Three reasons to hope that new enquiries will bring a satisfactory conclusion to child abuse scandal

Parliament SunsetTheresa May has announced two enquiries into historic allegations of child abuse.

The BBC reports:

The head of the children’s charity NSPCC is to lead a review of historical child sex abuse allegations, Home Secretary Theresa May has announced.

Peter Wanless’s review, which will cover how police and prosecutors handled information given to them, is expected to report within 10 weeks.

A Hillsborough-style inquiry will also be held, led by an independent panel of experts on law and child protection.

I had been slightly dubious that she might announce a narrow enquiry led by a member of the establishment. We can feel a bit more confident, I think, for 3 brief reasons:

The initial enquiry into what happened at the Home Office is to be headed by the head of the NSPCC. We will see very quickly, as he’s due to report within 8-10 weeks, how transparent and open his process is. If the outcome of his enquiry is not convincing, then people won’t have faith in the second, longer enquiry.

The bigger enquiry is being carried out by a panel rather than a senior establishment figure and will be able to look into all sorts of public institutions from the BBC to care homes to schools.

Finally, as Liberal Democrat MP Duncan Hames asked, people should be able to speak freely. Theresa May agreed with him that this was necessary but she needed to check the requirements of the Official Secrets Act. This means that if someone signed a non-disclosure agreement of some sort with a particular body, for example, they would be free from its obligations on confidentiality.

It’s to be hoped that the Government has learned the lessons of the past and set up a robust enough enquiry that will get to the bottom of what happened in the past and make sure that children are not failed in the future.  It’s important to do this all in a way that respects due process and not directed by the tabloids.

 

Photo by Greg Knapp

* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

39 Comments

  • matt (Bristol) 7th Jul '14 - 5:22pm

    Agreed, but (Department of Pedantry) should articles by ‘the Voice’ use the authorial/editorial ‘I’?

  • Jayne Mansfield 7th Jul '14 - 6:46pm

    I really feel that there is a need for a full public enquiry. I really don’t find it acceptable that the enquiry headed by the head of the NSPPC should be left to make the decision as to whether the enquiry will need to be up-graded.

    Norman Tebbit hinted yesterday that there may well have have been a cover up because of an instinct at the time for people to protect the system. Although he argued that the culture has changed, I am not convinced.

  • Eddie Sammon 7th Jul '14 - 7:30pm

    There should be prosecutions if people are found guilty, but there should also be support for mental health of those found guilty.

  • Jayne Mansfield 7th Jul '14 - 8:03pm

    How very, very brave of Tessa Munt to disclose the information she disclosed on Radio 4.

    Well done to Tessa, it can’t have been easy to disclose such personal information to the general public. I am full of admiration,

  • @Eddie Sammon. I doubt the victims will care much about their abusers’ mental health as theirs was ruined for life, their bodies and minds abused. So how about support for them?

  • After the Savile revelations and some recent prosecutions, it seems to me that the most important issue is the treatment of the witnesses and victims of any alleged abuse. In other cases of historic abuse we know that people did come forward and were ignored. This time they have to be listened to and given the support that may help to right some old injustices,

  • Eddie Sammon 8th Jul '14 - 1:06am

    Anne, I am not happy with being accused of lacking concern for victims. I regularly argue against left wing Lib Dems for being “soft on crime” and I want prosecutions and prison sentences. I also just wanted to show support for human rights and rehabilitation. It bores me simply joining in on public condemnations.

    Of course I want support for the victims, but I wasn’t writing an essay on everything I thought about it. I’ll try to call for that more in the future.

    Regards

  • Eddie Sammon 8th Jul '14 - 1:14am

    An example of Lib Dems being soft on crime is opposition to the “snoopers charter”. This would help catch child abusers, so I’m not being painted as the one who doesn’t care about the victims and bringing people to justice. Being against things like the snoopers charter is helping paedophiles.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/dec/11/theresa-may-coalition-snoopers-charter

  • Eddie Sammon 8th Jul '14 - 2:11am

    I don’t want to get into an argument. I said what I said and I didn’t think it was very controversial. I’ll try to show more support for victims in future, but I am not sorry for sticking up for mental health and human rights too.

  • I will be very surprised if anything substantial comes out of these enquiries. Many people are hanging a lot of credence on comments by Norman Tebbit, yet anything that from Tebbit seems to have some ulterior agenda. If Geoffrey Dickens’ allegations contained anything explosive, we would have to wonder how Dickens was silenced and why such information has not leaked out from those who worked for him.

  • John Roffey 8th Jul '14 - 8:33am

    @ Martin

    ‘If Geoffrey Dickens’ allegations contained anything explosive, we would have to wonder how Dickens was silenced and why such information has not leaked out from those who worked for him.’

    Watching the news coverage of this issue, there does seem to be agreement that the culture of the time was to protect the Establishment at all cost – little or no thought was given to the victims. Although it does seem that Dickens did make a number of attempts to raise the matter in the HofC and elsewhere – it must have been very difficult for him if all those around him closed ranks and treated him like a pariah whenever he raised the issue.

    By all accounts he was quite a brave man – I should think he needed to be to continue with his crusade once it became clear that his colleagues, the Civil Service and the MSM were not going to support him in his efforts

  • Geoffrey Dickens was also, publicly, a very unpleasant man, and not one who others would easily regard as someone who might “lead their opinions”. I remember some of my thoughts on going to help Chris Davies’s successful byelection in the Littleborough and Saddleworth constituency in the 90s, following Dickens’s death. My motivations were mainly to support Chris, a politician I have always admired, but a fair bit was because of my detestation of Dickens. It would be encouraging to think that his “dossier” might produce at least a little understanding of the way “the establishment” has covered up its wrongdoings, and give a feeling to those abused in times past that, at least, and at last, some people will properly listen to them, and acknowledge the crimes done.

  • I have not been commenting on LDV for a while because I am currently going through trauma-focused CBT and EMDR therapy for Psychological disorders that arose from being the victim of sexual abuse and rape over a 12 year period. I have been finding the therapy difficult and I am a bit irrational at the moment so have tried to stay away from public forums.

    I have waited “20 years” for this kind of intensive therapy from the NHS despite them being fully well aware of my mental health disorders the reasons for them and the fact that my whole life has been derailed due to the level of abuse.

    Whilst I welcome these inquiries, I think the government needs to be doing more for the “victims” of these crimes.

    And whilst I think it is important for our media and politicians to be highlighting the extent of sexual abuse that has been happening from celebrities, politicians and powerful people. Thoughts need to be turned to the attention of “ALL” victims of sexual related crimes.
    These are really difficult and traumatic times for people like me who have suffered from sexual abuse. On a daily basis you can not escape from being reminded about you own traumatic abuse, because everywhere you turn, the News, social media, people talking on the street. Pedophilia and sexual abuse is being talked about everywhere you turn.

    The Government is not doing enough to “support” the victims of these heinous crimes. Some of whom have had their entire lives totally derailed by these traumatic offences.
    Urgent Money needs to be released and directed to the Mental health services in order for them to be able to offer urgent treatment and support to victims. Mental health services are hugely underfunded at the same time as demand is soaring.
    An urgent review also needs to take place on the level of CBT and talking therapies offered to patients. At present due to lack of resources and high demands patients are only offered 12-15 sessions. This quite simply is not enough for people who are suffering from complex mental health conditions which are a result of sexual abuse.
    People who have suffered years of mental health disabilities due to these trauma’s, needs the time to build up a level of trust and to feel “safe” with the treating therapist in order for them to be able to open up and talk about their past.
    (When you are told you are only going to get 12 sessions) It is a huge barrier to the patient, because you are immediately put under added pressure by feeling that you have to disclose information before you feel ready or safe to do so. Its not just about feeling “safe” with the therapist it’s about feeling “safe” with yourself that you are going to be able to cope with the trauma of discussing the abuse openly and not feeling as though you are going to have the rug pulled from underneath you so to speak by having “support & services” taken away from you before you are ready.

    Mental health services needs “urgently” to be better funded so patients can be treated not only quicker but at a level that is appropriate for people who are suffering from long term and complex mental health disabilities due to sexual abuse and rape.

    I know Norman Lamb has done some good for NHS mental health, But more, much more needs to be done.

    We go out of our way (and rightly so) to support men and women from our armed forces who suffer from horrific injuries and mental trauma when serving in wars.
    We need the same level of support and services for people who have been victims of childhood abuse who are struggling with the consequences of these heinous crimes they have been subjected to.

  • John Roffey 8th Jul '14 - 10:39am

    @ Tim13

    ‘Geoffrey Dickens was also, publicly, a very unpleasant man,’

    I have no recollection of him at all – and am having to rely on the accounts provided by those who did through the media – what you say does not conflict with what has been said.

    What has interested me, since May’s statement to the House [a statement that did not acknowledge any loss of files] is how this morning the issue was dropped as lead story in Telegraph, Guardian, Independent, Mail and the Express – this clearly was the objective of offering the wide ranging measures included in May’s statement. There was a great desire by Cameron and the Tories to cool down what had become feverish speculation and this is why May offered much more than was originally trailed.

    I was somewhat surprised because last night’s Newsnight included an account from someone who had collected evidence from victims at the time and there were 17 individuals, of prominence, whose names had occurred time and again. However, watching the Sky News headlines – their lead item was the alleged abuse and highlighted the list of 17 [some now dead].

    Perhaps Murdoch has a score to settle with the Tories – lets hope so because there are clearly some very powerful Establishment figures who will continue to do all they can to avoid the truth being revealed and still have a good chance of success.

  • John Roffey 8th Jul '14 - 11:13am

    @ Matt

    I very much hope your treatment is successful. However, if it is not complete within the time allocated do not be too alarmed as a meditation group will serve the same purpose [and most likely be free].

    I was traumatized by an event that occurred when I was about one – that I had no knowledge of until I started with a meditation group lead by an experienced teacher. Sitting in meditation without distractions, those events in your life that have been pushed into the unconscious gradually start to rise into the conscious mind. Firstly the most recent and gradually those from the more distant past. Through this process the suppressed emotions related to these incidents can be re-encountered and once relived and, although painful, cause you no more concerns.

    My trauma was not from abuse but from an unavoidable event in an extreme circumstance. It took me 10 years of meditation to reach down to what must have been the depth of my unconscious. However, since you are already aware of the incidents this should happen far more quickly for you.

  • I was traumatized by an event that occurred when I was about one – that I had no knowledge of until I started with a meditation group lead by an experienced teacher

    Sounds like the event that traumatised me when I was minus five billion and a space alien. I had no knowledge of that either until an expert helped me recover the memory.

  • @John Roffey

    Thank you for your reply.

    I have been in “privately” funded therapy for 6 years as I could not get the support that I needed from the NHS. It is only now that the NHS has offered me “limited” treatment to try and help with some of the symptoms of PTSD. From the NHS own words they have told me to continue with my “private funded” weekly therapy sessions for treatment to manage my other depressive and Anxiety Disorders, because the NHS can not provide “long term” treatment for people in my situation.

    Anyway, I do not wish to make this about me, Ive written articles before on LDV about that and this thread is not really appropriate for me to be talking about personal circumstances.

    I just feel that it is important to mention at this time.

    Whilst these inquiries are very important to get to the bottom of how Childhood sexual abuse has been covered by those in powerful positions.
    It is just as important to remember that these are immensely difficult times for people who have been victim to childhood sexual abuse, because the mount of media/social coverage of pedophilia and sexual abuse.
    But more importantly to highlight that there is a complete lack of support and services for many people who have been victims to these crimes.
    The state has an obligation to do everything it all it can for victims of childhood sexual abuse, just the same as it does have an obligation to those men and women in the armed forces who suffer from horrific injuries & Post Traumatic Stress Disorders, Victims of Terrorism etc.
    At the moment the state is very sadly failing to properly support and care for victims of childhood sexual abuse, hence the reason why so many are suffering from long term and very complex mental health disorders.

  • Eddie Sammon 8th Jul '14 - 11:42am

    Matt, your post is very important and well written. Hopefully our senior politicians and activists will see it.

    Keep talking to us and others. Don’t lose hope and try to stay positive.

  • John Roffey 8th Jul '14 - 12:14pm

    @ Dav

    ‘Sounds like the event that traumatised me when I was minus five billion and a space alien. I had no knowledge of that either until an expert helped me recover the memory.’

    Thanks for that Dav – just hope you are never in a situation where your life becomes virtually impossible to live because of a trauma experienced in an earlier part of your life.

    Ex-archbishop Rowan Williams reveals he meditates for 40 minutes every day to help clear his mind for prayers

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2678815/Oh-Buddha-Ex-archbishop-Rowan-reveals-meditates-40-minutes-day-help-clear-mind-prayers.html

  • John Roffey 8th Jul '14 - 12:22pm

    @ Matt

    That’s good – it sounded from your post that you were going to be left without help once your current NHS treatment ended – hence my post.

  • @John Roffey

    Again thank you.

    “it sounded from your post that you were going to be left without help once your current NHS treatment ended – hence my post.”

    I will not be left without support, because I am paying “privately” for the other Psychological Therapy that I need “long term”
    The point is though, should It be acceptable for people like me to have to fund “long term treatment” for a mental health disorder “privately” because the NHS will not provide this. If I was suffering from a “physical ailment” i.e a Bowel Disease (Which actually I do) I am given unlimited treatment for this on the NHS for as long as I have the condition which is a life long disorder.
    Why is mental health treated any differently? The support and services should be available for as long as the condition exists and medical support is needed.

    I am only able to meet the costs of my “private treatment” as I use my access to disability benefits to fund this. If god forbid I was to lose that support, I would be left with no option but to be admitted into Psychiatric care as I would not be able to remain living independently in my own home.

    This is a really serious matter for a lot of people who are living with Psychological disorders. It needs someone from one of the main political parties to take up this fight and fight for the rights of those people who require long term support from mental health services.
    (I would have imagined that this is something Liberal Democrats would have fought tooth and nail for in the past)

    As I say, Norman Lamb has done a bit to improve the inequalities between NHS and NHS Mental Health services. But MORE much MORE needs to be done in my view. It needs urgent, emergency funding NOW so it can provide proper services and support to people for however long they need it.
    In a civil society it is not right that vulnerable people are ignored or worse still seen as political casualties that are somehow acceptable during times of austerity.

  • Jayne Mansfield 8th Jul '14 - 1:37pm

    @ matt,
    I am so sorry to hear of your suffering, but pleased that you have felt able to bring it to our attention.

    I believe that people do need reminding that this is not about politics but about children, including violated children such as yourself, who now live in an adult body. but remain tormented and sick because venal adults have destroyed your once innocent and hopeful world.

    Those of us who have not suffered such abuse cannot comprehend it. We try, but we have no point of reference or equivocal experience that enables us to come close. Nor can we ever know the impact of the double abuse of not being listened to and believed , n or the way in which a child might be manipulated so that it is the child who takes on responsibility for the abuse not the abuser. We need brave people like yourself to tell us Matt. No-one who has read your post can underestimate the courage and fortitude required for you to write it.

    I am gratified that the current disclosures and allegations have not been politicised, all political parties must be sensitive to what you and other survivors of abuse are going through as painful memories are repeatedly stirred up by the media attention. It is crucial that there is a cross -party effort and determination to keep the focus on the righting of any wrongdoing with an absolute insistence that the over-arching enquiry leads to a more effective coherent child protection strategy that protects children in the future, with no hurtful political point scoring.

    For those who like yourself are living with the consequences of abuse, more money and effort must be put into helping you overcome your suffering. I know from family experience that mental health services, especially access to CBT are totally inadequate. I hope that stories such as yours will fire people up to shout from the roof -tops that this is unacceptable and demand improvement. I also hope that before individuals say that the cases are historical or that the alleged perpetrators are dead, they remain mindful of the fact that many of victims are not, they are still living with the devastating, destructive consequences of the abuse and the lack of justice.

    I hope that with appropriate help you can overcome, or at the very least be helped to manage the pain that you are suffering. If the help that you are offered is inadequate, don’t stand for it. If you feel that you don’t have the strength to fight for your own rights, find someone who can act as an advocate on your behalf. You have suffered enough!

  • I make no apologies for not caring one iota about the mental health or human rights of abusers who have destroyed lives with no remorse for so doing. I hope that those who have protected and ignored reports about them are also brought to account. Fear of ones career being destroyed is no excuse for staying silent.

  • John Roffey 8th Jul '14 - 4:09pm

    Yes – it is truly monstrous. The callous disregard for basic humanity that has been unleashed on the people in the name of ‘austerity measures’ – unfortunately with the help and support of Liberal Democrats – has been shocking to behold.

    This is compounded by the fact that during the same period the wealth of the very richest has soared out of all proportion.

  • @Jayne Mansfield

    Thank you for that Kind and thoughtful post. It was very warming and very appreciative.

    I just felt compelled to remind people that whilst these enquiries are really important to get to the bottom of the level of cover up in the highest positions and offices. It is vital that people do not forget about the victims of abuse.

    You are right to say “I am gratified that the current disclosures and allegations have not been politicised, all political parties must be sensitive to what you and other survivors of abuse are going through as painful memories are repeatedly stirred up by the media attention. It is crucial that there is a cross -party effort and determination”
    It would be an absolute vile betrayal and disrespect to victims if political parties used this issue to try and score points against one another.

    I want to see parties working together to bring about change, but more importantly, I want to see the Government support victims of childhood abuse. It needs more funding for mental health support and services. Peoples whole lives can be totally derailed by long term abuse as I know to well.

    I think people should also stop to think for one moment about the scale of sexual abuse that still happens to children. The statistics are frightening
    http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/resourcesforprofessionals/sexualabuse/statistics_wda87833.html
    April 2014
    1 in 20 children have been sexually abused.
    Over 90% of children who have experienced sexual abuse, were abused by someone they knew.
    18,915 sexual crimes against children under 16 were recorded in England and Wales in 2012/13. (Those are just the reported cases)

    This is a ticking time bomb. And it is from my own personal experiences and lack of adequate support from the NHS. I fear for the future of these children who will suffer their whole adult life unless the governments acts now and puts in place proper resources, support and early intervention.

    .

  • To put it another way and I am sorry to be so blunt and shock.

    Over the course of this parliament over 100’000 Children would have been victims of sexual abuse.

    What can the Liberal Democrats do as a party to support these victims? What policies could you campaign for at the next election to improve the quality of these children lives to try and mitigate the damage done and give these children a hope a chance for a future which so far they have been robbed of?

    I note Paul Burstows thread published today on LDV https://www.libdemvoice.org/paul-burstow-mp-writes-making-the-pursuit-of-happiness-as-important-as-gdp-41444.html
    And I am hopeful for much of what he has wrote.
    But
    “Our goal has been to identify the key changes that over the next 5 to 10 years will reduce the number of people experiencing lifelong mental illness and help those who suffer mental illness to recover.”
    10 Years is to long. Many of these children will be young adults by then and their whole development would have been derailed.
    We need action now and the politicians have the power to make these changes now.

    If we can afford half a billion pounds to bring in free school meals for under 8’s and half a billion pounds on married tax breaks. Then we can afford a few Billion pounds to be targeted at mental health services.

  • During the course of this Government the coalition have rightly been able to proudly claim that they have helped to create over 1’000’000 million private sector jobs.
    But also during this same period over 100’000 children would have been subjected to childhood sexual abuse, robbing them of their emotional and mental development and equal life chances.

    Apart from the immeasurable human cost and suffering, at what cost is the government willing to pay for those who have, those who still, and those who will be suffering and be deeply effected and disadvantaged for the rest of their lives? Is it acceptable to write these people off as political casualties during times of austerity and the needs for cuts to services and an ideology to shrink the size of the state?

    I will shut up now and stop high jacking this thread and I do apologise, my only hope is though that I might at least have given some of you pause for thought and hope those of you that do have some influence within the party and within political circles might be able to wield that influence far better than I ever could.

  • Matt (Bristol) 9th Jul '14 - 12:05am

    Very much a sideshow to the main discussion here, but thankyou, Caron.

  • @Matt (Bristol)

    “Very much a sideshow to the main discussion here,”

    Wow insensitive or what. Nice empathy from you (not). Can not begin to tell you how that makes me feel being referred to as a side show

    People like myself don’t have many platforms where we can have a voice in society. Sometimes when an opportunity arises were you can raise the plight of yourself and others facing traumatic situations,, you take that opportunity to raise awareness.

    Sorry if that was so inconvenient for you and interrupted the flow of discussion.

    I will retreat back to my cave and inconvenience you no further

    Regards

    Matt

  • Jayne Mansfield 9th Jul '14 - 9:44am

    @
    On Sky News last night Tom Newton Dunn argued that the person who will be given the role of overseeing legal aspects could not be more of an ‘establishment’ figure and a member of the House of Lords no less, albeit a crossbencher).

    It is good to hear that people are coming forward to make allegations, many of them mentioning the same names. Geoffrey Dickens was according to many, a deeply unpleasant man who was not taken seriously, but this dossier whether it exposes a cover up or not, certainly seems to be having some positive effect Already we the pubic have become aware of the comments of a former government whip the late Tim Fortescue.

    The difficulty for those coming forward is often that they are seen as ‘unreliable’ witnesses. Their experiences mean that they may be drug users, alcoholics people who have got into trouble with the law etc. They are people who society at large has not placed a high value on, that is why they were such prime victims in the first place and the perpetrators are able to get away with their crimes for so long.

  • Jayne Mansfield 9th Jul '14 - 10:03am

    @ Matt,
    Please don’t ‘retreat back into your cave’.

    If anyone can be accused of being off -topic on these threads, it is I, and I am totally unfazed by the intellectual superiority of those of others who might point this out.

    You have something important to say, don’t let others control what you can or can’t say. If you , or anyone else, breaks the rules and go beyond that which is acceptable, presumably the moderators will not print our contributions.

    Reading back over the thread, I am a little uncertain as to what contribution Matt ( Bristol) has made to the main discussion.

  • Peter Watson 9th Jul '14 - 10:08am

    @Jayne Mansfield “The difficulty for those coming forward is often that they are seen as ‘unreliable’ witnesses.”
    Sadly, I think another problem will be in victims being able to confirm the identity of their abusers. In recent cases, the celebrities were recognisable as household names and faces, and in the case of Rolf Harris could be linked to a particular location on a specified date because of a television show recording. I suspect that most politicians, no matter how senior they were in the 80s, would simply be anonymous old white posh men as far as their victims were concerned. The “loss” of contemporary records makes me more pessimistic that some horrible people will evade justice.

  • Jayne Mansfield 9th Jul '14 - 10:58am

    A Peter Watson,
    I agree.

    The child, now adult, may , as new memories that have been suppressed are remembered , offer different accounts further adding to a view that they are unreliable. Any policeman or trained barrister will be able to point out that they failed to mention a detail in their first statement which they subsequently mentioned in later accounts, and use this against them.

    The absence of contemporaneous records makes justice seem an even less likely outcome.

  • matt (Bristol) 9th Jul '14 - 11:47am

    matt (and also responding to Jayne), I apologise if you misread what I said when I said it badly, but I meant to imply that _I_ was a ‘sideshow’ to YOUR main discussion on which I did not wish to intrude, but which I respected.

    I should have put ‘I am’ at the front of the sentence and you would have not been offended. Please come back. I like your stuff.

    I was simply dipping back into the thread and noting that Caron had responded to my comment in the first post of the thread where I asked why the OP had been put in the name of ‘the Voice’. She has now changed the byline to her own. So I said thanks.

    In general I don’t like to post my own private thoughts on this issue as abuse has deeply affected people I know and care about and it’s difficult to discuss.

  • @matt (Bristol)

    Thank you for clearing that up.

    Sorry if I overreacted and misinterpreted your post.

    I am a bit all over the place emotionally at the moment and pretty irrational at times, hence why I said in my first post that I had refrained from commenting on LDV over recent weeks.

    But thank you and I do appreciate your response.

    I think I have said all I can say on the thread now anyway.

    It is difficult and very emotional for me. But I do feel very passionate about trying to protect the younger generations from going through the same lifetime of mental anguish.
    So if I can find the courage to have a voice (albeit only on a forum) and raise some awareness, which hopefully might attract the attention of those that are in a better position than I to make a difference to these people’s futures. Then I try to do so.

    Thanks again

    Regards

    Matt

  • matt (Bristol) 9th Jul '14 - 4:20pm

    Thanks, Matt, and best wishes.

    Matt

  • Tony Greaves 9th Jul '14 - 5:20pm

    Going back to Caron’s initial piece. Will these inquiries bring a “satisfactory conclusion” to the current scandal?

    I doubt it. What worries me is that stirring up the past – inevitable as it is – will not alter what is, equally inevitably, happening now.

    Attitudes to sexual conduct and sexual ethics have changed hugely in the past 40 years. Things that were once tolerated (wrongly) are now thought to be abhorrent. Things that were once thought quite wrong are now tolerated, and in some cases actively promoted. These changes have not yet run their course, and there is not yet a “satisfactory conclusion” to them. Perhaps there never will be, but a more open discussion would help.

    Tony Greaves

  • Jayne Mansfield 9th Jul '14 - 6:10pm

    @ Caron,
    The scandal only came to the notice of the general population because of the efforts of a few campaigning MP’s and the press.

    I think that I would still put more faith in the press, including the tabloid press, to make sure that the scandal is fully and correctly investigated. Without the press and public anger at disclosures, one might ask even whether these enquiries would be held.

  • Jayne Mansfield 9th Jul '14 - 6:48pm

    @ matt ( Bristol)
    Now it is my turn to apologise. I did think that you post was at variance with the character of the author of all the other posts that I have read.

    So apologies for being so ready to misinterpret your post.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Zachary Adam Barker
    "Ed Davey is the likeliest leader of the current crops of MPs" Then perhaps we should consider allowing the party leader to come from outside of the Commons ...
  • Chris Cory
    The fundamental point behind this piece, that the typical family is £1200 worse off since Rushy Sanuk (as Joe Biden likes to call him) came into office, seems ...
  • Chris Moore
    Ed Davey is the likeliest leader of the current crops of MPs. He may not be particularly charismatic - a common criticism on here - but he's decent and solid an...
  • Chris Cory
    @Steve Trevethan. Dividends paid to the the owners of any company are not inflationary because they are simply a distribution of profits from the companie...
  • Chris Moore
    "Neo-Liberalism" is not dominant. All main parties support a mixed economy with transfers to the poorer off. The devil is in the detail, not in over-arching ...