The focus of the national grooming gangs inquiry “will not change” or be “watered down”, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has insisted.

Writing in the Times newspaper, Mahmood said the wait for the appointment of the inquiry’s chairperson will “not be much longer”, adding that the government “must get this right”.

Her intervention comes after three abuse survivors quit their roles in the inquiry this week over fears that its scope could be widened beyond grooming gangs – and concerns about who would chair the inquiry.

In her resignation letter, survivor “Elizabeth” – not her real name – said the process felt like “a cover-up” and had “created a toxic environment for survivors”.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced in June there would be a national inquiry into grooming gangs covering England and Wales, with a panel of survivors set up to oversee the process.

But three abuse survivors have accused officials of trying to water down the inquiry by broadening its scope to wider issues of child sexual abuse and exploitation.

There is also frustration around the length of time it has taken to appoint a chairperson, with some seeing this as a delay tactic because of fears of what might be exposed.

Survivors have raised concerns about the suitability of the candidates shortlisted to chair the inquiry – including Annie Hudson, a former senior social worker, and Jim Gamble, a former deputy chief constable.

Fiona Goddard, who was abused by gangs while living in a Bradford children’s home, said policing and social work services had “contributed most to the cover-up of the national mass rape and trafficking of children”.

Another survivor, Ellie Reynolds, suggested having “establishment insiders representing the very systems that failed us” as potential chairs was a conflict of interest.

Ms Reynolds, who was abused by a gang of Pakistani brothers in Barrow, told BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour: “If they were that serious in appointing a chair that was actually going to succeed in this inquiry they would not have picked a police officer or a social worker.

“It should have been a judge – it should have been somebody that was completely impartial and non-biased.”

Ms Reynolds said the “final turning point” in her decision to quit was a move to widen the inquiry “in ways that downplay the racial and religious motivations behind our abuse”.

Elizabeth said she had seen “selective narratives being promoted – ones that appear to serve particular agendas, especially around issues of race and the narrative of widening the scope”.

She told the BBC she had wanted a chair who was “legally” trained and “impartial”.

Annie Hudson has withdrawn her candidacy for chair, the BBC has been told.

In her article for the Times, Mahmood said it was with “a heavy heart” that she learned some members of the panel had stepped down.

“Should they wish to return, the door will always remain open to them,” Mahmood wrote. “But even if they do not, I owe it to them – and the country – to answer some of the concerns that they have raised.”

She also said the inquiry will “explicitly examine the ethnicity and religion of offenders”.

“I know that some are frustrated that they are still waiting for this inquiry to begin. I understand that frustration. And I feel it myself,” Mahmood added.

Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips had earlier said it was “untrue” the government was seeking to dilute the focus of the inquiry.

Responding to the resignations of Ms Goddard and Ms Reynolds in the House of Commons, Phillips said she regretted the departure of the two women but added: “My door is always open to them.”

She also insisted “not all victims are of the same opinion” and she would continue to engage with all survivors.

Phillips added that the inquiry panel of victims from which Ms Reynolds and Ms Goddard resigned was not managed by the government, but by a grooming gang charity.

But Ms Goddard said the safeguarding minister’s denials were a “blatant lie”, and later told GB News that she would “consider” returning to the panel, but only if Phillips resigned.

Ms Goddard said there were “many” members of the survivors’ panel who were not victims of grooming gangs but different types of child sexual abuse and exploitation, and that only these individuals were pushing for a wider inquiry.

A Home Office spokesperson said the inquiry “will remain laser-focused on grooming gangs”, as Baroness Casey had recommended when calling for a national inquiry to be set up.

“In order to meaningfully consult with victims and survivors about the terms of reference, we need to ask them questions and listen to their responses.” the spokesperson added.

“That is not expanding the scope – it is ensuring their voices shape the inquiry.”

Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the government’s inquiry was “descending into chaos”.

He said that ministers had been “forced” into holding the inquiry in June adding: “Perhaps that is why, months later, the government has said nothing substantive publicly.”

The Conservatives have called for the inquiry to be chaired by a senior judge to guarantee impartiality and restore faith in the process.

Phillips rejected that suggestion, arguing that Baroness Casey had said she did not want a traditional judicial-led inquiry.

The minister also stressed the difficulty of finding a chair who was not attached to an institution “that didn’t fail these girls over the years, including our courts who took the children away from grooming gang victims, who criminalised some of them”.

“There is no institution in our country that hasn’t failed,” she added.