Whitehall officials tried to convince Lord Gove to cover up grooming scandal, he tells Sky News

Whitehall officials tried to convince Lord Michael Gove to go to court to cover up details of a report into the grooming scandal in 2011, he has said, confirming Sky News reporting earlier this week.
Speaking to Sky's Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge, the former senior cabinet minister said it is "undoubtedly the case that more should have been done" to prevent the abuse of young girls in Britain, admitting that it weighs on him.
The allegations of an attempted cover-up were first made to Sky News by former Downing Street adviser Dominic Cummings in an interview with Sky News, and the claims were substantiated by other sources as well. Mr Cummings was working for Lord Gove, who was then education secretary.
Lord Gove explained that in 2011, he learned that the late Times journalist Andrew Norfolk, who he described as "a heroic reporter who did more than anyone to initially uncover this scandal", was seeking to publish details of a report from Rotherham Council about the abuse and grooming of young girls.
He said: "Rotherham Council wanted to stop that happening. They wanted to go to court to prevent him publishing some details, and we in the Department for Education were asked by the council, 'would we join in, would we be a party to that court action to stop it?'
"And I had to look at the case, advised by Dominic [Cummings] and by others, and there were some within the department, some officials who said, 'be cautious, don't allow this to be published, there may be risks for relatives of the victims concerned."
1:56
Rotherham Council also argued that publication may pose "risks" to the process of "improving in the way in which it handles" grooming cases, he continued.
The judicial review wanted by officials would have asked a judge to decide about the lawfulness of The Times' publication plans and the consequences that would flow from this information entering the public domain.
But Lord Gove said: "My view at the time, advised by Dominic and by others within the department, was that it was definitely better for it to be published."
"So we said to Rotherham, we will join the case, but we're joining it on the side of the Times and Andrew Norfolk because we believe in transparency."
1:11
'Tough questions' for Whitehall
Lord Gove went on to say that a national inquiry could see some "tough questions" asked of the Home Office about its culture and its interactions with the police.
But those questions will also be posed to two departments he led - the Department for Local Government and the Department of Education, and he said: "I think it's right that there should be, because the nature and scale of what the victims have endured means that there's an obligation on all of us who've been in any form of elected office to be honest and unsparing in looking at what went on."
He said he "certainly didn't have the knowledge at my command that we now do about the widespread nature of this activity".
'Not nearly enough' progress made
Sophy Ridge put to Lord Gove that despite commissioning a report on what was happening to girls in care, and not seeking to block the publication of Andrew Norfolk's reporting, he still failed to make change.
He replied: "Yes, so it is undoubtedly the case that more should have been done."
He admitted that it "absolutely" weighs on him, and that "not nearly enough" progress was made on the protection of vulnerable girls.
"With the benefit of hindsight, I do wish that I had been more vehement in trying to persuade people to take appropriate action," he said.
1:36
Local government 'sought to deny scale' of scandal
The now Spectator editor went on to say that there was "pushback, particularly but not exclusively, from those in local government" to subsequent questions about cultural background, and he said "local councillors and others sought to deny the scale of what was happening and particularly, sought to deny questioning about the identity and the background of the perpetrators".
He continued: "I think the right thing to do is for everyone to acknowledge that sometimes there were people who were acting from noble motives, who did not want to increase ethnic and racial anxieties, who did not to fan far-right flames, and thought that it was better to step away from the really grim reality of what was going on.
"I can understand that. But ultimately, that didn't serve anyone. It did not serve the victims."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Sky News

29 minutes ago

• Sky News

Sir Keir Starmer tries to contain rebellion among Labour MPs over welfare reforms

Sir Keir Starmer had a series of one-on-one meetings with Labour MPs on Friday to try to contain a rebellion on the government's welfare reforms. Ahead of the assisted dying vote, the prime minister met privately with some of the dozens of MPs with concerns about the proposed cuts to sickness and disability benefits. The first vote on the legislation, which the chancellor says will save £5bn a year from the welfare bill, will be held in early July. The prime minister's involvement at this stage suggests a major effort is underway to quell a potential rebellion. Cabinet ministers say they do not expect mass resignations, but one junior minister told Sky News that opposition to the reforms was "pretty strong". One frontbencher, government whip Vicky Foxcroft, resigned her post yesterday, writing that she understood "the need to address the ever-increasing welfare bill" but did not believe the proposed cuts "should be part of the solution". Other junior ministers and whips have not, as yet, moved to follow her. But one government insider said: "It's difficult to tell if the mood will harden as we get closer. There's a lot of work going on." The package of reforms is aimed at encouraging more people off sickness benefits and into work, but dozens of Labour rebels said last month that the proposals were "impossible to support". 1:34 Welfare secretary Liz Kendall is also meeting individually with MPs. She said earlier this week that the welfare system is "at a crossroads" and the bill was about "compassion, opportunity and dignity". Ministers are trying to convince MPs that a £1bn fund to support disabled people into work, and the scrapping of the Work Capability Assessment, a key demand of disability groups, make the cuts package worth voting for. They insist that 90% of current claimants of personal independence payment (PIP) will not lose the benefit. But disability groups say the cuts will have a "disastrous" effect on vulnerable people.

The Sun

44 minutes ago

• The Sun

Heads must roll over pro-Palestinian thugs break-in at RAF Brize Norton

Brize idiots HOW on earth did pro-Palestinian thugs manage to break into RAF Brize Norton to damage two military planes? Breaking through the perimeter fencing is one thing. 1 But why weren't they stopped in their tracks by armed guards before they got anywhere near military assets? Instead, the first hapless commanders heard of it was when Palestine Action gleefully posted their footage online. It's beyond belief that security could be so lax at a time when the base is on high alert over Iran and Russia. Results of a full investigation must be made public and, if necessary, heads should roll. Meanwhile, this wasn't a harmless stunt by a cosy protest group. Palestine Action is made up of dangerous fanatics bent on attacking our country from within on behalf of a foreign cause. Lord Walney, the Government's ex-adviser on political violence, recommended it be outlawed as an extremist political group more than a year ago. The militants have since gone on to terrorise workers at weapons factories and people outside Crown courts. We welcome Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to now proscribe the hate-filled group. The question is: Why did it take so long? Shock moment pro-Palestine protesters break into RAF Brize Norton & spray 2 military planes with paint before escaping Dead loss ASSISTED dying is a deeply emotive and complex issue. In brutal terms, it amounts to state-sanctioned killing. On that basis, it's deeply worrying that Kim Leadbeater's ill-considered private members' bill is now set to become law. It simply does not have enough safeguards, particularly for the vulnerable, poor and disabled. During yesterday's debate, the idea it might allow families to coerce elderly relatives into early deaths was brushed aside as though such a thing could never happen. Fears from hospice carers were also dismissed. The Government has been absent throughout the legislative process and nearly 150 MPs ducked the decision and abstained. Crime associated with illegal migration is of significant public interest and concern in the wake of the Casey report into grooming gangs.

Times

an hour ago

• Times

A dozen ministers could quit over Starmer's disability welfare cuts

As many as a dozen members of government are prepared to resign rather than support Sir Keir Starmer's controversial welfare reforms, it has been claimed, as backbench critics accused ministers of betraying Labour values. A senior government figure told The Times that about 12 of their colleagues had privately indicated they would find it impossible to support the measures that are due to be voted on a week on Wednesday. Another leading opponent said that as many as 80 Labour MPs were 'holding firm' in opposition to the plans and believed the government would ultimately have to pull the vote. • No concessions on benefits reform, Starmer tells rebels 'If this goes through this will be our version of tuition fees,' they said. 'The optics of taking away money from people who find it difficult to go to the toilet are terrible.' The government has a working majority of 165, meaning that 83 Labour MPs would have to rebel for Starmer to lose a vote. Whips are warning potential rebels that they will be blacklisted for any future government job for as long as Starmer is prime minister — even if they simply abstain. Anyone openly opposing the plans faces a threat of having the whip suspended entirely amid growing concern in No 10 that the vote could slip away from the government. But one government source suggested that contingency plans to pull the vote altogether were being prepared, in case Starmer's team concluded that they did not have the numbers. Any move to back down would have implications for the government's finances as the £5 billion of savings from the changes have already been 'banked' by Rachel Reeves in the government's spending plans. Those prepared to walk away from their jobs are understood to be a mixture of junior ministers and parliamentary private secretaries — the MPs who act as the eyes and ears of cabinet ministers in Westminster. A few are said to be new MPs only elected last year. On Thursday Vicky Foxcroft, the MP for Lewisham North, resigned as a government whip and said she could not vote for the reforms. 'I have wrestled with whether I should resign or remain in the government and fight for change from within,' she told Starmer. 'Sadly it now seems that we are not going to get the changes I desperately wanted to see.' • Three months' grace for claimants about to lose disability benefits MPs are due to debate changes to welfare on July 1, which include a tightening of the criteria for the personal independence payment (PIP), the main disability payment in England and Wales. Ministers also want to cut the sickness-related element of universal credit, and delay access to it, so only those aged 22 and over can claim. The package of reforms is aimed at encouraging more people off sickness benefits and into work, but dozens of Labour rebels said last month that the proposals were 'impossible to support'. A number of MPs spoke out in support of Foxcroft after her resignation. Jonathan Brash, the MP for Hartlepool, said he had 'utmost respect for her and her principled stand here', adding: 'She's right. Our welfare system does need change, but the cuts proposed are not the right way to do it.' Connor Naismith, the MP for Crewe & Nantwich, added: 'This must have been an incredibly difficult decision but she should be commended for standing by her principles. I agree with her that reducing the welfare bill is the right ambition, but cuts to universal credit and PIP should not be part of the solution.' Asked about the resignation on Times Radio, Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary said that it was 'up to every MP to look to their conscience and vote the way that they believe is right'. 'If you can't stick with collective responsibility in government, you have to resign,' she said. 'She's done the honourable thing. It will enable her to have a voice.'