“It felt toxic and isolating.” That’s how Barrow survivor Ellie‑Ann Reynolds summed up her brief stint on the government’s survivors panel before walking away this week. In Bradford, Fiona Goddard says she no longer trusts the process. These are not Westminster skirmishes to people here; they’re lived realities across Oldham, Bradford and Barrow, where patience is thin and answers are overdue.

Downing Street and the Home Office are standing by Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips. Children’s minister Josh MacAlister told reporters she has the prime minister’s and home secretary’s confidence, and Shabana Mahmood is now firmly in post at the Home Office after September’s reshuffle. Ministers insist Phillips stays.

Survivors themselves are split. Four women who resigned from the panel this week say they could return if Phillips goes, accusing her of undermining them in public. Hours later, five other survivors - led by Oldham’s Samantha Walker‑Roberts - wrote to Keir Starmer and Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood saying they will only keep working with the inquiry if Phillips remains, setting out seven conditions for their support.

Walker‑Roberts and her group argue Phillips has listened and offers consistency. They also want the inquiry’s net wide enough to include all forms of child sexual exploitation so survivors who don’t fit the common “grooming gang” pattern aren’t shut out. That stance directly clashes with those who quit, who fear any broadening would dilute focus.

Leadership of the inquiry is in flux. Former senior officer Jim Gamble, viewed as a frontrunner to chair it, has pulled out, citing a “toxic environment” and a lack of consensus among survivors given his policing background. Annie Hudson, a highly experienced social work leader, withdrew earlier this week. Both exits have stalled momentum.

Government sources now concede it could take months to appoint a new chair, even as they argue they are taking urgent steps to restart the process. That means communities in the North waiting longer for a credible lead figure and a timetable they can believe in.

In Parliament, Sir Keir Starmer said the inquiry will not be watered down and its scope will not change. He promised it will examine the ethnicity and religion of offenders and confirmed Baroness Louise Casey has been drafted in to steady the setup. “The door will always be open,” he told those who quit.

On the record, ministers say this is a statutory process under the Inquiries Act 2005 with powers to compel evidence, time‑limited to three years, and that survivor engagement is being run through the NWG Network charity rather than directly by officials. Those details matter to survivors trying to judge independence.

Across our patch, the stakes are practical, not political. Survivors in Cumbria, West Yorkshire and Greater Manchester want trauma‑informed support, a chair they can trust - many are calling for a senior judge - and clarity on whether the panel lead will be replaced by a mental health professional, as demanded by those who resigned. Until then, trust will remain fragile.