Sayeeda Warsi has resigned from government over Gaza. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Conservative minister Baroness Warsi resigns over government policy on Gaza

The government minister Sayeeda Warsi has resigned from the government over Gaza.

David Cameron's reticence over condemning Israel's actions in Gaza has been brought into sharp focus this morning as Sayeeda Warsi, Foreign Office and Faith and Communities Minister and former chairman of the Conservative party, has announced her resignation from the government in light of its policy on Gaza.

Here's her tweet confirming her resignation:

­­A Tory life peer and lawyer, Warsi was Britain's first female Muslim cabinet minister, joining the cabinet in 2010 as minister without portfolio. 

When the Conservative party was in opposition, she held the positions of shadow community cohesion minister and shadow social action minister – both roles that hinted at the party's recognition of how useful it is both for the look and culture of a party trying to modernise of having someone focused on faith, and a high-profile Muslim women's rights champion, from an ethnic minority group herself, on the frontbenches. A daughter of Pakistani immigrants, who was brought up in Yorkshire, she has described herself as a “Northern, working-class roots, urban, working mum”. In 2009, the Mail described her as "the multicultural face of the new Tory Party". 

It has often seemed to Westminster onlookers and insiders that Warsi has been promoted and retained a place in government so steadfastly partially due to the fact that it would look bad for Cameron to demote such a figure, because of what she symbolised and her unique position in the Tory upper echelons.

As commentators are currently pointing out, Cameron’s relationship with Warsi was often fraught and he may have been tempted to oust her from his frontbench due to her less-than-subtle opposition of the PM on a number of issues, and her propensity to go off-message. She has made forthright comments about immigration and religion, a memorable remark being her comparison of banning the burka to outlawing the miniskirt. She also riled the leadership recently by advocating clearing the "Eton mess" out of No 10.

Warsi was mired in an expenses row in 2012, which was said to make the PM “uncomfortable”, but was eventually cleared of the charges. It was argued at the time by some that the row was not just about expenses, but also down to her perceived unsuitability to the role of party chairman. From sources in Westminster, I have heard a few of her Tory colleagues sometimes don’t take her entirely seriously. One source recalls fooling Warsi in a Foreign Office meeting prior to the German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s visit early this year that they were obliged to welcome their foreign guest with a rendition of the German national anthem.

But regardless of individuals’ opinions of Warsi’s position in the party, they will have to take this situation seriously today. No longer can Cameron accuse Ed Miliband and the Labour party’s criticism of his silence over Gaza as playing politics; someone on his own side has now done far more than that.

Update: 5 August 10:20:

Sayeeda Warsi has tweeted a picture of her resignation letter (click to zoom in):

***

Now listen to Anoosh discussing Sayeeda Warsi's resignation with Helen Lewis and George Eaton on the NS podcast:

 

Anoosh Chakelian is deputy web editor at the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

In focusing on the famous few, we risk doing a disservice to all victims of child sexual abuse

There is a danger that we make it harder, not easier, for victims to come forward in future. 

Back in the 1970s when relations between journalists and police were somewhat different to today a simple ritual would be carried out around the country at various times throughout the week.

Reporters, eager for information for their regional newspaper, would take a trip to the local station and there would be met by a desk sergeant who would helpfully skim through details in the crime Incident Book.

Among the entries about petty thefts, burglaries and road accidents there would occasionally be a reference to an allegation of incest. And at this point the sergeant and journalist might well screw-up their faces, shake their heads and swiftly move on to the next log. The subject was basically taboo, seen as something ‘a bit mucky,’ not what was wanted in a family newspaper.

And that’s really the way things stayed until 1986 when ChildLine was set up by Dame Esther Rantzen in the wake of a BBC programme about child abuse. For the first time children felt able to speak out about being sexually assaulted by the very adults whose role in life was to protect them.

And for the first time the picture became clear about what incest really meant in many cases. It wasn’t simply a low level crime to be swept under the carpet in case it scratched people’s sensitivities. It frequently involved children being abused by members of their close family, repeatedly, over many years.

Slowly but surely as the years rolled on the NSPCC continued to press the message about the prevalence of child sexual abuse, while encouraging victims to come forward. During this time the corrosive effects of this most insidious crime have been painfully detailed by many of those whose lives have been derailed by it. And of course the details of the hundreds of opportunistic sexual assaults committed by Jimmy Savile have been indelibly branded onto the nation’s consciousness.

It’s been a long road - particularly for those who were raped or otherwise abused as children and are now well into their later years - to bring society around to accepting that this is not to be treated as a dark secret that we really don’t want to expose to daylight. Many of those who called our helpline during the early days of the Savile investigation had never told anyone about the traumatic events of their childhoods despite the fact they had reached retirement age.

So, having buried the taboo, we seem to be in danger of giving it the kiss of life with the way some cases of alleged abuse are now being perceived.

It’s quite right that all claims of sexual assault should be investigated, tested and, where there is a case, pursued through the judicial system. No one is above the law, whether a ‘celebrity’ or a lord.

But we seem to have lost a sense of perspective when it comes to these crimes with vast resources being allocated to a handful of cases while many thousands of reported incidents are virtually on hold.

The police should never have to apologise for investigating crimes and following leads. However, if allegations are false or cannot be substantiated they should say so. This would be a strength not a weakness.

It is, of course, difficult that in many of the high-profile cases of recent times the identities of those under investigation have not been officially released by the police but have come to light through other means. Yet we have to deal with the world as it is not as we wish it would be and once names are common knowledge the results of the investigations centring on them should be made public.

When it emerges that someone in the public eye is being investigated for historical child abuse it obviously stirs the interest of the media whose appetite can be insatiable. This puts pressure on the police who don’t want to repeat the mistakes of the past by allowing offenders to slip through their hands.  And so there is a danger, as has been seen in recent cases, that officers lack confidence in declaring there is a lack of evidence or the allegations are not true. 

The disproportionate weight of media attention given to say, Sir Edward Heath, as opposed to the Bradford grooming gang sentenced this week, shows there is a danger the pendulum is swinging too far the other way. This threatens the painstaking work invested in ensuring the public and our institutions recognise child abuse as a very real danger. 

Whilst high profile cases have helped the cause there is now a real risk that the all-encompassing focus on them does both victims of abuse and those advocating on their behalf a fundamental disservice.

As the public watches high -profile cases collapsing amidst a media fanfare genuine convictions made across the country week in week out go virtually unannounced. If this trend continues they may start to believe that child sexual abuse isn’t the prolific problem we know it to be.

So, while detectives peer into the mists of time, searching for long lost clues, we have to face the unpalatable possibility that offences being committed today will in turn become historical investigations because there is not the manpower to deal with them right now.

Operation Midland, which was set-up to check claims that boys were abused in the 1970s and 80s by a high-level group of paedophiles including politicians, military figures and members of law enforcement agencies, has had up to 40 detectives assigned to it and a similar investigation. Admittedly some of these were murder and major crimes officers but that’s still a large contingent.

In fact if such squads were formed for every historical case the Metropolitan Police would be overwhelmed as last year alone it received reports from nearly 1100 adults – many of them well past retirement age –that they were sexually assaulted when children.

So, now the Goddard Inquiry is in full swing, taking evidence about allegations of child sex crimes involving ‘well known people’ as well as institutional abuse, how do we ensure we don’t fail today’s victims?

If they start to think their stories are going to be diminished by the continuing furore over how some senior public figures have been treated by the police they will stay silent. Therefore we have to continue to encourage them to come forward, to give them the confidence of knowing they will be listened to.

If we don’t we will find ourselves back in those incestuous days where people conspired to say and do nothing to prevent child abuse.

Peter Wanless is Chief Executive of the NSPCC.