Labour Councillors Vote to Block Gang Rape Inquiry
Secrecy and Shame in Barrow
In Barrow Town Hall, survivors of grooming gangs were instructed to shut up and sit in silence as Labour Councillors voted to help cover up the gang rape of the town's children.
When a motion to include Barrow in the national inquiry came before the council, Labour councillors blocked it while Mayor Fred Chatfield tried to unlawfully stop the cameras from recording what was happening.
When the team of three newly elected Reform councillors demanded a recorded vote so the public could see who stood where on this critical issue, Labour voted to prevent it, ensuring their names would be hidden from the record.
A Simple Motion for Truth
The motion, tabled by Reform UK councillor Sienna Churcher, was straightforward in its ask. It welcomed the National Inquiry announced in June 2025 and requested that Barrow Council write to the Home Secretary, formally asking for the town to be included amongst those examined for historic and ongoing grooming gang activity.
The motion recognised the courage of whistleblowers and survivors, called for transparency in all correspondence, and demanded public accountability.
For survivors in Barrow who have lived with the knowledge that their town has been scarred by organised rape gangs just like Rotherham, Rochdale, Oldham, and Telford, this represented hope for official recognition of their suffering. Especially as, In February this year, that suffering was finally acknowledged in court when the truth was laid bare.
The Takeaway That Became a Trafficking Hub
Three brothers, Shaha Amran Miah, Shaha Alman Miah, and Shaha Joman Miah, were convicted of horrific child sexual offences committed in Barrow and Leeds between 2008 and 2016. They targeted teenage girls, who were groomed, abused, and traded like commodities in what the Crown Prosecution Service described as systematic sexual exploitation. Their youngest victims were reported to be as young as 6 years old.
BBC News
The brothers had moved to Barrow to work in a family-owned takeaway that became, in Judge Unsworth's words, a "hub of criminality." Girls, some still in school uniforms, were picked up in cars, taken upstairs, plied with alcohol and drugs, and assaulted on what the court heard described as "scabby beds."
Judge Unsworth, sentencing the men to a combined 70 years in prison, delivered words that should have resonated through every corner of Barrow's political establishment. "In Barrow, the brothers were not acting in the shadows but acting in plain sight. Each of the victims was vulnerable, and the brothers were confident that if the girls blew the whistle, they would not be believed."
Instead of heeding that judicial warning about institutional blindness, Labour councillors chose to repeat the same pattern of denial that enabled the abuse in the first place.
Because what Judge Unsworth's court had established was far worse than isolated incidents. A rape gang had been operating in Barrow. Men were coming to Barrow specifically to rape children. Children from Barrow were being trafficked to other towns and cities to be raped. The takeaway wasn't just a business but the centre of a trafficking network that moved vulnerable girls across county lines for sexual exploitation.
The court heard how the Miah brothers had treated teenage girls as commodities, passing them between abusers and transporting them to Leeds. The Miah brothers didn't act in the shadows but acted in plain sight while local institutions looked the other way. Last night, those same institutions did it again.
The Wrecking Amendment
Labour's response to the original motion was to gut it entirely. Councillor Andy Coles proposed an amendment, seconded by William McEwan, that removed the specific call to write to the Home Secretary and replaced it with procedural camouflage about "allowing the independent commission and survivors to get on with the inquiry."
Reform Councillor Colin Rudd called it exactly what it was. "This amendment adds no value. It undermines the motion. It sabotages the motion. This is a wrecking amendment."
The councillor was correct. This was sabotage dressed up as sensitivity, taking a concrete act of solidarity and replacing it with the empty comfort of hoping someone else would act. The victims of the Miah brothers deserved action, not hope.
The Mayor Who Tried to Stop the Cameras
As the debate intensified, and Cllr Rudd quoted Judge Unsworth's words about acting "in plain sight" as a warning about institutional complacency., Mayor Fred Chatfield intervened to stop filming.
"It's a public meeting," came the reply.
"You've never asked permission to film," the Mayor snapped back.
The exchange summed up everything wrong with how power operates in Barrow. When confronted with truth, the instinct wasn't reflection but control. Yet what Mayor Chatfield attempted wasn't just politically damaging but illegal.
Under The Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, introduced through the Localism Act 2011, members of the public and press have a statutory right to film, record, and report on all public council meetings.
The legislation is unambiguous. "Council meetings are public meetings. The press and public have a right to attend, and to film, record, blog, or tweet during those meetings." No permission is required. No consent is necessary. The only exception would be if filming genuinely disrupted proceedings through shouting or obstruction, none of which occurred.
Mayor Chatfield's instruction that filming required his permission violated both the letter and spirit of the Localism Act, which was designed to ensure democratic transparency.
The Mayor should now resign for his actions. By attempting to silence the cameras, Mayor Chatfield didn't just betray the survivors watching from the gallery but broke the law designed to protect their right to witness democracy in action.
The Vote They Didn't Want You to See
When the Reform councillors called for a recorded vote so the public could know who supported Labour's amendment and who opposed it, Labour again chose secrecy. Under standing orders, a recorded vote requires majority support. Labour used this procedural rule to block transparency, ensuring their names would not appear in the public record.
"So the councillors who stopped the inquiry can hide who they are," muttered one member of the public.
"Disgraceful."
"Shame on you."
The chamber doors were closed for the final vote.
The Survivors Watching
Among those in the public gallery were women who had lived through the horrors being discussed. Some had waited years for recognition. Others still live in the same town where their abusers walked free. They listened as councillors downplayed the motion, softened the language, and eventually killed it entirely.
Councillor Colin Rudd spoke directly to the chamber's shame. "Every person in every office, in every department, in every institution in this town failed these girls... and you're doing it again."
His words carried the weight of judicial truth, but they didn't move the majority. The vote carried, the motion died, and the survivors left that hall knowing nothing had changed.
The Labour Playbook of Denial
What happened in Barrow follows the same playbook used across Britain's Labour strongholds when grooming gang scandals surface. Whether it's Oldham, Rotherham, or Telford, the institutional response never varies. Resist external scrutiny, prefer internal reviews that can be controlled, deploy procedural manoeuvring to protect the institution over the victims.
The formula never varies. Protect reputations over truth, deploy bureaucratic language to avoid concrete action, and when challenged, retreat behind phrases like "independent commissions" as though process can substitute for courage.
The questions are obvious. If everyone truly wants accountability, why block a letter to the Home Secretary? Why stop the filming? Why refuse a recorded vote? Because they understand that public accountability requires public records, and public records create public consequences.
The Continuing Cover-Up
Last night's meeting exposed the mechanism by which grooming gang scandals are managed across Britain's local authorities. This wasn't incompetence or confusion but a deliberate strategy deployed with surgical precision.
Here's how it works. Acknowledge the problem exists but only after court proceedings make denial impossible. Express concern and sympathy while blocking any external examination that might reveal institutional culpability. Deploy procedural manoeuvring to prevent public accountability by killing recorded votes, stopping filming, and sanitising minutes.
The pattern is so consistent it might as well be written in a manual. Oldham Council used identical tactics when faced with demands for transparency over Operation Augusta. Rotherham's political leadership employed the same playbook during the Casey Review fallout. The strategy works because it allows politicians to appear concerned while ensuring nothing changes.
But Barrow's case reveals something more disturbing. The Miah brothers operated their trafficking network from 2008 to 2016, eight years of systematic abuse while local institutions looked the other way. Children were being transported across county lines for rape while Barrow Council carried on with business as usual.
When survivors finally saw their abusers jailed, they might have hoped for institutional recognition and reform. Instead, they got Andy Coles and William McEwan drafting amendments to avoid external scrutiny. They got Fred Chatfield trying to silence cameras. They got Labour councillors voting to hide their names from public records.
This goes beyond political embarrassment. It's institutional betrayal that mirrors the same complacency that enabled the Miah brothers to operate with impunity. The children who were trafficked from that Barrow takeaway deserved better then. The survivors watching from the gallery deserved better last night.
It is now up to the people of Barrow to decide if they want better politicians representing them.
This isn't about politics anymore. It's about preservation of a ruling clique defending its own survival, even if it means abandoning the very people they swore to protect.
The nation does not need silence. It needs truth. This is not only a child abuse scandal. It is a crisis of truth, trust and governance in modern Britain.
I am Raja Miah. For seven years, I led a small team that exposed how politicians protected the rape gangs. I cannot do this on my own. I need you to stand with me and help make sure the National Inquiry we have all fought for is not a whitewash.
We’re running out of time. Without the numbers, they will win. It’s as simple as that.
🔴 Subscribe to my newsletter – it’s free. Or support the work for just 75p a week (£3/month or £30/year). Whatever you do, please subscribe;
This is the fight.
This is the moment.
There will not be another
🔴 Prefer a one-off contribution?
👉 http://BuyMeACoffee.com/recusantnine
👉 http://paypal.me/RecusantNine
No corporate sponsors. No party machine. Just you and thousands of ordinary people who know what’s at stake. We’ve come this far. Help finish it.
Raja Miah MBE