The Casey Audit

About this episode:

Explore the findings of the Casey Audit and the controversy surrounding group‑based child exploitation. This episode examines systemic failures, the role of cultural sensitivity in safeguarding, and the urgent questions facing professionals and policymakers—challenging whether lessons have truly been learned.

Authors: Sam Preston & Sara Spinks

Publish date: 21 Jun 2025

Episode script

Information discussed in this podcast was correct at the time of recording.

Sam:

Welcome back to Safeguarding Conversations where we unpack the most pressing - and sometimes uncomfortable - safeguarding issues facing our society.

Today, we're talking about a topic that's once again hit the headlines: the government's U-turn on launching a full national inquiry into group-based child sexual exploitation in England and Wales.

Sara:

That's right. This reversal follows Baroness Casey's damning audit which has just been published , which not only reinforces findings from previous reports like the Jay Review and Operation Linden - but also forces us to confront a deeply uncomfortable question:

Were cultural sensitivities prioritised over the safety of children?

Sam:

Let's set the context. For years, survivors and professionals have argued that systemic failures - across local authorities, the police, and government - enabled the abuse of young girls, particularly in places like Rotherham, Rochdale, and Telford.

The original plan was five localised non statutory inquiries based on the findings of the Jay Review. But only one local authority agreed to participate.

Sara:

Which says a lot. And the Jay Review itself took seven years. People were asking - do we really need another national inquiry, or should we be applying what we already know?

But now we've got the Casey Audit. Sam - what's the reason behind the U-turn?

Sam:

The audit confirms data failures but hits hardest on the issue of ethnicity and fear of causing offence. It states that in two-thirds of cases, ethnicity wasn't even recorded. Yet from the data we do have, there's a clear pattern - disproportionate numbers of suspects are from Asian backgrounds, specifically Pakistani heritage.

And it raises this blunt question:

Have professionals avoided acknowledging patterns of abuse for fear of being labelled racist?

Sara:

That's the controversial bit. And it's where things get politically and emotionally charged. Let me play devil's advocate for a moment.

Some would argue: If you focus too much on ethnicity, you risk stigmatising entire communities. You risk giving oxygen to far-right narratives. Is it possible that professionals were trying to balance safeguarding with social cohesion?

Sam:

Possibly. But here's the counterpoint - and I say this as a safeguarding professional - children were raped. Girls were groomed, brutalised, and then disbelieved or blamed. That's not anything to do. with social cohesion. That's negligence.

Sara:

Fair. But why has it taken this long for a full inquiry to be confirmed? The Jay Review and IOPC reports were out for years. We've had time. So - is this political fear? Bureaucratic inertia? Or worse - moral cowardice?

Sam:

All of the above. Baroness Casey's testimony to the Home Affairs Committee was a turning point. She was explicit: the system failed to act because ethnicity was seen as too uncomfortable to discuss. That's unacceptable.

Sara:

So here's the big question for today:

Should safeguarding ever be compromised to avoid offending cultural or religious sensitivities?

Sam:

My answer? Absolutely not. Safeguarding must be culture-aware, not culture-blind - but it must never be culture-fearing. If we tiptoe around identity to avoid discomfort, we leave children unprotected.

Sara:

Listeners, we'd love to hear what you think. Is this a safeguarding issue? A political one? Or both?

And here's a final thought. At the time of recording, there are 800 active cases of suspected group-based grooming. This isn't historic. This is happening right now.

Sam:

Let's hope the new national inquiry doesn't just gather data, but compels action - and that those in authority are finally held to account for why safeguarding failed... and who it failed most.

Sara:

As always, we'll link the Baroness Casey audit, the Jay Review, and Operation Linden in the episode notes.

Sam:

And let us know what you think. We will of course keep you updated as we get more information on the context of the proposed inquiry,

Links for episode notes:

Share