Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder why no one seems bothered by links to labour MPs + paedophile rights organisation?

954 replies

starlady · 20/02/2014 22:54

The Mail has published new claims about Harriet Harman, Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt supporting The paedophile information exchange. Thought it was a rehash of an old story, but I've looked at the evidence published, and it looks as if harriet etc do have some explaining to do. I won't link to the Mail, but the Guardian gives a more nuanced point of view here

www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/feb/20/dailymail-harrietharman
What I'm finding puzzling is twitter is not bothered! And I haven't seen anything on mumsnet. Isn't anyone bothered? No wonder jimmy Saville et al got away with their actions. I am a labour voter myself, so I'm not trying to be partisan and stir up trouble, but the silence on this disturbs me.

OP posts:
falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 19:03

But I think you have highlighted an issue. If politicians are always going to chop and change according to focus groups or pressure groups, however serious the issue in hand is, there is no hope for us.

merrymouse · 27/02/2014 19:03

Apparently for some misguided individuals who were members of some civil liberties organisations in the 1970's it wasn't. Do I think HH's involvement with the NCCL means that she is one of them? No, and I don't think many people do.

MoominMammasHandbag · 27/02/2014 19:04

I disagree on that one falaaalaaa.
I think we want people who can question the status quo governing us.
If what was considered moral or ethical never changed then where would we be? Locking up gay people? Removing children from unmarried mothers? Banning abortion?
Of course we want people who will question things, governing us. Paedophilia had it's opportunity to become mainstream, shamelessly piggybacking on gay rights. It was debated, considered and rejected. I think that's a positive thing.

Viviennemary · 27/02/2014 19:04

I wonder if it will be raised on Question Time tonight. I am assuming it's on. If it is it will be interesting to see what the panel have to say. But nobody seems too keen to do very much digging. Too much dirt to be unearthed I would think.

claig · 27/02/2014 19:06

Listen to the World At One BBC Radio 4 news report. It is up now.
It starts at about 19.00 minutes into the stream.

claig · 27/02/2014 19:06

Sorry, link is

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03vsj3c

claig · 27/02/2014 19:08

'Do I think HH's involvement with the NCCL means that she is one of them? No, and I don't think many people do.'

No one thinks that.

thatswhatimtalkingbout · 27/02/2014 19:15

"there are many, many victims of historic child abuse who need their voices to be heard."

That is true but I don't think Harriet Harman personally made abuse happen. OR that pursuing her is providing justice to them.

"Do we want people governing the country who feel that the moral and ethical are a bit uncertain?

No."

There are two issues here being wrongly conflated.

1 - are ethics a matter of opinion? No. Absolutely not. Don't forget that majorities can be made to support abhorrent things. Nazism was popular in Germany but it was still wrong. We must have the courage to say that what makes things right or wrong is bigger and deeper than what everyone around you seems to think.

2 - are ethics to be debated, can minds be changed?
Yes.

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 19:27

Patricia Hewitt has just come clean and apologised.

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 19:29

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26376896

claig · 27/02/2014 19:30

Good.

claig · 27/02/2014 19:37

"As general secretary then, I take responsibility for the mistakes we made. I got it wrong on PIE and I apologise for having done so.

"I should have urged the executive committee to take stronger measures to protect NCCL's integrity from the activities of PIE members and sympathisers and I deeply regret not having done so."

news.sky.com/story/1218567/hewitt-says-nccl-naive-over-paedophile-group

Hewitt has apologised and is no longer in politics. Dromey and Harman are in politics.

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 19:49

According to the itv website: "Patricia Hewitt said that a proposal by theNational Council for Civil Liberties (now Liberty) to reduce the age of consent had not been hers, although she acknowledged that it had been the policy of the organisation and the executive committee."

www.itv.com/news/story/2014-02-27/patricia-hewitt-apologises-over-paedophile-group/#patricia-hewitt-i-do-not-support-reducing-age-of-consent_331020

claig · 27/02/2014 19:51

Who was on the Exceutive Committee?

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 19:53

And talking of lobbying, having no moral compass, and being fuzzy/ open to influence on moral and ethical issues, I had forgotten this:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/7500906/Stephen-Byers-Patricia-Hewitt-and-Geoff-Hoon-suspended-over-lobbying-allegations.html

somewherewest · 27/02/2014 19:54

From the Guardian (link below):

According to archives held at Hull University, in December 1975 Keith Hose, chairman of PIE, wrote to Patricia Hewitt, then general secretary of NCCL and later a Labour health secretary, asking her to consider PIE's views in its policy on ages of consent. The letter was on PIE notepaper which features a logo of two bare-legged children sitting on a rock. Hewitt wrote back saying: "We have found your evidence ... most helpful and I think it has certainly been taken into account by the people preparing our evidence."

www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/26/lobbying-paedophile-campaign-revealed-hewitt

claig · 27/02/2014 19:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheHoneyBadger · 27/02/2014 20:01

they haven't joined in a witch hunt and uber cynical political smearing. i think that's a good thing.

bbc HAD to report on it because of the trouble they've been in before and not being able to be seen to avoiding anything to do with child abuse (given the kicking for covering up celebrities behaviour).

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 20:01

Some TV presenters are dirty old men...

somewherewest · 27/02/2014 20:04

The BBC article someone else linked to on this thread and other coverage I've been reading on the BBC and the Guardian makes it clear that PIE were incredibly controversial amongst liberals and within the gay rights movement at the time, so the arguments about 'context' just don't seem terribly convincing. I'm just not clear why its so hard for people to accept that those involved with the NCCL in the 70s and early 80s fucked up massively, Hewitt in particular. 'Naive' is a charitable interpretation of Hewitt telling a paedophile advocacy group that their take on the age of consent was "helpful".

TheHoneyBadger · 27/02/2014 20:05

you can't publish 'titilating' images of children and then expect to be taken seriously when claiming disgust at paedophillic associations decades ago.

clearly no serious news outlet or person is going to take your 'concern' seriously or give you airspace unless they have their own agenda for doing so.

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 20:06

There were clearly plenty of people in possession of a moral compass at the time - lots of people have said they spoke out against PIE.

TheHoneyBadger · 27/02/2014 20:07

somewhere - i don't know what the whole letter or context is but that letter to me reads like a polite fuck off letter to me.

somewherewest · 27/02/2014 20:09

a witch hunt and uber cynical political smearing

Sigh. I'm not sure how much has to come out for some people to realise that this actually wasn't just invented wholesale by the DM. Everything I've quoted on this thread originated with either the Guardian or the BBC, and it is still appalling. Basically it comes down to poor X can't possibly have done anything bad, because she is one of us not one of them.