Andy Burnham has come under fresh criticism after comments from former Greater Manchester Police detective Maggie Oliver highlighted a pattern of policy missteps surrounding the early release of serious sexual offenders. Oliver, who founded the Maggie Oliver Foundation to support victims, says the latest announcements reveal a disconnect between political rhetoric and legal reality.
What triggered the controversy?
The debate resurfaced following the case of Shabir Ahmed, the self-styled ringleader of the Rochdale grooming gang. Ahmed's victims were repeatedly told he would be deported after his prison term, only to learn that a decades-old legal provision prevents deportation for offences committed before 2003. The government's subsequent scramble for a workaround mirrors earlier promises that serious child-sex offenders would not be released early, a promise that does not apply to pre-2003 crimes.
Why does it matter?
Oliver argues that such mis-steps erode public confidence in both the government and the criminal-justice system. For survivors, each reversal of policy creates renewed fear and uncertainty. She points to a history of institutional failures in Greater Manchester, where, as mayor, Burnham oversaw the police force that dismissed victims, ignored intelligence and pursued lighter convictions. Between 2003 and 2014, an NHS worker warned authorities about grooming-gang activity a hundred times, yet the warnings were dismissed as unreliable.
Two major inquiries, the Operation Augusta Review in South Manchester and a separate Rochdale Review, were set up by Burnham in his role as Police and Crime Commissioner. Oliver, who contributed to those reviews, describes them as thorough, but notes that a later "Assurance Review" published in 2025 omitted any survivor testimony, a decision she found indefensible.
"His Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC), the body meant to oversee the police, has greater powers than the original independent review team," Burnham told Oliver.
Oliver counters that greater powers cannot replace the voices of victims who have lived through the abuse. She also cites the resignations of safeguarding experts Gary Ridgway and Malcolm Newsam, who left the review process rather than endorse findings they could not support.
What happens next?
Oliver calls for a systematic overhaul that places survivor input at the centre of any future review. She warns that without such changes, the pattern of political grandstanding followed by legal loopholes will continue, further damaging trust. The debate also raises questions about the role of the new prime minister in addressing systemic shortcomings that have persisted across successive governments.
While the machinery of policing and policy may remain largely unchanged, Oliver sees growing hope in the increasing willingness of survivors to speak out and demand accountability. She urges policymakers, including Burnham, to translate rhetoric into concrete reforms that protect vulnerable children and restore confidence in the justice system.