Should Harriet Harman apologise?

Yes, I agree that they are basically in agreement - Zoe's piece does seem to be a bit of a rant though.

Has anyone seen Pat Hewitt or is Hattie the only one who has put her head above the parapet?
PH was chief executive.

Zoe Williams misses the point that PIE was a much publicised and reviled organisation at that time. Simply disassociating herself when she realised there was an unwanted connection would have been enough, or doing what Shami did later on would have exonerated her, but riding it out when it has been raised several times, not just in this instance, hasn't done HH any good. It's not quite the same as Ed's dad - HH is still around to put the record straight for herself. I don't believe for one moment she supports paedophilia, but for someone who isn't shy about speaking out I'm disappointed she hasn't done so here until forced to by this ugly smear campaign. She's inadvertently encouraged the sort of media behaviour that makes the DM look bad, too not that that would be difficult to do

Well said, when. Agree totally.

But she has spoken out. She has made it quite clear what she thinks of PIE.

She's spoken out NOW, but this has been rumbling for years.

Wonder why the Mail has suddenly decided the bee in its bonnet needs exercising now then.

The Daily Mail has it's own agenda with this story but it shows a flaw in either HH herself or the Labour Party that they are trying to avoid apologising. They are keeping this story on the paper's front page. I'm sure after this there will be more especially in the run up to the general election. But the Labour Party will be shooting themselves continually in the foot if they try to thrash out each story as they have this one.

I'm not sure it is in their interests to keep it on front page, given the failure of an academy trust and the likely closure of Stafford NHS Trust. Coalition must be rather pleased with the distraction.

Best not to bring bring Staffordshire NHS Trust into this which has nothing to do with the OP. That's another black mark for the Labour Party anyway.

I don't think it's doing anyone any favours, raking up the murkiness of the '70s like this. As I think have said before on this thread, the world has moved on since then - in leaps and bounds. Thank goodness.

Perhaps the dear old DM just likes running smear campaigns, jings. What a shocking thought! Can't think whence I got such an idea .

No, it doesn't, but why the intransigence over apologising for a mistake, which is what it was?

And why is P Hewitt hiding behind HH's skirts?

X post, doesn't do any favours I meant. But you are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

It may be in the past but the endorsement of PIE could have had enormous danger and ongoing trauma to many children. Or does no-one care about that?

Well Rose if they don"t , they damn well should . Wonder how many lives were ruined by the likes of PIE ?

Lilygran , was not the age of consent you speak of related to lowering the age of consent for Homosexuals and not for lowering the age of consent below sixteen ?

Will the Daily Mail now start a campaign attacking every barrister who has defended child abusers in court?

Perhaps the Daily Mail should start looking at the beam in its own eye.

Wasn't it the DM who backed the Nazis?

Sauce for the goose....

"Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject suffered."
Perhaps 40 years on she could admit that she doesn't believe this any more, or has she already said that?

No, Anniebach, PIE wanted to get the age of consent lowered for everyone to 10 or 14.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/01/zac-goldsmith-nazi-daily-mail_n_4023045.html

Tom O'Carroll who was very active in PIE at the time was on Today this morning. He made the point that PIE had support from other NCCL member groups and they had common cause campaigning for a lowering of the age of consent. I suppose what makes me so cross about HH and her ilk is the apparently wholesale acceptance of a package of issues and the unwillingness to debate the implications of adopting some ideological positions. Or to admit you were wrong! Tom O'Carroll was on a number of NCCL committees and said neither HH nor JD nor PH tried to oust him/them. Other people at the time were demonstrating and writing against PIE. The DM, and Private Eye which has been covering this story for years, are quite right to challenge the judgment of our leaders. Would the story have been ignored if it had been a Tory involved?

And it seems that the most notorious member of PIE was one Sir Peter Hayman, long time deputy director of MI6. Never prosecuted. Why?

Actually, he went to gaol en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hayman_(diplomat). It wasn't and isn't illegal to lobby on behalf of paedophiles so PIE weren't doing anything illegal in campaigning, however disgusting the purpose. Only in abusing children.

As I said in my earlier post, you will find that HH will never, ever admit that anything she has done is wrong. If she now backtracks, you will still find her words mealy mouthed.There is something fundamentally wrong with people who can never apologise and at the moment she is a liability to her party.As others say, she is keeping this item in the news.

She instigated our Winter fuel payment!