Britain's safeguarding minister fired back Tuesday at remarks by US tech billionaire Elon Musk, calling them "ridiculous."
Jess Phillips said she has "more important things to be thinking about" after Musk accused her of being a "rape genocide apologist" over her handling of child abuse cases.
Speaking to Sky News, Phillips said the SpaceX CEO and close ally of US President-elect Donald Trump "should crack on with this 'getting to Mars'" instead of wading into British politics.
"You know, Elon Musk is going to (do) Elon Musk. I've got bigger and more important things to be thinking about," she said.
Recently, Musk criticized the Labour government over its handling of historical child abuse cases, calling for Prime Minister Keir Starmer to be ousted and imprisoned over alleged failures in prosecuting grooming gangs.
Phillips said she had dedicated her life to fighting child exploitation, saying it was "painful" to watch it become "political football."
Also speaking to the BBC, she said "disinformation" spread by Musk was "endangering" her but that it was nothing compared to the experiences of victims of abuse.
Phillips confirmed that the threat to her own safety had gone up since Musk's social media posts calling her a "rape genocide apologist" and saying she should be jailed.
"I'm no stranger to people who don't know what they're talking about trying to silence women like me," she added.
Musk's inflammatory remarks came in response to Phillips rejecting a request for the government to lead a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham, which prompted calls from the Conservatives and Reform UK for a national inquiry into grooming gangs.
Although her decision was taken in October, it was first reported by GB News at the start of the year and then picked up by Musk on his social media platform X.
Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp has argued that a national inquiry is needed to "get to the truth" of how grooming gangs were able to abuse children.
But Phillips defended the government's stance not to hold a national inquiry, arguing that local inquiries were more effective at leading to change.
