WATCH: Jim Gamble calls for 'cross-party co-operation' amid grooming gang inquiry chaos

Jim Gamble, I think you're there for us now, sir

Jim Gamble, thank you for joining us. You've said in a letter today that you're tired of the political point scoring

You must be deeply disappointed to have to withdraw from this inquiry

I am. I think there's been misinformation, and I feel for the victims and survivors who feel yet again

that they're stuck in the middle, and there's evidence that they're being pulled in different directions

And some of that is about misinformation and some of it's about party political point scoring

I mean, you introduced me as a former police officer. And of course, I am

I'm former because I resigned 15 years ago in protest at what Theresa May was doing to the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre

In the 15 years since, I have been involved in a range of reviews which have called out the police in and across the UK

have highlighted feelings in social care and elsewhere. And one of your reporters covering this not that long ago

when describing me as this former police officer, said that one of the problems was that I wouldn't understand modern slavery

I was in the ground floor when we began to learn about modern slavery

to understand the impact of it, and to be able to align that with the human trafficking

that takes place not just internationally, but locally. and I held the Association of Chief Police Officers lead on these issues

So I think, you know, everyone plays a part and everyone needs to be responsible

when they are pushing out information to, you know, victims who are carrying this burden of pain

because misinformation actually misinforms and it leads to people getting judgments on what they think is credible and factual information

when actually it isn't. OK, Jim. Hi. Thank you Charlie Peters with me now Jim I think you referring to me when you saying the reporter who made reference to modern slavery I was referring to a comment made to me by one of the survivors who interviewed you

and that was a concern they had shared based on conversation with you, saying his background is brilliant

And I did also share many of the positive comments that survivors engaging with you had heard

but said that they were worried about a lack of modern slavery knowledge

but I'm glad to have you put your expertise on the record on that here today

But perhaps there was a limited time to explain that background to the survivors

because, of course, we know that they had to submit their questions in advance

and not all survivors were able to attend that interview. Are you concerned, as many of them have said, that the process was stage managed

and that you weren't afforded the opportunity to discuss your background more broadly

I mean look thank you for that clarification I really appreciate it and I think yes that there

are issues I spoke to two victim and survivors panels which is indicative I think of some of the

problems that the Home Office are trying to manage because different people come from different lived

experiences and have different hopes fears and expectations I was totally unaware that they had

to have their questions, you know, proofed by someone. And in fact, I totally, I find that abhorrent

that that shouldn't happen. These are people who are reflecting their lived experience. As I said to them at the time

if I had been successful, the first thing I would want to do is give them the opportunity to speak to me in groups

if that's more comfortable. But actually people need the opportunity sometimes to share some of the detail they have in private

in one-to-one. And so to me it would have been stepping beyond the small groups that have been brought together for this purpose into creating a network of survivors who are able to speak to and inform the chair and challenge the chair because no two experiences are the same and I was really I was really disappointed that you know some of the survivors

like Fiona Goddard felt that she had to leave the process because she wasn't happy with it

and at the time I couldn't reach out to her which is what I would have wanted to do because I didn't

want to to do anything that would have made the process inappropriate but that's a person

who has been really, really good in the way that they've been able to speak out

They've used their experience courageously. And I think she, for one, has demonstrated a generosity of spirit

in the way she looks at it from both sides. So it was one of the things for me is if someone with my background in policing

which is undeniable, is going to be the predominant inhibitor for people like Fiona participating, then I don't want to inhibit that

I think this has got to be victim-centric. And I made a promise when I spoke to the survivors

that if I couldn't get their complete trust, that I would step back

And I think I got a huge amount of trust from a majority, but not all

And when you're given the privilege of speaking to these young people

who have the courage to come forward, who share their journey and the pain that that's inflicted

then you need to be true to your word. And that's one of the reasons I've stood down. The party politics and the toxic atmosphere around it, you know, is very much the context that's around it

And my goodness, if politicians can't come together cross party on this, when are they ever going to come together

And Jim Gamble, we've also heard the safeguarding minister, Jess Phillips, talking about how every institution in the country failed

And so it doesn matter the background of the person that selected in terms of that disqualifying them because it not just police officers and social workers who were involved in causing extreme suffering for these poor victims and survivors but also judges of course who criminalised many of the victims or courts that

took their children away while they were fighting for justice. Do you think that's going to make it

extremely difficult for any panel of survivors to adequately trust any appointed chair? And do you

fear that this toxic environment you're referring to is going to seriously scupper that job hunt

process. Well, great point. Yeah, I think the toxic environment, there needs to be a pause now

there needs to be a calming. Those people in positions of responsibility need to think about

the victims and survivors rather than their own political point scoring. What I would say to you

about occupation is this, you're absolutely right. There's none of us, none of us in the criminal

justice system, in the social care system, in education have covered ourselves in glory in the

past. All of those sectors have been complicit in the harm that has taken place and in the cover up

in the aftermath of it. But that doesn't mean every individual within every aspect. So I'm sure you

can get a judge. I'm sure you can get the right police officer. I'm sure you can get someone with

a social care background. Louise Casey is a social worker and she's created this platform

But the judgment needs to be made on the basis of the individual's character rather than their

previous occupation. So what have they done? What can you measure by virtue of deed rather than the

words that people will use to try and convince someone at the right time in the right place

that they're the right person? Look at their career profile and their career history. You know

from my point of view, you know, I have challenged. I delivered the Child Cure Review. I challenged the

Metropolitan Police around institutional racism. I challenged the West Midlands Police around the

incompetence that I saw, and it's a public document, following the death of, you know

Arthur Abinjo Hughes, a death, I believe, if the police had done their job right

could have actually been averted. So you've got to look at the individuals and check

you know, whether their words are supported by evidence of their deeds