about the lack of action for child victims?

Joyce Thacker

I do not accept there is a full dereliction of my duty. With hindsight, I am saying to you I could have done more. But I would say to you that since Matt Jukes came in, he took this issue on and worked closely with us at Risky Business as well as the council. Matt was the first person that seemed to really understand the gravity of the situation.

Lorraine Fullbrook

But failed to let his chief constable know?

Joyce Thacker

I cannot comment on that.

Nicola Blackwood

Mrs Thacker, I just want to pick you up on a point that you made at the last session when you gave evidence to us. You said to the Chairman at the very beginning of your evidence that you viewed prosecutions as the icing on the cake, and at that point in 2013 there had only been five prosecutions of child sexual exploitation related cases in Rotherham. Now there have obviously been 104 prosecutions. Have you changed your mind?

Joyce Thacker

I have always viewed that prosecution is the most vital deterrent. I think my choice of language was unhelpful at that previous session, but what I was trying to say was it is really important to have prosecutions. It is the most important deterrent and what you have from the previous evidence given is a real sea change and prosecutions coming forward in Rotherham and, indeed, South Yorkshire.

Nicola Blackwood

Just to be clear to any victims who might be watching this who are seeking justice and fear that previously they have not been believed, if they come forward now the council and the police will work together vigorously to seek justice for them?

Joyce Thacker

Absolutely. I can assure you there is utter determination on that.

Nicola Blackwood

Thank you. The second point is that in your comments to the Chairman you said that the council welcomed Andrew Norfolk’s stories, but is it not true that Rotherham Council actually asked South Yorkshire Police to conduct a criminal investigation against the leak that had initially led to The Times’ reporting? Is it not also true that they hired a legal team to secure a High Court injunction barring publication of one of his articles as recently as 2012?

Joyce Thacker

I don’t know about a legal team and injunction. I cannot honestly recollect that.

Chair

You are telling this Committee that you have not heard of Rotherham Council seeking legal advice to stop publication?

Nicola Blackwood

This was a case that was dropped when Michael Gove said that this information should be in the public domain.

Joyce Thacker

This was a serious case review, sorry, it was not an article published by Andrew Norfolk. This was a serious case review, which is a very different matter.

Nicola Blackwood

Well, yes, but there was—

Joyce Thacker

Indeed, Professor Jay does cover this in her report.

Chair

Mrs Thacker, just one second; Nicola Blackwood, just finish.

Nicola Blackwood

As I understand it, part of the High Court injunction was to prevent Andrew Norfolk from reporting the case.

Joyce Thacker

It was not reporting the case, no, not at all. In my estimation, it was him producing the serious case review in full that was the issue. Professor Jay indeed touches on that in her report.

Nicola Blackwood

Was the finding after all of that had fallen away that what was attempted to be removed in the redactions was not just the details that would have protected the victim but also aspects of failures of the council?

Joyce Thacker

No, none whatsoever, and Professor Jay does cover that in her report. She does not say we attempted to cover up. She does say some of the redactions she queries but does not think in any way it covered up our actions. My only ever intention with Child S serious case review was to protect her remaining family.

Nicola Blackwood

You stand by your claim that at all times you have welcomed Andrew Norfolk’s stories in The Times and you have at no point attempted to prevent it, including the point at which you have asked South Yorkshire Police to conduct a criminal investigation into the leaker?

Joyce Thacker

The concern about the leaks was what other information does somebody have that might come out and actually be dreadful for a child or a victim if they were not knowing it, and that is my concern. That is just to make sure that whatever information is there is in safe hands. He did report responsibly, but there may have been other information that was in the public domain that would have been a serious breach of data.

Nicola Blackwood

Right. I also would like to take you back to the comment that you made that you did not realise the scale of the problem and some of the evidence that we received in private session from Jayne Senior, Dr Heal and a Home Office researcher. Obviously, you were the chair of Risky Business Steering Group. Was it 2003 to 2004?

Joyce Thacker

No, it would be later than that. I think it would be 2005. I remember stepping down when I got the position as the senior director of Children’s Services in 2006 because it would have been a conflict of interest.

Nicola Blackwood

Okay. You would then have been involved in some of the reports that Dr Angie Heal would have shared, which included analysis of the links between drugs running, guns running and serious abuses and exploitation that was widespread across Rotherham in 2006? She was clear that she shared that with the steering group of Risky Business in 2006.

Joyce Thacker

I can recollect Dr Heal sharing that information. I can recollect that it was in police hands. I cannot recollect what happened with it from there. I remember that it was frustrating because the police as a group did not seem to be taking it seriously and I recollect Dr Heal’s frustrations with that.

Nicola Blackwood

How can you reconcile your evidence to the Committee that you did not realise the scale of the problem with the main finding of the 2006 report, which described the continuing abuse having gone on for a number of years, “With an established sexual exploitation scene that was very organised and involved systematic physical and sexual violence against young women, that involved young women being trafficked to other towns and cities, predominantly in the north, which involved a level of intimidation, physical beatings and rape among exploited girls considered by multiagency staff to be very severe and their situation to be very serious”?

Joyce Thacker

I think when we came last year I recollect we discussed then that the evidence was about 600 historic cases. What Professor Jay has uncovered is 1,400.

Nicola Blackwood

Oh, I see, so it is the difference between 600 girls being abused and 1,400 girls?

Joyce Thacker

None whatsoever. I remind you last year when I gave evidence it was about the fact that we talked about 600 then. Professor Jay in all her work has come up with 1,400 victims, which is absolutely shocking. One person being abused through any form of abuse, particularly sexual exploitation, is one victim too many. It deeply, deeply saddens me when children have to go through this experience, but to learn now from the report that we received at the same time that others got it, that it is 1,400 is deeply shocking.

Nicola Blackwood

But you are clear that you knew about this and the scale of about 600 from as far back as 2006?

Joyce Thacker

No, we talked about 600 last year as the evidence that came out then.

Nicola Blackwood

But given that we are talking about systematic physical and sexual abuse, women being trafficked, severe and very serious physical beatings and rapes, this was a 2006 report, which you claim you are aware of.

Joyce Thacker

I am aware of; I cannot recollect the detailed content of it. But what I can say is it was severe in terms of the nature. It was the numbers I am saying is the shock because that is the issue.

Nicola Blackwood

Can I just field one more issue? You were chair of the Risky Business Steering Committee in 2005?

Joyce Thacker

I think so, yes.

Nicola Blackwood

This would have been when the joint paper was done between the police and Children and Young People’s Service about rationalising the role of Risky Business as to whether it would be more strategic and who would have access to the forum, is that right? Is that true?

Joyce Thacker

Goodness, I honestly cannot recollect that. I cannot recollect that now.

Nicola Blackwood

Because the issue to do with this report was the police carried out an audit of about 87 files resulting in them proposing a large number of girls being removed from the sexual exploitation forum and, therefore, not having access to the kind of support that would be necessary. The judgment made by Professor Jay is that this was part of a failure of the professional relationship between Risky Business and the Children and Young People’s Service, and that this was an ongoing problem. I just wondered if as the chair of Risky Business and later deputy chief executive and then chairman and then chief executive at Children’s Services you were already aware of this problem during this audit process in 2005 why you did not fix that when you became the chief executive.

Joyce Thacker

I cannot recollect the detail. I did not sit on the forum. The forum was practitioners who met together and considered cases.

Nicola Blackwood

No, but this was something that was conveyed to senior managers in the CYP and was something that Risky Business was very concerned about and was conveyed all through the Safeguarding Board and so on.

Joyce Thacker

Yes, I believe it went to the Safeguarding Board. I do not think the issue about changing the registration of victims went to the Safeguarding Board, but I could be wrong on that. I cannot recollect that.

Chair

Thank you. Can we just be clear because both you and Mr Kimber are on oath? You are saying that you were unaware that the council sought to prevent Andrew Norfolk and The Times reporting details of the case of Laura Wilson, a 17 year-old girl who was groomed and subsequently murdered? Are you telling this Committee that you were unaware that the council was seeking an injunction?

Joyce Thacker

Chair, I can say the injunction was against the full publication of the Child S serious case review of Laura Wilson.

Chair

Who was dead at the time?

Joyce Thacker

Absolutely.

Chair

Right, so how would that information come into the public domain when the victim was already dead? What was the problem?

Joyce Thacker

The victim has family, Chair, family who are still living in Rotherham, one of whom—

Chair

You did not think of asking the family?

Joyce Thacker

We did ask the family. The family were fully involved. I met with the family.

Chair

Thank you. Mr Kimber, did you know about this? You as chief executive would have known that council taxpayers’ money was being spent on this injunction. You authorised it, did you?

Martin Kimber

I did know about it, Mr Vaz, yes.

Chair

Did you authorise it?

Martin Kimber

I cannot recollect whether I would personally have authorised it, but I would not generally need to. I would need to check that for you. What I can say is that my recollection is similar to Mrs Thacker’s, that it was not an intent to prevent publication of an article. It was an intent to prevent publication of the unredacted version of the serious case review.

Chair

Right. Well, it would be very helpful if you could send those papers to the Committee.

Martin Kimber

I will happily confirm whether I authorised that or not.

Chair

Please. Please send those papers to the Committee.

Ian Austin

Mrs Thacker, the thing I do not understand about all this is that you said you knew there was a problem with child sexual exploitation and grooming and that it all improved in 2006-2007 when a new police commander was appointed. But it has been during this period that hundreds more girls have been abused. How could that have happened if it was being taken as seriously by you and the police as you have told us this afternoon?

Joyce Thacker

I can honestly say the working relationship with the police significantly improved when Matt Jukes arrived. It had been difficult before then. You will know that Risky Business passed evidence after evidence on to the police at the time and it felt like nothing was being taken seriously. I am afraid we cannot stop child sexual exploitation, much as I would like to do. If I could stop it, I would, but there are bad people out there intent on harming children.

Ian Austin

When you say Risky Business passed evidence to the police before 2006-2007 and it was not taken seriously, they also passed lots of evidence to you and the police since then. I have to say it looks to me as if it was not taken seriously then either. I have a list here of probably a dozen occasions on which reports and details came to you and Mr Wright, and the police as well, and clearly not enough was done to tackle that. Most of these perpetrators have still not been arrested, let alone prosecuted and convicted. The other thing that I have been told is that at least two members of staff reporting to you told people trying to bring all of this to light to shut up, to stop talking about this, to stop trying to raise this. Has that ever been put to you? Has that ever been suggested to you? Do you know about that?

Joyce Thacker

Well, I would be absolutely appalled if any person reporting to me said that to any member of my staff. Frankly, that is so important that we protect children and if somebody had said, “Stop talking about it” or whatever they had said, I would be very, very annoyed with that. I would take appropriate action against them.

Ian Austin

That has never been suggested to you that that has ever happened?

Joyce Thacker

The first I saw that was in the Jay Report.

Ian Austin

Okay. Can I just ask the chief executive? I know the Chair touched on this before, but why did you say immediately on publication of the Jay Report that no disciplinary action would be taken and then put out a press release pretty much straight away saying that Mrs Thacker’s job was safe, even though you had not at that point clearly had a chance to review the report and its findings?

Martin Kimber

I do not think I have ever issued a press release indicating anybody’s job was safe. What I did say on publication of the Jay Report is exactly as I have said to you today. The report itself does not provide evidence for disciplinary action, but it provides base material to allow me to gather further information. If that information indicates to me that I need to consider disciplinary action, then indeed I will do so. Of course, there is evidence coming out today, some of which I have never heard before.

Chair

Thank you. We will give you a copy of this evidence.

Paul Flynn

I want to refer to the relationship with Members of Parliament. You have mentioned Ann Cryer, who is a greatly respected former Member of this House known for her great courage and persistence. Could you tell us about the talks you had with Ann Cryer and what the outcome was of the efforts that she made?

Joyce Thacker

I am digging deep in memory now, but Ann Cryer was MP in Keighley. I was the area manager for the youth service at the time in Keighley. We were working with Barnardo’s “Streets and Lanes” project. We were piloting some work with Barnardo’s in Keighley. Ann Cryer was aware of this work and took a keen interest in that work and was keen to raise this at the highest possible level, which she did go on to do.

Paul Flynn

My difficulty is finding out why this vast amount of evidence, abuse on such a tragic scale, did not come into the public domain, was not well known, was not a major scandal. I am wondering where the Berlin Wall is. There is another MP who did an interview, a former Rotherham MP, Denis MacShane, and he talked of raising the issue. He very candidly said, “I was a coward” in that he said he did not continue, he did not persist with his complaint. Have you any view there of where the buck stopped? Who was responsible for stopping this becoming what it was with prosecution and so on?

Joyce Thacker

I think police taking evidence forward. They were given lots of information about specific incidents. It then goes into the police domain. The police then look to whether they build prosecutions, follow up investigations, and then pass that on to the Crown Prosecution Service. I know that Risky Business and youth work staff worked tirelessly to give information over and nothing seemed to be done about it. I can only lead to the conclusion that the police received information at the time and did very little with it or felt they did not think it was enough information to take forward. If I can just come back to Denis MacShane—you mentioned him—Denis MacShane came and spoke; he was our keynote speaker. I did mention the event—I know you are not keen on conferences—but I was trying to get MPs to listen to this issue. Denis MacShane came and was our keynote speaker at the event in 2006, which we held in Rotherham to raise awareness on child sexual exploitation. I have tried tirelessly to raise this issue across a range of spheres.

Paul Flynn

The worrying thing is that none of this appeared to work. I can recall Ann Cryer’s very courageous identification of the alleged perpetrators and so on, a completely fearless Member of Parliament. I just wonder why that did not produce results. I am still puzzled as to was it the ignorance of the police, was it the attitudes of the police who victimised these young people? What was it that stopped this coming into the public domain and being dealt with earlier?

Joyce Thacker

There could be a range of issues here, sir. When you look at the case studies and you hear about the police thinking it was consensual, no child agrees to their abuse. No child agrees to their abuse. They cannot consent to their own abuse. I do not think that was as well understood then as it is now. I think now we have a much more open debate nationally. Here we are discussing these very issues. Ann Cryer I think paved the way for doing that. Denis MacShane in his own way tried. He came and spoke about trafficking at the time. Denis spoke about that and the work they were doing on trafficking in South Yorkshire and there were police present in that audience. We have tried to raise issues. As I said earlier, hindsight, could we have done more? Absolutely, without question we could all do more with the benefit of hindsight, but I can assure you I have tried at appropriate opportunities to raise this issue among all the other duties that I do in my post.

Paul Flynn

I am grateful to you, Mrs Thacker.

Mark Reckless

You say you and Denis MacShane tried to raise the issue, but I believe Denis MacShane said that the one issue he did not want to raise was the prevalence and concentration of this offending behaviour within the Pakistani community in Rotherham. Why was that?

Joyce Thacker

I don’t know why Mr MacShane said what he said, but I think there was absolutely a fear culture in the community. I do often think that people were frightened of raising the issue. I do not think that is anything to do with the ethnic issue. I think it is a genuine fear.

Mark Reckless

Who did you fear?

Joyce Thacker

I did not fear anyone, really, in that sense. I raised these issues. We brought reports to the Area Child Protection Committee, which fell under the Safeguarding Children Board.

Mark Reckless

Mrs Thacker, what I really cannot understand is how you were so ineffective in raising these issues once you became the Director of Children’s Services. Did you have ultimate management responsibility for all the social workers in Rotherham working with children?

Joyce Thacker

In 2007, can I say that the first operation that the Jay Report refers to goes largely unreported. That was the first serious issue where Matt Jukes and his team worked tirelessly with our staff to prosecute a man who had had offences against children. Then in 2008 it was Operation Central and we went on from there. We have raised issues and there have been successful pieces of work since that time.

Mark Reckless

The people we spoke to from Risky Business earlier said that they had been very hopeful, given you had chaired Risky Business, when you took over at Children’s Services. They were hoping things would change, but they say it was not just the police. Even though you say the police changed that is not what they say. They also said that they were always trying to press social workers to take these young girls on to their caseload and they would not do so very often. Those people were reporting directly to you. Why were they so resistant of looking after these young girls?

Joyce Thacker

Social workers did not directly report to me until July 2008. I was not responsible for managing social workers until that time.

Mark Reckless

Okay. You are then telling us that after that time that was no longer the case and you dealt with it? Again, that does not seem consistent with the evidence we got earlier.

Joyce Thacker

There were differences of opinion at the time about child sexual exploitation.

Mark Reckless

But you were in charge of Children’s Services?

Joyce Thacker

That is right, and you will see improvements were made from about 2009 onwards.

Mark Reckless

Okay. You said that Shaun Wright received an annual report from Risky Business. You seem to be slightly dumping him in it because he had that annual report, but surely he should have got much more than an annual report from Risky Business. Shouldn’t you as the director reporting to him have been consistently raising this issue and demanding action rather than just relying on him reading a report from Risky Business once a year?

Joyce Thacker

I am not dumping this issue on Shaun Wright, none whatsoever. I am just trying to explain to—

Mark Reckless

So it was your fault for not raising it with him sufficiently?

Joyce Thacker

No, I am not saying it is my fault. We would meet regularly. We would talk about issues. He was briefed on the operation in 2007. He was briefed on the operations in 2008 and onwards from that. We did share information.

Mark Reckless

You shared information, but whose fault was it that insufficient was done to deal with it?

Joyce Thacker

I think collectively we are all at fault for not doing it, but I think in hindsight—

Mark Reckless

You said Mr Kimber always acted appropriately before. Are you now saying he is collectively responsible with you for these failures?

Joyce Thacker

Professor Jay asked me a question. She said why—

Chair

Sorry, Mrs Thacker, would you answer the question that Mr Reckless has put, not answering the question by referring to Professor Jay?

Joyce Thacker

Apologies.

Chair

You are here; she is not. Can you answer Mr Reckless’ question?

Joyce Thacker

Mr Kimber has always acted appropriately. He has been made aware of issues. He has given me full support in tackling these issues. You will see we have had instances where we have developed practice. Now what we have is a far different offer in Rotherham. Regrettably, what those victims had—

Mark Reckless

Mrs Thacker, throughout this period we are told that people when they came to Rotherham Council were not believed. It was thought the problem was exaggerated. People did not want to deal with what was going on largely in the Pakistani community. Social workers would not take these girls on to their casework. You surely more than anyone else were the point person who should have dealt with that and failed to do so.

Joyce Thacker

It takes a long time to change the culture of an organisation, sir. I can say that.

Mark Reckless

Okay. Mrs Thacker, are you still monitoring the political leanings of foster parents in Rotherham?

Joyce Thacker

I would just say that regardless of political persuasion people are entitled to become foster parents if they are fit for purpose to do so.

Mark Reckless

Would you be able to work with a UKIP council should one be elected in Rotherham next May?

Joyce Thacker

I am working already very closely with the opposition on this matter. All of them have come for CSE awareness raising as members so, yes, I am working very closely with them already.

Mark Reckless

Do you understand the degree of public anger there would be if you were to take any pay off or take any legal action against Rotherham Council either now or after next May in light of your own failings on this issue?

Joyce Thacker

The public are very angry now and they are right to be so.

Mark Reckless

With you?

Joyce Thacker

With us all and with me in particular, absolutely.

Chair

Thank you. Just to confirm for the record, I said Mr Kimber was on £130,000 a year. You said £160,000, Mr Kimber?

Martin Kimber

That is correct, sir.

Chair

Your salary is £130,000, is that right, Mrs Thacker?

Joyce Thacker

With pension contributions, yes. I get £115,000 a year.

Chair

Thank you. Michael Ellis has the final question.

Michael Ellis

Mr Kimber, is it a rotten borough council that you have been presiding over that, first, blames victims; secondly, blocks complaints of horrific child sexual abuse and exploitation over a prolonged period of time; and, thirdly, seeks an injunction against The Times newspaper, who quite frankly with Andrew Norfolk have done more to expose this incident than a lot of very highly paid public servants who are a disgrace to the public service? [Interruption.]

Chair

Order, order. We must have no noise from the gallery.

Michael Ellis

How much, Mr Kimber, did you waste of taxpayers’ money on the legal action against The Times newspaper seeking to block them from doing the public service that they did? How much? How much did those lawyers cost?

Martin Kimber

To try to deal with your questions, the last one first, I do not know, sir, but I can let you have the answer in writing.

Michael Ellis

Roughly? Over £100,000? Over £200,000?

Martin Kimber

It would be nowhere near that.

Chair

Would you let us have a note?

Michael Ellis

Perhaps you will let us have a note.

Martin Kimber

I will, sir. In the context of me working with a rotten borough, I do not recognise—

Michael Ellis

Rotten borough council.

Martin Kimber

Rotten borough council, I do not recognise what you say in the context that I personally would never allow a position where victims were blamed. It is absolutely not acceptable that that inference—

Michael Ellis

That is what Professor Jay’s report says.

Martin Kimber

Professor Jay’s report does not say it is from 2010 onwards and I have been the Chief Executive from the very end of 2009. I am giving you my position of the council that I recognise. I absolutely would not allow that to happen.

Michael Ellis

Right. Let me ask you this, then. When The Times broke the story, your response as a local authority was to ask the police to investigate who leaked it to them. Is that not right? Is that not right, Mrs Thacker?

Joyce Thacker

We have already covered that, sir, in previous questions.

Michael Ellis

Just answer the question; I do not care whether you have covered it or not. Was that your response, to actually look for the leaker to the story rather than get to the bottom of the gravamen of the story itself?

Joyce Thacker

It was important that we protected innocent people’s data being released to goodness knows who.

Michael Ellis

The data were more important than the child abuse victims?

Joyce Thacker

No, it was important that we protected innocent people. I did not know what anyone might have.

Michael Ellis

Mrs Thacker—

Chair

Mr Ellis, could you just let Mrs Thacker finish?

Michael Ellis

Would you like to finish, Mrs Thacker?

Joyce Thacker

No, it is fine, thank you, Chair.

Michael Ellis

I understand you told the Rotherham Advertiser in September of 2012, Mrs Thacker, that you would ask the police to investigate the leak. You were focused on the leak. It beggars belief, doesn’t it? Instead of being focused on what Norfolk and The Times were reporting, you were trying to waste taxpayers’ money on finding out who leaked it.

Joyce Thacker

As I just reiterate to you, sir, I wanted to make sure that we had no private and confidential information of innocent people out there in the public domain.

Chair

Thank you very much. Mr Kimber, you have resigned for the reasons that you gave us and we welcome what you have said and done, but we are very troubled that as part of the collective leadership no further action has been taken against anyone else. You presumably believe that Rotherham deserves a fresh start. It has lost its Leader of the Council. You have resigned as Chief Executive. Is that right? Do you believe that Rotherham Council deserves a fresh start after all this?

Martin Kimber

I indicated, sir, when I resigned that I thought that my leaving would be a very visible sign of a new beginning and that is my position. As I have also indicated, I would be looking very carefully at fresh information that comes forward that would allow me to build on the Jay Report and consider whether I need to take any further action. I have already indicated to you that I have a pedigree of taking such action if, indeed, it is needed.

Chair

Well, it is the view of this Committee that the evidence we have received from Joyce Thacker today has been unimpressive and we believe that she should be asked to step down, to reflect on her position and, if she does not do so, she should resign. Of course, at the end of the day, Mrs Thacker, it is a matter for you what you do. We do not accept your evidence that you raised this and nobody was listening to you, though we will hear from Mr Wright shortly. We believe that you—having received the evidence today from Risky Business where they tell us that 100 names were in this file that was given to you in 2006; this went up to 600 names when you gave evidence to us and it has now reached 1,400 names—should have been aware of this as you were intimately involved in these matters and that you should resign as a matter of conscience and in order to try to cleanse the council of the leadership that it has had so far. That is the unanimous and collective view of this Select Committee.

Joyce Thacker

I have made my position quite clear, Chair.

Chair

We know that. You have made your position clear at the beginning, and I think that the attitude you have displayed today and the unimpressive nature of your evidence only adds to that. You might like to bear that in mind, Mr Kimber, since you still have three months before you go. I am sure you would not like your legacy to Rotherham to be you have gone and the rest of those responsible are still there. I am sure since everyone has so much respect for you in the council, you will use your persuasive power to try to cleanse the council of the past to give the people of Rotherham, and the young people of Rotherham in particular, a future. Thank you for coming in today.

Martin Kimber

Thank you, sir, and as I have indicated I would always act properly.

Chair

I would hope you would act properly. Thank you for coming in today. Examination of Witness

Witness

Shaun Wright, South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, gave evidence on oath.

Chair

Mr Wright, thank you very much for coming to give evidence today. Can I say I am most grateful to you? When I wrote to you and telephoned you there was no hesitation on your part in coming to give evidence. Unlike other witnesses, you immediately accepted the invitation of the Committee. I want to apologise for keeping you waiting beyond the time that we allocated for you. Thank you for sitting patiently to listen to what other witnesses have said. We are most grateful. Mr Wright, the Prime Minister, the Home Secretary, Ed Miliband, the Leader of the Labour Party, the Deputy Commissioner and others have all called for your resignation. You are still there. Before you answer my question as to why you are still there, the Committee has decided to put you on oath. The reason why we are doing so is that if evidence is given falsely to the Committee on oath, the clauses of the Perjury Act come into effect and that is a very serious matter. Before we proceed and you answer that question, I am going to ask the Clerk to administer the oath.

Shaun Wright

I swear by Almighty God that the evidence I shall give before the Committee shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

Chair

Now, perhaps you would like to answer that question.

Shaun Wright

Yes, Chairman. Thanks very much for inviting me. I value being present today and being given the opportunity to share my thoughts on this matter with you. Clearly—

Chair

Well, can I just explain? It is not a matter of sharing thoughts. These are questions from a parliamentary Committee.

Shaun Wright

Of course.

Chair

You have now gone on oath, so it is not a discussion or a sharing of comments. It is not a seminar. It is a question and answer session.

Shaun Wright

I recognise that, Chairman. Addressing the point that you have put to me about the various individuals calling for my resignation—

Chair

Sorry, could you speak up, Mr Wright?

Shaun Wright

I can, indeed. I basically think that resigning would have been perhaps the easy option given the last fortnight with the various criticisms that have been made and the effect that that has had on both myself and my family. Having said that, I am prepared to field any criticism and to be held to account by anyone, any inquiry, including yourselves, Chairman, in relation to my activities for the period 2005 to 2010.

Chair

Of course, but this is not about accountability to inquiries, which could take several years. This is the Prime Minister of the country, the Home Secretary, the leader of the party that you have been a member of for how many years?

Shaun Wright

Over 20.

Chair

Presumably, you respect democracy because it is because of democracy that you are sitting where you are.

Shaun Wright

Indeed.

Chair

All these people say, “We have no confidence in you” and the public appear not to even want to come to your weekly or monthly surgeries to share information with you. I spoke last night to the chair of the police and crime panel that is supposed to scrutinise you, Councillor Harpham, and he is very clear that you should resign. He says that is the view of every other member of the crime panel. To whom do you think you owe this great duty when everyone in the country appears to be saying, “Resign because of what we have heard”? I am just wondering to whom is the duty owed if it is not due to all the people I have just mentioned.

Shaun Wright

There is a duty to the people that I got elected to serve; that is the people of South Yorkshire. Like yourself, Chairman, I take that duty very seriously to the electorate. Having said that—

Chair

There is a very easy way of dealing with that, Mr Wright.

Shaun Wright

Not at all.

Chair

Of course there is, and that is for you to put your record before the people of South Yorkshire, as other people who serve as elected representatives have done when their conduct has been called into question, not by one or two newspapers but by the entire political establishment. Everybody has called for you to go. Isn’t the best way to test the views of the public for you to resign and then offer yourself for re-election by the people of South Yorkshire? Isn’t that the best way that you can get everyone to put their faith in you and what you have done? Why are you not doing that?

Shaun Wright

I was elected in 2012, Chairman, to serve a term of office for a period of three and a half years. I am now I think 20 months into that period of office and I am happy to stand by my record during the period that I have been the Police and Crime Commissioner. I have not heard any criticism whatsoever from anyone about the role that I have fulfilled as Police and Crime Commissioner and the record and the evidence that I have supplied to the Committee demonstrates very clearly how seriously I have taken this since I have been the Police and Crime Commissioner. I am very happy to stand on that record.

Chair

Well, on the contrary, your record does not display that at all, Mr Wright. What your record says is, and what Professor Jay says, that this was continuing beyond 2012. You have said, I think, to Sky TV that because you have resigned once as the lead member for Children’s Services, that, in fact, purges all your responsibilities and, therefore, once you resigned in 2010 there is no reason for you to resign again. Now, that is a very odd position to be in, is it not, to have said to the television audience that you have already done this once in 2010 and everyone knew about your part in all this so there is no reason to resign again? That is what you said to Sky TV.

Shaun Wright

Chairman, what I said to a number of media outlets was that I was accounting for the period 2005 to 2010 and at the end of that period of office, being the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, I felt it appropriate on the back of the Ofsted report in 2009 that I should stand down at the subsequent election in 2010, which I did in 2010 in the May. Of course, that was on the back of the Ofsted judgment coming in in late 2009. I took the view, and also took advice, that the best course of action would be to go in the May rather than the December when the report was published, and that is what I did. I did not resign on the basis of the issue of CSE because over—

Chair

Mr Wright, are you really hiding behind the fact—

Shaun Wright

Chairman, please let me finish the answers. I have been waiting very patiently, as you know, to come along today and give this information and I am very keen to give it.

Chair

What is the information you wish to give?

Shaun Wright

Well, the information is that I received four reports during the five years that I was in that position.

Chair

No, we will ask you about that information.

Shaun Wright

In terms of the external reports, I do not recall one single external report from Ofsted or any other organisation that flagged CSE as being a significant issue. Now, as elected individuals, we are not the experts in any of these areas so we look to a range of indicators. Over that period of time, not one member of the public came to a surgery of mine, not one local councillor asked me a question either in my political group or at full council, not one local MP in Rotherham raised the issue or a case of CSE for those five years. Not one external report raised CSE as a significant issue over that five years.

Chair

Mr Wright, we do not accept any of that. None of that is accepted.

Shaun Wright

That is the facts.

Chair

Now let me ask my question without you interrupting me. We do not accept any of that. We know that you attended a seminar in 2005.

Shaun Wright

No, I did not.

Chair

We know that you were aware of what had happened at that seminar. We have heard evidence today on oath from the woman who headed Children’s Services that you were given every report. We have heard from Risky Business in evidence to this Committee that you knew about this. We know that you resigned in 2010 because you said you wanted to take your share of the responsibility. You must have read newspapers when you became the Police and Crime Commissioner because Andrew Norfolk’s articles in The Times were very clear about what was happening in Rotherham. We do not accept for one moment the evidence that you have just given that you did not know that this was an issue. We accept as a Committee that you did know. We accept the evidence that has been given by people who have come here before this Committee and gave evidence before the Committee last year that you were well aware of what was happening. That is our view as a Committee, so we do not accept that you did not know. We do not accept that not a single councillor raised it with you because we have had evidence on oath from others that you did know about this.

Shaun Wright

Can I address that point, Chairman?

Chair

Of course.

Shaun Wright

Thank you. In 2005, I came into this role and I asked the then strategic director for a state of the nation report from each of her deputies to bring me up to speed with the issues in relation to the Children and Young People’s Service department. As Professor Jay recognises, there was no mention of CSE in any of those state of the nation reports. I received the first report about CSE in June 2007. That was over two years into the role. At that point, I referred it to the children’s scrutiny committee. I also asked for a members’ seminar and I also endorsed the action plan put to me by the officer responsible for this area of work. I subsequently received the next report on this in July 2008 and at that point I was not satisfied that sufficient resources were being put into Risky Business and I asked for a report to come back. That report was brought back to me five months later in November 2008 and at that stage I increased the resources going into Risky Business by 80%, from £64,000 to £110,000. I also asked for another report to be brought back to me, which came back to me on 29 January 2009. At that stage, there had been a revised action plan endorsed by the Children’s Safeguarding Board of which then I accepted and endorsed further the action that had been taken with the additional resources that had been put in place. I then did not receive another report about CSE until I left office in May 2010, so I had four reports and I acted entirely appropriately on each of those reports. I subsequently attended the Local Children’s Safeguarding Board, which as you know is independently chaired, and I attended that around September of 2009. At that meeting, there was a report presented to the Local Children’s Safeguarding Board. I was only there in an observer capacity, but at that meeting it was shared with the meeting that Rotherham had been very proactive and ahead of the game in relation to dealing with CSE. One of the directors attending that meeting said, “Yes, and this information or good practice should be shared with the rest of the country”. There was no indication to me throughout that period of office that there was a significant problem with CSE.

Chair

Well, we do not accept that, obviously. You must have been the only one in Rotherham not knowing about it.

Shaun Wright

Well, that is the facts, Chairman.

Chair

Even Joyce Thacker, who this Committee does not have much confidence in based on her evidence, even she said that you had these reports and you were well aware of it.

Shaun Wright

Chairman, I have just outlined the reports that I received.

Chair

Sorry, can I just finish, Mr Wright?

Shaun Wright

Indeed.