The article is suggesting that the current heavy concentration on historic abuse cases involving victims who are now well into adult life is overtaxing the police/resources available. This is having a detrimental effect on how much time and money can be spent on rescuing children from abuse taking place NOW where victims are often well below the age of puberty.
To say that more money needs to be made available may well be true but it is not really addressing the issue directly since it is highly unlikely that this will happen any time soon when cuts are being made in many areas of public funding.
In many cases (the NHS, army, education, social services etc., benefits etc.) difficult decisions have to be made regarding where to put the limited funds that are available. Sadly, it is a question of prioritising.
Therefore, is it satisfactory, given the limited resources available, that historic cases should take precedence over rescuing children from present day abuse?
I agree with the argument that celebrities need to be publicly identified and prosecuted because their very celebrity enables them to abuse young people who are overawed by them. However, I believe that most young children can easily be manipulated by any adult they perceive to have power over them (teachers, doctors, parents, care home workers to name but a few).