A Very English Scandal - BBC1

[jean]

The NCCL gave space to them.

In reaction to the repression that went before, such dubious organisations too easily found a sympathetic hearing.

And the PIE’s propaganda was very clever.

[Andrew353w]

Which is true but it comes with provisos such as:

(a) why it was he who ended up in a situation in which he was pushed into extreme action and subsequently brought before a court, especially a decade after the law had changed in many ways in his favour (answer: as I have suggested earlier, the nature of his marital relationship and especially the politics of the time, plus that the activities in 1960-1 had been with someone who was under the age of 21 which was the age of consent in the late '60s/'70s and also onwards - that is what I meant by society not having decided in every circumstance who was an adult or a child - the standard age of consent was 16 but Scott would at age 19/20 have been an "illegal" even if the events of 1960-1 had been in 1977-8)

(b) why Heath was protected on what is known about his lifestyle in the 1950s etc, let alone subsequent more lurid allegations, given that he was from a grammar school background (answer: possibly because Heath became PM to help ensure it wasn't ultimately Benn in a coup as happened with Livingstone a bit later at the GLC and that the blasé assumption in Thorpe from very early on was largely derived from his ultra establishment background and schooling, then deemed in a new class system to be unmanageable by the old elites).


My memory - almost certainly in late 1974 (Sep?) - was of the Liberals descending by helicopter onto North Devon beaches full of holiday makers to hand out election leaflets. I don't know if you recall this? I was 11 at that time. The drama of it, with hindsight, was very Thorpian!

Yes, he did some pretty spectacular stunts! I don't remember the helicopter one but I was on Westward Ho! beach when Thorpe et al arrived in a hovercraft! The theatricality of his actions somewhat masked the vacuity of his actual policies, which seemed somewhat vague when you studied them in detail. I am not a supported of the Liberal party, or its offspring, the LibDems, but I studied politics at university and I was not alone in considering that Thorpe's stunts were just that: stunts. Underneath the policies lacked detail.

[LMcD]

I imagine that he would have certainly made the most of the opportunities provided by 'social media' had they been available at the time.

[LHC]

Unless I've missed it, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Harold Wilson and Jack Straw's role in this.

In 1974, Wilson and Thorpe were close friends, and Thorpe spent alot of time at no 10 in private meetings with Wilson. Wilson was reaching the end of his premiership, and was increasingly paranoid; he would complain to Thorpe that MI5 had bugged no 10.

Wilson thought that the allegations about Thorpe's relationship with Scott were the work of the South African security forces, and were intended to smear Thorpe because of his anti-apartheid stance. He arranged for Scott's social security files to be reviewed by a young researcher - the young Jack Straw - for evidence of the relationship with Thorpe, and to see if it was true that the Liberal Party had tried to buy off Scott.

Of course, the information would also have been useful to Labour, as they could have used it to pressure the Liberals in the event of a hung parliament.

More here:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/04/jack-straw-examined-extraordinary-social-security-files-of-jeremy-thorpes-lover

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11741826/Harold-Wilson-feared-he-was-being-targeted-by-South-African-spies.html

[Lat-Literal]

Yes, he did some pretty spectacular stunts! I don't remember the helicopter one but I was on Westward Ho! beach when Thorpe et al arrived in a hovercraft! The theatricality of his actions somewhat masked the vacuity of his actual policies, which seemed somewhat vague when you studied them in detail. I am not a supported of the Liberal party, or its offspring, the LibDems, but I studied politics at university and I was not alone in considering that Thorpe's stunts were just that: stunts. Underneath the policies lacked detail.

At that time, I would have regarded the name "Liberal" as fairly meaningless. "Conservative" likewise - and while "Labour" had a bit more meaning, it was only an approximation of the "working classes". Concepts of "democracy" and "fairness" were significant. The idea that what had led to mismanagement of the country was an electoral system that was biased in favour of two parties was very persuasive. PR. It was also the start of environmental politics. It seemed the Liberals had more of a commitment to those and also more awareness.

But I'd have been seeing politics mostly in terms of what was evidently increasing economic hardship for many - and inequality. The huge social distance between a grandparent in a council tower block - and my other two often in council housing - and the lives of those who were in my independent school (where I was on a free council pass) and their families was not lost on me. Nor the fact that my parents in a very small house and somewhat struggling were in the economic centre ground. Centrist economics not only seemed more suited to our position but an addressing of the positions of older, wider, family if there was ever to be more equality (rather than a reversal - the rich becoming poor and the poor becoming rich).

By the very late 1970s, I would have known about the early 20th century Liberals. I'd have been saying that it was they rather than Labour who had introduced national insurance and pensions. That would have been contrasted with a Labour council which had replaced slums with brutal architecture, forcing people out of their old homes, and a national party which while it was often well-intentioned was being hampered rather than helped by the trade unions. So all in all, the Liberals to me would have been like a Labour party that could actually function, acceptable economically as I saw it to the wide range of classes with whom I associated including Tories (though it never was : I completely underestimated the lack of give on money among Tories when the going gets tough, the appeal of huge money to those who don't have any; and the entrenched views of old Labour : my uncle who was in the print with close links to Brenda Dean : a family cousin ran the SOGAT home in Rottingdean : said "The Liberals are neither one thing or the other"); and forward looking on the environment/PR.

While I went into the manifestos in more detail - I still have the main three from 1979 - these were among the sorts of messages that were successfully being conveyed to the general public even though they just read tabloids or watched the occasional programme on television. There was probably even a "new broom" idea that they could resurrect an Attlee spirit. Small "l" liberal causes - often controversial for many as highlighted above - I'm not sure "liberal" would have been the tag in the 21stC way. Fringe perhaps, trendy : that sort of thing.

Brenda Dean - 29 April 1943 - 13 March 2018

[LMcD]

Unless I've missed it, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Harold Wilson and Jack Straw's role in this.

In 1974, Wilson and Thorpe were close friends, and Thorpe spent alot of time at no 10 in private meetings with Wilson. Wilson was reaching the end of his premiership, and was increasingly paranoid; he would complain to Thorpe that MI5 had bugged no 10.

Wilson thought that the allegations about Thorpe's relationship with Scott were the work of the South African security forces, and were intended to smear Thorpe because of his anti-apartheid stance. He arranged for Scott's social security files to be reviewed by a young researcher - the young Jack Straw - for evidence of the relationship with Thorpe, and to see if it was true that the Liberal Party had tried to buy off Scott.

Of course, the information would also have been useful to Labour, as they could have used it to pressure the Liberals in the event of a hung parliament.

More here:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/04/jack-straw-examined-extraordinary-social-security-files-of-jeremy-thorpes-lover

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...can-spies.html

I, too, don't recollect any reference in the TV series to Wilson's involvement in the Thorpe affair. It is mentioned in the Tom Mangold documentary (highly recommended if you haven't seen it).

[Lat-Literal]

I, too, don't recollect any reference in the TV series to Wilson's involvement in the Thorpe affair. It is mentioned in the Tom Mangold documentary (highly recommended if you haven't seen it).

I've added a little to post 110 to mention Brenda Dean. I need to revisit the Mangold documentary. An awkward looking Portillo - I quite like him - and Johnson, who is also acceptable, were talking about how so much of the establishment was batting in Thorpe's favour as suggested by Mangold which is probably true. But it is not in sync with my opinion that he was the fall guy in a desperate attempt to keep the old economic order afloat via a post 1979 Lib-Lab government. Of course, I am prepared to revise and will say so if I do on the grounds of seeing the documentary again but I am keeping to my stance for now. Why? I am aware of how there has rarely been one establishment but two. For example, there is historically a massive gap between MI5 and MI6 and, while opaque, a chunk of the answer on why institutionalised abuse was not properly addressed is in the long fight between the two. Even up to 2016, you'd have found one with significant sympathies towards UKIP ideas and one that was, without question, not. They are far more political than anyone thinks, for better or worse. That would also translate across easily to the comments on South Africa. As for Wilson, I think later history tells us that he was a much better PM than to many he appeared. It ain't easy. Theresa May knows that and that is why I tend to give her the benefit of the doubt. I'd also rate the personally unpleasant President Johnson higher than Kennedy, with provisos.

Straw is not a politician I admire, especially in view of what happened under Blair's Labour. He was, of course, a protégé of Barbara Castle who was the proverbial force of nature and he ultimately inherited her constituency. I have always felt that I cannot really have an opinion on "In Place of Strife" because it came so early in my life. It makes some sense to me given how the unions went in the 1970s but I also wonder if it wasn't a bit too early. Whatever her faults, I think she was a magnificent Labour woman without all of the slight archness of many who followed her and - this will no doubt sound awful in 2018 - I tend to feel that a certain substance always comes with women from the Labour movement with flaming red hair. I just think you can sense political class when you see it. Melanie Phillips who by definition has to look as miserable as sin coming from her own political angle beats Jess Phillips at every turn on rationality but not strategically because she refuses to give way in terms of her own standard. It's horses for courses from a neutral stance. Some are weighty and some are not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydw1ZHk0Tmc

Pure political class from Castle.

Thorpe here on the side of a killing male Establishment Euro dominance - not another woman with a voice and quips that Castle is trying to be a revolutionary Pankhurst. Contrast with the waffle of Swinson, Lucas, McGovern, Harman, Sturgeon, Savile-Roberts, O'Neill and Soubry - brandishing women's rights and signed up to be enslaved by a Euro patriarchy while that conjurs opponents donning jackboots who won't accept dictatorship on the grounds that the new wealthy claming to be leftist don't want themselves - and their kids - to get poorer. But perhaps the greatest point made is the facade of internationalism - the developing countries are shot at economically from a high and mighty hill and in the name of righteousness.

[gradus]

'"In Place of Strife" .. makes some sense to me given how the unions went in the 1970s '

Couldn't agree more, it's rejection was an error of massive proportions from which UK unions have never recovered.

[Lat-Literal]

'"In Place of Strife" .. makes some sense to me given how the unions went in the 1970s '

Couldn't agree more, it's rejection was an error of massive proportions from which UK unions have never recovered.

Yes, from what I know, my immediate reaction to your kind comment is that it is a strong one.

I was a Willy Brandt man - or a Scandinavian - myself. Not so much beer and sandwiches round the table with smoke swirling around as an honest power sharing with everyone there to enhance an economy with minimal scope for conflict. I still think the Remainers have a point and that everyone does - but, with hindsight, I feel we Europeans were naïve so I shall go along with Peter Bone if necessary. "Dear" David Owen - and let's not dwell on the clouts of shoe on his chauffeur - is in my current ball park. I guess that it is a lack of hubris for you.

(I always had a very soft spot for Shirley Williams of the Gang of Four but I do have to ask myself sometimes if I am a bit crackers)

[Pianorak]

Barbara Castle: The Castle Diaries 1964-1976 fascinating stuff and extremely well written.

[Lat-Literal]

Barbara Castle: The Castle Diaries 1964-1976 fascinating stuff and extremely well written.

Wherever one comes from and I wasn't in her camp, I look at that clip and she almost had it all. Classless by then, erudite, feisty, rational, of fierce conviction, humourous, and come and 'ave a go if you think you're hard enough. When I watched it today I was in awe. I know how stumbling she became in older age. But my gawd - I love Wilkinson and Lee, of course. Boothroyd. I liked the Libs' Nancy Seear. Dunwoody appealed to me when I wasn't havng to brief. That to me is the Labour movement. There are few of them around today.

Call me complex but I was also impressed by Melanie Phillips in her testimony before a recent Parliamentary committee and, on balance and pending, I will give a yes to Cressida Dick. What I look for in women of power is a substantial steeliness which is actually what I look for in men of power too. Although I will permit a bit of fair feist in women whereas I would be looking for a nuance and a sensitivity in the men. That absolutely does not mean the sort of violent wetness one finds in a Thorpe. Rather I would, as posted, choose a Rory Stewart.

Irrespective of political persuasion, the heroic and very substantial indeed in my view : no stereotypes here; I especially like him - admire him - as he doesn't look or sound the part:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Re4x0dizlM

(my unequivocal Prime Minister in waiting,,,,,but not in this world)