MP accuses Roger Ellis of ‘perverse’ pride

Roger Ellis

Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk has accused former Rochdale Borough Council Chief Executive Roger Ellis of taking a "perverse" pride in claiming to be ignorant of widespread child sex abuse in the town.

Mr Ellis told a Home Affairs Select Committee he knew nothing of the abuse until the men's arrests in 2010 and feels no "personal culpability" – a position that angered MPs, including Mr Danczuk. Mr Danczuk said the claim "beggared belief" and that Mr Ellis' leadership had shattered lives.

Mr Danczuk said: “The victims wanted to hear senior managers explain how a council culture came about that allowed victims of rape to be routinely ignored by social workers.

“We wanted to hear from a repentant former chief executive who was prepared to explain how things went so badly wrong under his watch.

“But instead we got someone who refused to accept personal responsibility and claimed he didn't know anything about the endemic culture of abuse that was reported to social services on numerous occasions.”

He also said Mr Ellis appeared all the more contradictory as he was a member of the council’s Safeguarding Children Board.

Mr Danczuk said: “We heard earlier on in the committee, Sara Rowbotham tell MPs she had made over 100 referrals for abuse in this period. Roger Ellis said nobody had told him anything.

“He didn't know a sexual exploitation working group had been set up in 2007, which identified 50 young people affected by, or who were at risk of, sexual exploitation and yet he still didn't know anything.

Mr Danczuk also criticised Mr Ellis for refusing to disclose details of his "bumper pay-off" and called for a significant portion of it to be given back.

Earlier in the year Rochdale Online (RO) submitted a Freedom of Information request regarding Mr Ellis' pay off but the Council rejected the FOI request on the spurious grounds of Data Protection and a confidentiality clause, despite RO pointing out that the Data Protection Act was not applicable and the Government had ruled confidentiality clauses in such circumstances are invalid.