X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Coffee House

Rotherham’s child abuse was ignored in order to protect careers and retirements

27 August 2014

4:32 PM

27 August 2014

4:32 PM

This is an extract from this week’s Spectator, available tomorrow. Subscribe from just £12 for 12 issues here

If Rotherham council were a family, its children would have been removed by social services long ago, and Ma and Pa Rotherham would be safely behind bars. Professor Alexis Jay’s report, which was published this week, reveals depravity on an industrial scale in the South Yorkshire town. At least 1,400 children, Prof. Jay estimates, were subjected to sexual exploitation between 1997 and 2013. Many were raped multiple times by members of gangs whose activities either were or should have been known about. Children were trafficked around the country to be abused. Those who put up resistance were beaten. And when they complained they were treated with contempt by the people who were employed to protect them.

We don’t hold out much hope that anyone in a position of authority will be going to jail, nor even that anyone will lose their pension. Roger Stone OBE, leader of the Labour-run council for the past 11 years, has ‘stepped down’, saying that he would be taking responsibility. There was no mention of the 71-year-old Mr Stone ceding his pension, and neither did he show much in the way of contrition; he seemed to see his resignation as a noble act, falling on his sword so that his minions might continue in employment.

It is always the same with public authorities and scandals relating to children in care. No one is ever to blame, only ‘systems’. There is always room, of course, for these nebulous ‘systems’ to be improved. But there must never be any finger-pointing. If, on rare occasions, people are forced out of their jobs, then an action for unfair dismissal invariably follows.

[Alt-Text]


If Rotherham Council’s social services department does have anything that deserves to be described as a ‘system’, it is a deeply flawed one. How can a child, entrusted to the care of the state, end up being delivered into the arms of abusers, the very thing that children’s services are supposed to be there to prevent? Worse, how can it happen to hundreds of children and still no one act to stop it?

It has been reported that no one in the council felt strong enough to challenge the mainly Asian gangs that perpetrated the abuse for fear of accusations of racism. It’s true that racism, even of the inadvertent kind, has — along with sexism and homophobia — been turned into such a heinous crime in the eyes of public-sector functionaries that many would rather turn a blind eye to child rape than risk such accusations. Rotherham Council’s children’s services last made headlines when it removed three eastern European children from their Ukip-supporting foster parents. One of its functionaries explained it was concerned about Ukip’s opposition to the ‘active promotion of multiculturalism’.

It is a pity that the council was not as concerned about the systematic abuse of the children supposedly under its care. As Colin Brewer explains on page 16, there’s also something inherently fishy about the pseudo-scientific nature of social work and how social workers are trained.

But there is a bigger sickness in Rotherham, and in other councils where similar scandals have taken place: the bias towards secrecy. Wherever children are involved, the default position on the part of public authorities seems to be that they should keep information about their failures under their institutional hats — out of concern, naturally, for the privacy of the children involved. Yes, of course, the privacy of children has to be protected. But often what is really being protected is the privacy of the social workers and other staff involved. The wellbeing of hundreds of children is, in this way, sacrificed in order not to disturb careers and retirements.

Social workers always come into the firing line when scandals involving children come to light — and that is right. But we should not ignore, either, the astonishing failure of the police. The Rotherham scandal is not a historic case which we can pretend would not happen in this day and age: the timescale of the abuse uncovered by Prof. Jay runs from the beginning of Tony Blair’s premiership to last year. It commenced well after the care of children became subject to the much-vaunted ‘multi-agency’ approach, where social workers, police, teachers, doctors and so on are all supposed to work together. Echoing what happened in Rochdale, the Jay report finds that police treated victims ‘with contempt’.

We are in the middle of an investigation into sexual exploitation of children and adults by celebrities and other public figures dating back more than 50 years. Some of this is certainly genuine; some of it may be moral panic. But one thing is for sure. The allegations of historic groping that we read about on a weekly basis are dwarfed by the kinds of scandals we have seen in Rochdale and Rotherham — scandals which, besides being of a graver nature and on a worse scale, are happening beneath our noses, in the present. There will be no drawing a line under them until all those who let this happen have been held to account.

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close