Those ‘not fit for purpose’ who are still there despite Prof Jay’s damning report

When Prof Jay issued her damning report, she identified the point in time, after which,
no one could claim they did not know.

A certain Seminar given to councillors in 2005!

Those that remain,  must now bear their share of blame!

  • Alan Atkin
  • Sue Ellis
  • Rose McNeely
  • Ken Wyatt

Download the Jay report and judge for yourself?

15 thoughts on “Those ‘not fit for purpose’ who are still there despite Prof Jay’s damning report

  1. How many Common Purpose graduates have been outed and sacked?
    There’s a surprise !
    No wonder there will never be any change in RMBC.


  2. It’s not just councillors, there’s a staggering amount of well-paid lackies still sat in Riverside House who knew exactly what was going on, some of whom actively tried to cover it up (looking at you the communications team).

    They know CSE is still continuing in the Roma community too. But Roma don’t vote, so it doesn’t matter.


  3. If Read had a back bone he would suspend the four and carry out an independent investigation into what they did, or not following the briefing on CSE.

    Three of them enjoy the full support of Read so that is not going to happen, to single one out would show his hand.

    If senior police officers are being investigated why not four Labour Cllrs?

    So Leader Read, will you order an investigation?


  4. There needs to be an investigation into ALL the people at RMBC who ignored, or actively covered up CSE, within the Council be they elected members or officers ! SYP are being investigated for their failures – time for the civilians to be held to account ! There should be a proper investigation led by a Judge or a Government body now !


    • The obscenity with the police is that abuses are ongoing to this day, and despite having had the evidence, are actively and stubbornly covering up and refusing to act, because to do so now would be an admission that they should have acted appropriately when first handed the evidence – the same applies to the PCC’s office.


  5. Read is also in Healey’s ward and is Healey’s puppet enquiries will do nothing the establishment will not let it believe me I know and I am still fighting it theirs a program on TV Tuesday 8pm On Drama Judge John Deed how true to life this is now it is coming out about the so called suicide of the weapons inspector Kelly not being a suicide the establishment in the Westminster village will protect them all for fear of the truth coming out of who knew what and who kept quiet to cover it all up
    Cops investigating cops MPs investigating MPs Labour Councillors investigating Labour controlled Officers come on no one cramps on their own doorstep
    Even the Commissioners bailed out early and tow community secretaries gave Rotherham Labour powers back when nothing has changed the whole political system is corrupt and stinks
    People who know what went on and know who knew and when need to come and speak out so we can stop this now


  6. Reading the Home Office report and in one instance Documents arising from 20th October 2003 an electronic search revealed a letter dated and addressed to the then Home Secretary (document 43) in which 2 desperately concerned parents ask for help for their daughter, who is being sexually abused by persons well known to the police in the Rotherham area.
    They had all this time said that they didn’t receive the letter, this clearly shows a cover up, this is just one of many, so the Labour party knew that CSE was going on and officials knew.
    Following on from the white wash six Independent report into RMBC it clearly showed that some knew and refused to talk and work with Gowling solicitors.
    Those still sat in chamber who attended the 2005 seminar and those that had their faces all over the national media must have a repeat prescription of Sleeping tablets to help them sleep at night.
    On a final note… Did the “whistleblower” now Councillor actually whistleblow.
    Page 15 P5.6 of the HO report it says…’One final reflection on the nature of the Home Office engagement with the exploitation and abuse in Rotherham :eventually uncovered by the Jay Report: is triggered by paragraph 91 of the Internal Review, which outlines very different interpretations of a phone call between the former researcher in Rotherham and a Home Office official. The researcher thought she was calling to ‘whistleblow’ or report malpractice, while the official receiving the call interpreted it as one to explain a delay to the
    research timetable.


    • Who was the Home Secretary at the time, and, if there was a change, who to? So it looks like the affair was and remains an issue of political pragmatism, reputation management and damage limitation, always more important than the destroyed lives of abused children. Now we must consider Sheffield, where cover-up by police and council are ongoing.


      • Jack Straw Labour 2nd May 1997 – 8th June 2001…
        David Blunkett (Labour 8th June 2001 – 15th December 2004)
        Charles Clark Labour 15th December 2004 – 5th May 2006…


        • Thank you very much for this. The recent scandalising exposures are a sad and scarifying indictment of the years 2001 to 2004. Perhaps now Blunkett will be called to account.


Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.