Connect with us

Published

on

A nationwide grooming gangs inquiry must “leave no stone unturned”, Kemi Badenoch has said as the Conservatives urged the government to ensure ethnicity and religious background are taken into account.

Ms Badenoch and shadow home secretary Chris Philp, appearing alongside a survivor and two parents of survivors/victims, called on the government to adopt draft terms of reference for the inquiry drawn up by the Conservatives with help from some grooming gangs victims and survivors.

The Tory leader said her party is willing to work alongside the government, and an inquiry needs to be undertaken on a cross-party basis as it is ultimately about the survivors, victims and their families.

Politics latest: Starmer becoming ‘second Thatcher’, Scottish first minister says

The Conservatives’ terms of reference include ensuring the inquiry examines the ethnicity and religious background of offenders, a two-year time limit and a focus on extra-familial abuse.

They also want it to forward evidence to police and prosecutors where criminality is indicated.

In June, the government announced it would be launching a national inquiry into grooming gangs, representing a U-turn after previously accusing Reform and the Conservatives of jumping on a far-right bandwagon when they called for one earlier in the year after Labour announced five local inquiries.

More from Politics

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘I’d wake up with really bad bruises’

But a national inquiry has been delayed by rows about its scope, while both shortlisted chair candidates withdrew their candidacy following criticism by survivors of their careers as a police chief and a social worker.

A group of women also quit the inquiry’s victim liaison panel – one who was present with the Tories on Monday – as they accused the government of attempting to widen the inquiry’s remit to consider other forms of child sexual abuse.

Ms Badenoch said: “I want to be clear that a national inquiry must leave no stone unturned.

“It must investigate councils, the police and even the government if necessary.

“It must be time-limited, and it must consider the role of ethnicity, religion and other cultural factors.

“Baroness (Louise) Casey’s own report admitted that many of these cases are committed by people of Asian and Pakistani ethnicities.

“Her own report said that those who downplay the ethnicity of perpetrators are continuing to let down society, local communities and the victims. We agree.

“As I said, I have spoken to many survivors. We are speaking on their behalf.

“Their lives and their families’ lives have been turned upside down, so separate to this inquiry, the government must act now to ensure that they and their families are supported so they can heal.”

No political party owns high ground on this matter

Fiona Goddard was close to tears when she told me on Monday that pulling out of the grooming gang inquiry panel was “the most difficult decision of my life”.

The survivor of child sexual abuse in Oldham has spent years campaigning for a national inquiry – but sacrificed her chance to play a part in it because she felt it was moving in the wrong direction and broadening its scope.

The government insists that its scope has not changed, but time has marched on since two candidates to chair the inquiry pulled out in October, and the opposition has stepped into the void – offering their own version of what the inquiry should look like.

However, Kemi Badenoch’s call that “no stone should be left unturned” was reminiscent of her own party’s pledge in December 2018 when then Home Secretary Sajid Javid promised to investigate the ethnicity of grooming gangs with exactly the same words.

The subsequent review published in 2020 found that most group-based child abusers were white but also revealed the lack of data being collected on ethnicity, which the Conservatives promised to improve.

Five years on, Louise Casey criticised the lack of data in her rapid review published earlier this year.

Asked if her own government had done enough, the leader of the opposition pointed to initiatives but added, “We didn’t know everything we know now”.

The truth is, no political party owns the high ground on this matter – just as Fiona Goddard is first to say that no one survivor can speak for everyone.

There is division about how this inquiry moves forward, and there’s no evidence of political parties working together to bring unity.

What it needs more than anything is an independent chair who can pull it out of the hands of politicians.

Baroness Casey, known as a Whitehall troubleshooter, having worked on social issues for successive prime ministers since Tony Blair, is assisting with setting up the inquiry, but acknowledged it could now be “months” before a chair was appointed.

Fiona Goddard, one of the survivors who left the inquiries’ liaison panel, backed the Conservatives’ proposals as she said she had “lost faith in the ability of the government to make more meaningful progress”.

Read more:
Grooming gang survivors on the role drugs played in their abuse
Why are abuse survivors losing faith in the grooming gang inquiry?

Mr Philp said a two-year time limit on the inquiry is essential as he said: “It can’t drag on for years and years.”

He said the Tories were being “constructive” and that dual nationals found to have been involved in grooming should have their British citizenship removed and be deported “with no exceptions”.

A Labour Party spokesman said: “The Conservatives’ record on this issue is clear: they had years to take action on this appalling scandal, yet time and time again they failed to do so.

“This Labour government accepted all the recommendations from Baroness Casey’s report and we are committed to a full, statutory, national inquiry to uncover the truth.

“It will be robust, rigorous and laser-focused on grooming gangs, and its scope will not change.

“The inquiry will direct and oversee local investigations, with the power to compel witnesses and summon evidence. And it will explicitly examine the background, ethnicity and culture of offenders.”

Continue Reading

Politics

US bank regulator clears national banks to facilitate crypto transactions

Published

on

By

US bank regulator clears national banks to facilitate crypto transactions

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has affirmed that national banks can intermediate cryptocurrency trades as riskless principals without holding the assets on their balance sheets, a move that brings traditional banks a step closer to offering regulated crypto brokerage services.

In an interpretive letter released on Tuesday, the regulator said banks may act as principals in a crypto trade with one customer while simultaneously entering an offsetting trade with another, a structure that mirrors riskless principal activity in traditional markets. 

“Several applicants have discussed how conducting riskless principal crypto-asset transactions would benefit their proposed bank’s customers and business, including by offering additional services in a growing market,” notes the document.

According to the OCC, the move would allow customers “to transact crypto-assets through a regulated bank, as compared to non-regulated or less regulated options.”

Banks, United States, Donald Trump
The OCC’s interpretive letter affirms that riskless principal crypto transactions fall within the “business of banking.” Source: US OCC

The letter also reiterates that banks must confirm the legal permissibility of any crypto activity and ensure it aligns with their chartered powers. Institutions are expected to maintain procedures for monitoring operational, compliance and market risks.

“The main risk in riskless principal transactions is counterparty credit risk (in particular, settlement risk),” reads the letter, adding that “managing counterparty credit risk is integral to the business of banking, and banks are experienced in managing this risk.”

The agency’s guidance cites 12 U.S.C. § 24, which permits national banks to conduct riskless principal transactions as part of the “business of banking.” The letter also draws a distinction between crypto assets that qualify as securities, noting that riskless principal transactions involving securities were already clearly permissible under existing law.

The OCC’s interpretive letter — a nonbinding guidance that outlines the agency’s view of which activities national banks may conduct under existing law — was issued a day after the head of the OCC, Jonathan Gould, said crypto firms seeking a federal bank charter should be treated the same as traditional financial institutions.

According to Gould, the banking system has the “capacity to evolve,” and there is “no justification for considering digital assets differently” than traditional banks, which have offered custody services “electronically for decades.”

Related: Trump’s national security strategy is silent on crypto, blockchain

From ‘Choke Point 2.0’ to pro-crypto policy

Under the Biden administration, some industry groups and lawmakers accused US regulators of pursuing an “Operation Choke Point 2.0” approach that increased supervisory pressure on banks and firms interacting with crypto.

Since President Trump took office in January after pledging to support the sector, the federal government has moved in the opposite direction, adopting a more permissive posture toward digital asset activity.

Magazine: Quantum attacking Bitcoin would be a waste of time: Kevin O’Leary