Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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:
Martorana · 27/02/2014 22:26

So. What did Harman actually do wrong?

What do people want her to do about it now?

claig · 27/02/2014 22:27

BBC News doing a brilliant job again. What is going on at the BBC? This is a revelation.

They just reported on BBC 1 10 o'clock news that Patricia Hewitt has apologised and this may increse the pressure on Harman to apologise, but that the difference is an apology from Harman, a serving MP and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, would have far more serious ramifications.

nauticant · 27/02/2014 22:31

But what should the HH apology relate to, specifically?

HH ... bad woman ... paedos ... sorry

could be a high-level version, but what is the specific thing she did for which she should apologise?

claig · 27/02/2014 22:35

I don't know. She didn't do anything wrong. But she did work for an organisation that had affiliated to it, a paedophile supporting group. Patricia Hewitt has apologised. But Hewitt was in a much more senior position as General Secretary. Hewitt said

"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 "

Martorana · 27/02/2014 22:58

"I don't know. She didn't do anything wrong"

Right. So the Daily Mail is hounding her exactly why?

claig · 27/02/2014 23:03

It is now being discussed on Question Time

BusinessUnusual · 27/02/2014 23:06

Good point about the DM's online angle on teenagers, Jay

Caitlin17 · 27/02/2014 23:16

Fryonefatmanic I was born in 1959 and husband was born in 1954. Jay Rayner has just eloquently expressed our views. The 70s was a weird and weirdly nasty decade.

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 23:18

It was a particularly nasty decade if you were a child in a local council children's home.

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 23:21

On Newsnight the DPP was explaining why it was important to take historic sex abuse claims to court. These things really must not be shoved under the carpet - especially if people in power want them to be.

longfingernails · 27/02/2014 23:22

The Sun has quite a headline.

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 23:23

It's because of The Sun's investigations that Hewitt has been forced to come clean. There was nothing else she could do.

Caitlin17 · 27/02/2014 23:24

falala Your point isn't relevant. Not even the DM is suggesting HH is an abuser.

longfingernails · 27/02/2014 23:25

Well done The Sun. Great investigative journalism.

It's despicable that Hewitt thinks she can get away with a mealy mouthed apology.

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 23:28

Caitlin, you don't see any connection between PIE's policies being given credibility and widespread child abuse?

DonnaDishwater · 27/02/2014 23:29

What is the Sun's headline?

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 23:30

www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/

Caitlin17 · 27/02/2014 23:32

Faalaalaa have you read this thread? There are several posters, including me, pointing out several other organisations who gave PIE a platform at the time.

claig · 27/02/2014 23:36

This is a document the NCCL wrote in 1976, before Harman joined.
Who wrote this and who was on the executive committee and was it at all influenced by PIE?

"However, in a 1976 submission to Parliament’s Criminal Law Commission — dubbed a ‘Lolita’s charter’ by one MP — the NCCL claimed: ‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage.’

The document argued that it was ‘logical’ but ‘not politically possible’ that the age of consent be abolished altogether , and said therefore that the age of consent should be lowered to 14 — or ten provided it is demonstrated that consent was clearly given by the child .

When you joined the NCCL as its legal officer two years later, you must have been fully aware that this remained the organisation’s position. Why, then, did you join a campaign group that supported such a policy?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567098/Not-one-hint-remorse-Harriet-Harman-Jack-Dromeys-statements-Mails-replies.html

This is the question of judgement that I think the Mail is asking

"When you joined the NCCL as its legal officer two years later, you must have been fully aware that this remained the organisation’s position. Why, then, did you join a campaign group that supported such a policy?"

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 23:36

Yes, I have RTFT. I'm on it. I'm one of many posters who don't really think it's about senior Labour politicians, but a story with far, far, far wider and more important ramifications. Which is why it really must be given airtime, and - thank God - it is now being given it.

Caitlin17 · 27/02/2014 23:37

Faalaalaa no I don't think allowing PIE to put their heads above the parapet encouraged widespread abuse. If anything the unintended consequences were If anything it forced people to think about it seriously and face up to it happening.

I entirely agree with the posters who have mentioned "dirty old men" and dodgy uncles one steered clear of but whom no one did anything about.

Caitlin17 · 27/02/2014 23:39

faalaalaa to what end? Most of PIE main figures have already been prosecuted. What exactly do you want?

falaaalaaa · 27/02/2014 23:41

I think you're very wrong. I don't think you're understanding how child abuse was legitimised. You seem to be saying PIE's policies had a positive effect!!!

Caitlin17 · 27/02/2014 23:47

I think the PIE may well have opened up people's eyes to things they had previously been unwilling to even admit happened.

I'm still unclear what you think HH is supposed to do or have done to her?

claig · 27/02/2014 23:49

The Sun article is shocking

"LABOUR’S Patricia Hewitt last night apologised after The Sun confronted her for backing a paedophile plan for the age of consent to be TEN in certain cases.

The ex-Health Secretary put her name to a document that also wanted to legalise incest. She and Jack Dromey, now a Labour MP, were members of a committee recommending a revolutionary change in child sex laws.

Our investigation showed how she backed the work of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) in the 1970s and 1980s. She said: “I got it wrong on PIE and I apologise for having done so.”

www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5475224/labour-chief-patricia-hewitt-sorry-for-backing-paedo-plan.html

This sounds like the document that the Mail mentioned above.

If the press does not drop this story, it wouldn't surprise me if more shocking stuff comes out.