118. Perran Moon River

Summary

Podcast Summary: Where Politics Meets History

Episode 118: “Perran Moon River”
Date: April 24, 2026
Hosts: Iain Dale & Dr. Tessa Dunlop

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Iain Dale and historian Dr. Tessa Dunlop unpack the week’s major political news with their trademark mix of seriousness, wit, and good-natured sparring. The main topic is the ongoing “Mandelson Saga” — a mushrooming political scandal involving vetting failures, leadership mishaps, and echoes of historical British political crises such as the 1963 Profumo Affair. Tessa, in particular, draws pointed historical parallels, while both hosts critique current political players, discuss the changing public moods, and engage in wider reflections about political trust, vetting, and what history teaches about scandal’s impact. In typical fashion, the episode is rich with anecdotes, memorable phrases, and lively debate.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Mandelson Saga and Political Vetting

• The Ongoing “Many-Headed Beast”
  The “Mandelson Saga” is lambasted as a political scandal that refuses to die, with Tessa calling it:

  “...the many headed beast—you think you’ve chopped the head off it and up it pops again. And each time, it kneecaps.” (00:02, Tessa)
  The affair centers on the vetting failure that allowed Mandelson to gain a crucial role despite red flags, leading to political fallout and the perception that “process” has overtaken substance in government appointments.

• Public Boredom and Trust
  Both hosts argue that while Westminster might obsess over these dramas, the public tunes out as scandals get lost in “he said/she said” detail. Tessa observes:

  “I think quite early on, you decide: I’m standing by the PM or I’m not... I feel this pod sometimes could do with more history...” (09:54, Tessa)
  Iain adds that audience engagement spikes with big stories but wanes as scandals drag on.

• Vetting Process Complexity
  There’s an extended discussion about the intrusive nature of modern vetting — not just past behavior but also the conduct of a candidate’s friends and ex-partners.

  “Most people have something in their lives, whether it’s to do with their love life, their financial affairs, friends, whatever, that they wouldn’t particularly want to see on the front page of the Mail on Sunday.” (14:55, Iain)

Notable Segment

• Personal Failings & Kiss with Perrin Moon
  Tessa shares a candid, humorous story about being overly effusive with Labour MP Perrin Moon while campaigning for her Romanian GCSE cause.

  “So I kept on verbally spewing...and then I kissed him…and I’m like, how do I call this back? And probably if I’d asked Corey, but I couldn’t because it was all, you know, lifetime happening in front of the politician, I would have just slipped away and hoped the less said the better. But I instead interrupted the Labour politician and I said, I’m really sorry I kissed you.” (05:00, Tessa)

  • Timestamp: 04:09–05:27

---

2. Direct Parallels with the Profumo Affair (1963)

• Historical Echoes
  Tessa and Iain explore how the Mandelson scandal conjures direct parallels to 1963, when Macmillan’s government was rocked by the Profumo affair — combining vetting failures, sex, espionage, and the collapse of public trust.

  • Tessa:

    “I have done this deep dive into the summer of 1963 and the parallels between Macmillan and Starmer are fascinating.” (09:54, Tessa)

• Key Similarities

  • Both scandals involve protracted “death by a thousand cuts,” as new details continually emerge.
  • The leader’s credibility erodes not due to any single event, but because the public, civil service, and party grow weary of endless controversy.
  • Both result in accusations of misleading parliament and allow political opponents to question not just competence, but basic decency.

• Historical Quote—Harold Wilson on Profumo Scandal

  “What we are seeing is a diseased acrescence, a corrupted and poisoned appendix of a small and unrepresentative section of society that makes no contribution to what Britain is—still less to what Britain can be.” (26:42 & 33:53, Tessa quoting Wilson)

• Political Patience vs. Precipitous Action
  Tessa commends Wilson’s slow build-up and focus on “security, not sex,” and contrasts that with modern politicians’ impulse for rapid (sometimes panicked) action or scapegoating.

Notable Segment

• Direct Quotation of Wilson’s Speech
  • Tessa:

    “I thought it was a brilliant killer line. I loved it. I’ve read all his speech and that’s the bit that stood out for me.” (34:04, Tessa)

  • Iain:

    “...they weren’t memorable at the time. When you use a word like acrescence, I haven’t got a clue what that means…” (34:09, Iain)

  • Timestamp: 33:53–34:10

---

3. Present-Day Fallout and Political Analysis

• Keir Starmer’s Leadership Under Fire
  Iain spells out just how serious the Mandelson affair is for Starmer, referencing Tim Shipman’s article:

  “His basic view is that Starmer is finished. He’s lost the Labour Party, he’s lost the civil service now, and he’s basically lost the public if you look at the opinion poll ratings.” (18:51, Iain)

  • The hosts discuss how the scandal is fracturing party unity and emboldening opposition.
  • The infamous “shit weasel” slur is highlighted as symbolic of the collapse of Starmer’s “decent man” narrative.

• Timing and Political Fate
  Local elections are looming, and both hosts agree that poor results could be terminal for Starmer’s premiership.
  Iain:

  “In politics, timing is everything. The local elections could not come at a worse time... if they are as bad as people are predicting, I think he’s toast.” (25:04–25:50, Iain)

---

4. Gender and Scandal: The Christine Keeler Angle

• Keeler’s Legacy & Gender Double Standards
  A listener question reignites debate about the treatment of Christine Keeler versus Profumo post-scandal.

  “She had such a tragic life in many respects...I’m not convinced a woman would be treated that differently these days. Please champion her.” (52:51, listener, read by Tessa)

• Nuanced View of Keeler and Stephen Ward
  The hosts explore the murky ethics around Keeler’s life, whether she was “procured,” agency versus victimhood, and the legal and social treatment of women in scandal.

  • Tessa:

    “She was eventually called out, berated and accused of being a slut, harlot and a prostitute in Parliament as well as in the press, when all she was doing was giving men what they wanted. And that’s a really difficult circumstance.” (53:36, Tessa)

  • Both hosts agree that while Keeler made some money, Profumo’s rehabilitation was much more complete—a reminder, Tessa says, of how class and gender define legacy in Britain.

---

5. Broader Themes: Public Reaction, Media, and History’s Lessons

• Media Saturation and Scandal Fatigue
  Iain notes audience numbers rise and fall with scandal, but “the vast majority” of people are ultimately turned off by politician process stories and infighting—not just by scandal, but by its relentless coverage.

  • Iain:

    “What drains political trust is that these people get up to no good. It’s not the reporting of it.” (46:45, Iain)

• Ruthlessness as a Political Prerequisite
  The hosts reflect (somewhat cynically) on the idea that anyone who reaches high office will have made enemies and probably committed ruthless acts en route—history, they argue, bears this out.

• The NHS and Sacred Cows
  Closing listener questions turn to the NHS. Both hosts agree it has become “fetishized” and almost beyond criticism or reform—a marked contrast with the earlier, raw scrutiny of politicians:

  • Iain:

    “We should not be thinking of any institution, whether it is beloved by many or not, as beyond reform.” (60:09, Iain)

---

Notable Quotes

• “I’m starting to do things not as well as I could be doing them...I feel like I’m starting to do things not as well as I could be doing them. Not executing my craft as loquaciously and incisively as I should be because I’m doing too much.” (00:53, Tessa)
• “Let’s talk about your marvellous performance on Cross Question on Tuesday.” (03:23, Iain)
• “I think I’ve come to the conclusion, because I like to psychoanalyze you, obviously, I don’t think your brake mechanism is quite there in the same that it is with most people.” (05:27, Iain)
• “You’re basically a rebel with the cause, aren’t you, now?” (06:08, Iain)
• “He’s a shit weasel.” (21:25, quoting Tim Shipman article, Iain/Tessa)

---

Important Timestamps

• Start of the episode & Mandelson Saga analogy (00:02)
• Tessa describes vetting and over-talking (includes story of kissing Perrin Moon) (03:01–05:27)
• Political vetting and who could be blackmailable (12:11–14:55)
• Discussion of audience and media impact of scandals (09:02–10:19)
• Tim Shipman’s article and “shit weasel” quote (20:52–21:25)
• Historical deep-dive: Profumo parallels (28:17–35:08)
• Wilson’s “diseased acrescence” quote (33:53)
• The case against “fetishizing” the NHS (60:09)
• Closing listener questions (47:16–end)

---

Tone & Dynamics

• Conversational, witty, often irreverent.
• Tessa leans into historical depth and emotional insight; Iain brings sharp political analysis and a slightly sardonic, world-weary flavor.
• Both are self-deprecating and willing to needle each other (and themselves) over slip-ups and biases, offering a dynamic balance of perspective.

---

Final Note

This episode delivers on the podcast’s promise to show how history repeats itself in politics. Through sharp analysis, rich anecdote, and cutting historical parallels, Iain and Tessa show that scandal, human frailty, and power struggles are timeless. The only things that seem to change are the names—and perhaps, as Tessa argues, our (slowly) shifting sense of gender and class in public judgment. The episode closes with the recognizable exhaustion of scandal fatigue but leaves listeners with a reminder: history is always, inevitably, repeating itself.

---

For direct quotes, references, or to re-immerse yourself, see key timestamps above.

Transcript

[A]

This is a global player original podcast the Mandelson Saga. It's the many headed beast you think you've chopped the head off it and up it pops again. And each time it kneecaps.

[B]

Dharma, that is a clear case of misleading parliament. Now people can say, oh, that's just Westminster talk. It's really boring. But when a prime minister starts to get a reputation for doing that, which he is now, again, that's really serious.

[A]

What we are seeing is a diseased acrescence, a corrupted and poisoned appendix of a small and unrepresentative section of society that makes no contribution to what Britain is. Still less to what Britain can be.

[B]

Tessa Dunlop, how the devil are you?

[A]

Well, I think I might be a little over poached.

[B]

What does that mean?

[A]

Well, you know when you get like an egg. Yeah. But you know, a hard boiled egg, that's too hard boiled. You can always put mayonnaise on it. But an over poached egg, what do you do with that? It's really challenging. And that's where I'm at. I feel like I've just. I'm starting to do things not as well as I could be doing them. Not executing my craft as loquaciously and incisively as I should be because I'm doing too much.

[B]

And how has this manifested itself?

[A]

Well, there's.

[B]

Just pretend you're on my psychologist's couch now.

[A]

Okay. There's several examples. This morning I was filming for a Channel 4 program on Christine Keeler. And every time I opened my mouth to speak, I was aware that I didn't know how the sentence was going to end. And that's.

[B]

I do that for three hours every night.

[A]

Yeah. I rest my case, ladies and gentlemen. What was that I always talk about? No, I'm not going to say it. I don't want to start the program with something anti man.

[B]

No, anyway, because it'll come later anyway.

[A]

Yeah, it's bound to seep out my bitter, twisted ways. So that's one example. And at one point I recall putting my hands in front of my face going, I'm really sorry. I don't know why I'm finding this so difficult. And actually I knew exactly why I was finding it so difficult because I hadn't done the level of preparation, the forensic level of preparation I normally do for a filming session because there simply weren't enough hours in the day. Part of this is down to the legs that my Romanian GCSE campaign has grown because I'm having this meeting in Westminster on Monday, when you're meeting the King virtually. I'm literally meeting quite a large number of politicians now. But the other manifestation is I become. When I get really overtired, the two things happen. One is it's a bit like being drunk. I over talk and then I don't. And I'm aware I'm doing it and I don't know how to stop.

[B]

Well, we. We experience that quite a lot on the podcast.

[A]

But the. The third one, and perhaps fitting I should bring this up now, is that also can be sometimes a bit of a fucking bitch. Yeah, no, which is what I'm going to be to you if you stop motherfucking agreeing with me whenever I say something negative about myself.

[B]

Corey was really worried that I would cast a Paul over the beginning of this podcast because of an incident that's happened which has put me in a thoroughly bad mood. But I'm the one that's in a good mood.

[A]

Everything's relative, isn't it? That's the truth. Ian had a flounce, but we're not allowed to talk about it because it's to do with his.

[B]

No, no.

[A]

Heaven forfend that we might, you know, put a chink in the image of perfection.

[B]

Let's talk about your marvellous performance on Cross Question on Tuesday.

[A]

But even that I. I subsequently sabotaged. So Ian, as you'll all know if you're loyal to Ian, has this session every night on LBC with politicians and he invites one wild card that is

[B]

non politician to Generally General.

[A]

Generally. And I was one of the wild cards. But on the Cross question, there was a Labor MP called Peron Moon.

[B]

Great name from Cornwall.

[A]

Yes. And he seemed very amiable and I liked him a lot and I think we conversed well on air and he committed himself to turning up to my meeting on Monday night. And I was so grateful that at the end of the meeting because he said he had.

[B]

What did you do, Tessa?

[A]

Take it up? Well, that's on the first instance I caught. You said. The thing is, Tessa, I know a lot about politicians now and when you've got them, once you've got them committed, you can stop. And I didn't stop. So I kept on verbally spewing when he was trying to clearly extricate himself from our communication post show. And then I didn't know how to stop and I thought, how am I going to extricate myself? So I kissed him and then I turned to Corey and Corey was like doing the sort of sawing motion with his neck right and putting his hand.

[B]

He does that to me quite a lot.

[A]

Yeah, it's hard.

[B]

Usually when I'm on air, it's really undermining.

[A]

And so then Perrin's still there because he's talking to the other guest and I'm like melting into the floor thinking, oh no, I've over talked and I've sexually assaulted.

[B]

Not.

[A]

I mean, it was just a kiss on the cheek but, you know, I've been inappropriate and Corey's like making the 25 year old face of, you know, inappropriateness and I'm like, how do I. How do I call this back? And probably if I'd asked Corey, but I couldn't because it was all, you know, lifetime happening in front of the politician, I would have just slipped away and hoped that the less said the better. But I instead interrupted the Labour politician and I said, I'm really sorry I kissed you.

[B]

You know, I think I've come to the conclusion because I like to psychoanalyze you. Obviously I don't think your brake mechanism is quite there in the same that it is with most people.

[A]

No.

[B]

Because I don't mean that as an insult. I think it's actually quite endearing.

[A]

Yeah, well, that, you know, is. It's true that I do speak sometimes before I think, like there's an element of childlikeness about me. I mean, we had the conversation once about Tourette's. But there is a bit in me where I just sometimes say things that. And I can't. I've never worked out quite how to stop myself. Can I blame that on something intrinsic within me? Or is that the rebel? And I just, I could learn to break it and I haven't.

[B]

You're basically a rebel with the cause,

[A]

aren't you now with the Romania gcse, because in the Millbank. So basically, ladies and gentlemen, that's the

[B]

title for the podcast Rebel. Rebel.

[A]

Yeah. Well, where Ian records on his cross question is Millbank, which is all very political and stuff. And that's also where Andrew Marr does his LBC show. And Andrew Ma has sufficient sort of national repute that one feels like he must know you because you know him through television, et cetera. But I've never actually spoken to him. But that evening I was waiting for your show and as is discussed, arrived an hour early and he came on through the foyer and I just leapt out of my seat and I went, andrew. I said like, he was my best friend and being somewhat younger than him, I sort of could sort of stop and I got between him and the door. And I said, and I gave him the entire essay on the discrimination involved in the second language in Britain, that is, and the need for a Romanian GCSE all in one long verbal sentence. And he looked surprised, bemused, maybe even shocked.

[B]

Who is this mad woman?

[A]

He gave me the name of the CEO of the main exam board, so it was worth the ambush. But the end of it. I said, oh, and thanks, I think, I believe this is actually the first time we've spoken, Andrew. And he said, yes, who are you? Yeah, he basically said, yes, it's the first time. At which point I then stepped.

[B]

Did you actually say who you were?

[A]

I. I probably. No, I didn't. I just assume. It's always good to assume with Queen like style that everyone knows you.

[B]

Corey, can you make a note that when we go down to Milbank after this, that I do apologize to Andrew Ma for the assault that he experienced?

[A]

Actually, much better would be if you could say Tessa sent the email. Could you double down on it? Because I used his name. Right, With Colin Hughes, CEO of an exam board. But having her back, weirdly enough. Well, I'm just starting to.

[B]

Anyway, you were very good on the program that.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, I. I did enjoy. The thing is, and we're coming to this in just a minute, it's. I understand we've talked about the need for process. It's just. And I'm someone who's got one foot now in the political camp, thanks to you and my remaining GCFC campaign. But I find it's been a lot, hasn't it? It's been a lot of minute nitpicking. And what's been interesting is, as I mentioned, I've been doing a program on the Perfumo scandal this week, and I think. So they did all this kind of unbuttoning politically in the night in the 1963 Summer of. But the difference was they had some sex in there, too. I mean, if we had something to lighten it up a bit, you know.

[B]

But instead it's like, top 10 sexy Romanians.

[A]

No, but I'm being serious. It's a. He said this and she said that, and the Cabinet office person did this and there was this vetting and that vetting, and nobody gave a shitting vetting. You know, I'm like, what? It's. It's kind of a turn off, you know, I would be interested to see what the lbc, you know, listener graph is doing.

[B]

It's been very high.

[A]

Has it?

[B]

No, I was actually Told the other day that the. Because we. How it works is we get the quarterly audience figures, but they can track all the digital listening because through the technology and whenever there's a big political story, like when the Iran war started, I mean, it went off the scale. And this week has been. I'm not sure it's been as high as that, but it's been very, very high.

[A]

Really? Is it still really high?

[B]

Well, it's gone off a bit, I think. I mean, we're not doing it today. In fact, we didn't do it yesterday either.

[A]

It quite quickly becomes a turn off, doesn't it? That's the problem.

[B]

I think you're right. Once it gets to the. Well, he said this, she said that and, oh, has Keir Starmer misled Parliament again? Which he clearly has, by the way. Then I think that is when people do start to think, oh, this is just sort of silly boys talk.

[A]

I think quite early on, you decide I'm standing by the PM or I'm not, as a voter, as a listener, as a viewer. And we'll come to this because I feel this pod sometimes could do with more history and there is going to be a full section on history because I have done this deep dive into the summer of 1963 and the parallels between Macmillan and Starmer are fascinating.

[B]

Let's come on to that in a minute. I mean, so far this podcast has been all about you.

[A]

Yeah. How are you?

[B]

Let's make it about me now.

[A]

Yeah, because you're going to America, you fucker.

[B]

Well, am I?

[A]

Because there's no jet fuel.

[B]

No, I went to check into the flight this morning and you have to put your visa details. Now. I have a five year visa where I can work, do radio work in America, but it's in my old passport.

[A]

Right.

[B]

So I typed in the number.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And then it said, oh, you'll have to go to the check in desk at the airport. Well, they said something like, we can't match this with our records or something,

[A]

so take both passports.

[B]

Well, I'm going to take both passports, but I'm just thinking, well, surely this isn't all going to go wrong because I have terrible transport disasters virtually every trip I go on, every long trip I go on, something somewhere goes wrong. I actually lost two boarding passes Once I lost the first one, then lost the second one and then Mr. Flight. So I have this feeling of trepidation tomorrow.

[A]

I feel, I mean, I've got mixed feelings about you being in America because A, it should be me, obviously, Being the Royal expert that I am. And B, it means you can't be at my Westminster event.

[B]

I know, and I genuinely regret that because I would have come.

[A]

I've got a cross party support. I've got three Conservatives coming. No, three for your side of the team. Is that because they know you, do you think?

[B]

I think I know who they are and I don't know it. I don't know.

[A]

I think I got, after I've been on lbc, cross question, where I heavily promoted it, I did get three more MPs saying they were coming.

[B]

Good. So, anyway, so I'm going to New York, meeting up with my friend, best friend that I haven't seen for 10 years. So that's gonna be quite something. We're meeting at a bar where we're going to watch West Ham play Everton.

[A]

Do you think, you know, if you were vetted like Mandy was, and now I've discovered more about vetting. It's like serious stuff, serious shit, you know, they have to really dig into the weeds. Could you be blackmailable? Because whenever you say you meet a friend in a bar, it's not that I don't trust you and I'm not married to you, so it doesn't matter anyway, but do you think you'd past the vetting? Do you think your past would mean you're blackmailable or not? Ian?

[B]

Oh, God, yes.

[A]

So you couldn't be in an important role.

[B]

I mean, a friend of mine has been vetted and he was telling me some of the questions. It's not just your own past, it's the past of people that you might have had an assignation with 10, 15 years ago.

[A]

100%.

[B]

They go to all of your friends, to your family and look at their backgrounds. I can't think of anything that I could be particularly got for, but it wouldn't be a pleasant experience.

[A]

But if, for example, so obviously a moral man of considerable public standing like yourself would never find himself in the weeds. But if, for example, you'd had an affair 10 years ago and you didn't want John to find out about it, would that prohibit you from then taking. But would that prohibit you from taking up the job? Because it would make you blackmail. If it's the question, you know, if

[B]

I don't know, I don't know.

[A]

It's interesting, isn't it?

[B]

Because if it's, well, make me ambassador to Washington and then we'll find out.

[A]

Well, that makes me not that I'm

[B]

admitting to having had an affair 10 years ago.

[A]

But is that why ambassadors are so boring? Not saying you have to be exciting and therefore, by definition, have had an affair, but you've got to have.

[B]

Well, there are plenty, of course, of ambassadors that have had affairs.

[A]

Right.

[B]

Who's. There was one very recently, I'm trying to. Was it the ambassador to Turkey? Right. And I think he's had to step down because I think he. Well, I better not say anymore because

[A]

I don't say anymore.

[B]

I'm sure it was Turkey. I think there was that Craig Murray, remember him, our ambassador to. I think it was Uzbekistan or Kazakhstan. And he, shall we say, had a fairly lurid love life. And he was withdrawn and then effectively became some conspiracy theorist whistleblower, and the media lapped him up in the end, but once they decided that that's exactly what he was, a conspiracy theorist, they dropped him like a stone. And now he just writes on weird websites.

[A]

Because what's interesting is the affair matters if the marriage you're in matters more than. Than being found out publicly, because that's what makes you blackmailable, isn't it? Does that make sense somehow? It's when they're vetting you, and I use the word affair, but that could be anything. It could be some financial mis. I mean that. It just. I never. I had no idea that everyone in those public roles had to be so scrutinized.

[B]

Most people have something in their lives, whether it's to do with their love life, their financial affairs, friends, whatever, that they wouldn't particularly want to see on the front page of the Mail on Sunday.

[A]

Yes. That's why I. I think it makes it so difficult going forward.

[B]

These appointments, you can't be squeaky, squeaky clean. So. So when Ollie Robbins started talking about mitigating things, I kind of got that, because it. As. I think as long as people are upfront about things, and I mean, if you said to me now, what would the five things in your life be that you would. That you think you're vetting might be difficult over? I mean, I. I'd probably struggle. I might struggle to get to five. I might be able to come up with one or two. But as long as you're open about these things from, from the front, open

[A]

in front of the vetters, presumably, because you're not being open about them publicly, because that's.

[B]

Because I don't think you actually. I don't think you have a formal interview. I think it's just all done on an online form.

[A]

It's just made me feel quite differently about. I Mean, I only know a couple of ambassadors and what they might have have been through, I don't know. And the other thing is these things take time if you've got to go into people's family and out in their outer circles and that is just going to make the bureaucratic process of appointing people so slow because it's now got to happen. It's now got to happen before the appointment can take several months. So those bureaucratic wheels are going to turn at an extraordinarily impossibly, you know.

[B]

Well, I don't think that has to be the case.

[A]

It does, Ian, it does. If you're going to do have to take months and months, a 360 full scale interrogation into a man who's lived for seven decades like Mandy has. Takes months. Takes months.

[B]

Right. Should we go to a break?

[C]

That sound could mean a lot of things. And when something's going wrong at home, the hardest part can be figuring out what the problem actually is. At Thumbtack, you can upload a voice message or a photo and our AI powered search will help diagnose your project. Plus, the pros we know have over 14 million five star reviews, so you can hire with confidence. Thumbtack, we know homes hire the right pro today.

[B]

Well, let's talk about a little bit more about the whole vetting scandal. You're going to bring Christine Keeler into it in a moment, but it's taken on a different turnover over the past, I'd say 36 hours after, not just the evidence of Ollie Robbins, which I thought was astonishing to watch. I mean it's absolutely gripping. And then today we've had Cat Little, the Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, who, I didn't see much of her, but all the reports I've said was that she, she was desperate to avoid making news and she succeeded in that, by and large. I mean, there were bits where Keir Starmer would have sort of grimaced a little bit, but she, she also critiqued, well, sort of vaguely criticized Ollie Robbins for one or two of the things that he had said. So I don't think that's going to cause a downfall for Keir Starme Week. Of course, we've got Sir Philip Barton, Ollie Robbins's predecessor, and Morgan McSweeney who is alleged to have told Sir Philip Barton, just get it done. Yes, now, I mean if, if Barton says yes, he did say that, and, and what's his name? McSweeney says he didn't. Well, any one of them can be right.

[A]

At which point most of the General public arrest my case, have signed out. And I think Cat Little, the reason she didn't make the news really today is because a lot of us have like, okay, act one, we've engaged with it, we've made our decision and now we actually want this to move on.

[B]

But you see, it will move on, but not in the way that you want it to move on. Because this is by far not finished yet. Because we've got the, this new set of papers that are coming out. You've got Tim Shipman writing in the Spectator today, a lengthy article which I know you've, you've read because I sent it to you, which, I mean, his basic view is that Starmer is finished. And he says he's lost the Labour Party, he's lost the civil service now, and he's basically lost the public if you look at the opinion poll ratings. And he's lost the parliamentary party. Even more importantly, Dan Hodges was saying this last night on the show that Labour MPs, they were willing to give Starmer the benefit of the doubt until he's just been like twisting in the wind.

[A]

What's interesting is I'm not sure I would have agreed with you because Starmer's so innocuous. He's kind of hard to hate. I mean, obviously people aren't impressed by him. But when I look and we're coming to it at what happened in 63, it again was this protracted scandal that went on and on and on. And I think that's been the main problem with the Mandelson saga is it's the many headed beast. You think you've chopped the head off it and up it pops again. And each time it kneecaps Dharma. Each time he's got this dwindling reserve of cultural capital.

[B]

And you see Shipman quotes a text that has been leaked and it must have been leaked from a civil servant because I mean, who else could leak it? Essentially on the day before Mandelson flies to America saying how wonderful it is to work with you after all these years, Peter, etc. Etc. It's vomit making in some ways, but it is the sort of thing you might send to somebody on their first day in the new job. But the general public. Well, did you? Well, I'm not so sure the general public will think that, but he's got a lot of good source material in this article that, I mean, it did slightly change my view because I've always thought that Starmer would probably survive this, but I'm no longer so sure.

[A]

Of that, two things about the article. It's too long.

[B]

Well, it's meant to be a long

[A]

read, I know, but I think it's a niche audience and I include you in that niche interest audience. It did have a couple of quiller quotes, but again, it's no surprise to me that people are calling out Starmer's personality. You don't get to the top without taking a great big scythe with you and chopping off heads along the way. The quote, I think that's the best and the most excoriating is that the word is quote. I hope this will finally kill the absurd Keir Starmer is a decent man narrative. He's a shit weasel.

[B]

Great word.

[A]

So who actually said that?

[B]

No, that, that comes from a civil servant, I think inside number 10.

[A]

I don't know where that quote.

[B]

No, it's an anonymous. Of course it is. But I mean this word, shit weasel, it's like wank spangle, which is another word that I love.

[A]

But again, and we've seen this, I realize, ad infinitum throughout history. It's just like kids in a play yard at some point a bit though. It is. And he hates him, so he's undercutting him.

[B]

No, the point is that starmer, in his 18 months has gone through, is it three or four cabinet secretaries, five directors of communication, et cetera, et cetera. And each time he throws someone under the bus to save his own skin. And that's what he did with Ollie Robbins. And he shouldn't have sacked Ollie Robbins in the way that he did. And the taxpayer will be paying the price for that because later on in that article, he's speculating that Robbins will win up to a million pounds in compensation. Well, Chris Wormald has already had, I think nearly three quarters of a million and there have been various others. So this, I mean, okay, in the widest scheme of public spending, it's a pinprick, but there is a pattern here. That's the problem.

[A]

So just to clarify, resting smug face Ollie Robbins, he's gonna get a thumping great payoff. He believes firmly that he was a first class civil servant. Many say that he was, but he, his self belief was so great, I think he failed to scrutinize even what he knew. And that's been one of the complaints. Yes, you're right. PM's now on his third chief of staff, third cabinet secretary and fifth director of communications. But the most interesting thing of all of this, and I feel that really in some ways Starmer should have been Presenting Ollie Robbins with a big bunch of roses. Is that. Had Ollie Robbins gone to the Prime Minister way back when, at the time of the Mandelson appointment, and said, look, mate, he's got red flags on all over his fetting, I sincerely recommend you step back from this appointment and sink it. Because had Ollie Robbins done that, we know that Keir Starmer would have said, ah, it's all right, just a bit of dabbling with China, nothing that we can't handle, move on in. We've already booked his flight to Washington. The truth is, Starmer pretends, had he known about these red flags, he would have not appointed.

[B]

Well, I agree with that and I think that is. That is where the public still have an interest in this, because they believe that Starmid's done exactly what you've just said. Yes, and so do I.

[A]

And that means he's a sunk man and he should be saying thank you to all your problems. And if he'd been clever, rather than panic on Tuesday, too precipitous, his response, he should have got his selfie stick out and he should have said, look, this has come to light, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to find out what it involves before I make any injudicious actions or decisions about where the responsibility lies. We're in this as a team, we've got to get to the bottom of it. Posted that on social media, but he can't because he's old school. And then he would have go, gone and done full research, done a 360, had all this week's investigations, worked out where the public response sat and then chopped her head off. He was. He did it the wrong way round.

[B]

Totally agree. And I think that is the advice that Antonio Romeo, the new Cabinet Secretary, gave him. And again, he ignored it.

[A]

Yeah, well, it's challenging.

[B]

Make of that what you will.

[A]

It is challenging, though, because as we're going to come to in history, seen as to be one of the great failings of Harold Macmillan in the summer of 63 was that he didn't get rid of Perfumer quickly enough because he felt he'd been too precipitous the year before in the Vassal scandal. It's very difficult to get these things right, Ian, and it's very difficult in the thick of it.

[B]

But you have to suffer the consequences if you don't get it right. And you and I both agree he hasn't got it right.

[A]

No, he hasn't.

[B]

And I think when you have all of these stories, it's not just From Tim Shipman, plenty of other journalists are saying this as well, that he's starting to lose the support of members of his Cabinet, people who've been previously very loyal to him. Then you think, well, okay, is this the start, the beginning of the end, or is it the end of the beginning, as someone once famously said? And I think we are in that territory now. And the timing for him. And remember, in politics, timing is everything. The local elections could not come at a worse time. Now, a lot of people are now speculating that Labour results in those local elections might not be quite as bad as people are predicting. But if they are as bad as people are predicting, I think he's toast.

[A]

Let's see. There's a war on, that's all. I think there's a war on.

[B]

I genuinely don't think that makes any difference. It's not a war that we're involved in. Margaret Thatcher was deposed when we were actually involved in a war in the Gulf. So I don't. Churchill became Prime Minister at the beginning of the Second World War. So I don't think that is a. Is a killer fact, really.

[A]

The other thing is that it's quite a new administration. It's not like 63 when Macmillan's at the tail end of his administration and what you end up with then is a Prime Minister that no one elected. And I know that you're going to say, oh, but it's not that usual.

[B]

That's totally usual.

[A]

But the public don't like it, do they? They don't like it when Gordon Brown's imposed on them or Rishi Sunak's imposed on them. We're like, humph.

[B]

That's because they don't understand our constitution, that we're a parliamentary democracy. But if you go back to 1945, I mean, I ought to do this maybe one day, but the majority of Prime Ministers have come to power in those circumstances, they replace somebody rather than be elected for the first time.

[A]

I know, but it's when you're elected for the first time, like a Thatcher or a Blair, that people really feel they are part of the new dawn. And if you can take your electorate

[B]

and allow them, that will be Farage's strongest selling point in 2028, 2029.

[A]

You say that like you assume he's going to get elected to become Prime Minister.

[B]

I don't assume, but it's certainly a possibility.

[A]

Yeah, I agree, partly because, unlike you, I'm not an unalloyed fan of Mistress Kemi Badenoch.

[B]

Well, there you go.

[A]

I loved, by the way, that moment on Cross Question when my new friend Perrin Moon said Badnock and he was absolutely corrected by Baroness Rachel McLean, as opposed to McLean. I was too scared to say her last name then. Let's go to a break so I can take on some water. Still recalling that kiss with Peron, Ian, what do you know? I know we've talked about the Perfumo scandal before, but your understanding of it in terms of Wilson, this new leader of the Labour Party versus Harold McMillan, what's your understanding of the dynamics and how they changed because of this scandal concerning a Soviet spy, a Minister of War and a good time girl. I hate that expression, but I refuse to call her a cool girl, a prostitute and everything.

[B]

She was a cool girl.

[A]

Everything that the tabloids called her out for being in the 60s. What's your understanding?

[B]

But that's what she was.

[A]

God almighty. Can we just move on, please?

[B]

Anyway, well, you raised it. Harold Wilson had been leader of the Labour Party only for about a couple of years. The before this, this whole thing became public, I think the, the actual shenanigans between Christine Keeler and the Russian defense attache, Ivanov, and then Profumo. Yeah, I mean, that.

[A]

That was the summer of 61.

[B]

Exactly. So, I mean, Profimo's undoing was. I mean, basically lied to the House of Commons, I mean, clearly lied to the House of Commons. And I think Macmillan, even though, I mean, he'd been around a bit and Macmillan knew a little bit about the sins of the flesh, shall we say, not for his own sins, but his wife's sins with Lord Boothby. But it is quite shocking when you think about it. And this is where politicians can be incredibly arrogant, that they just think they can get away with it. And I, Profumo, knew who Christine Keillor was. I think he knew that she'd been shagging a Russian defense attache and yet still started an affair with her.

[A]

2 secs. What happens is actually it's kind of darker than that. They meet at Clifton, this mansion belonging to Lord Astor. And at that meeting, pool party, spontaneous pool party, there is Christine Keeler, who's 19 at the time and dances in a cabaret club. There is Minister of War and there is also the Russian attache at the same party, he actually had a swimming race with Ivanov, so they were all interlinked, if you like. She goes back at the end of that weekend and it's the one and only time she shags Ivanov in London on a bottle of vodka. All right? And that's their moment. You Know what I mean? Tea is offered, vodka is consumed. But she's already met Jack Perfumo and he's expressed an interest in her. And she said, see my mentor in inverted commas, Stephen Ward, who then heavily peddles the idea of Perfumo to Christine Keillor because he likes to lace himself with significant players, with agency and politics, etc. And then a few days later, they start their affair, which goes on for about a month. The reason Perfumo stops the affair is he's effectively warned off it because the MI5 let him know, look, we don't know what's going on between Ward and Ivanov. And he just. He reads, reads the. The weather. He sends a note, my darling, to Christine Keiller, which of course later is weaponized against him. So that's the end of the affair. In 61, it comes up to bite him on the bottom because she's embroiled in a court case with two West Indian abusive men, basically, who are fighting over her. And that's how she hits the press. And that's why it all unfolds. And she's offered money for her story, et cetera. What's fascinating about it is by early 1963, we've had the Cuban Missile Crisis, we had the veto from De Gaulle, we've had quite a lot of negative stuff going down for the Conservative administration. But it' looking like it might pick back up again for Macmillan when he's informed of. I think it's from the Chief editor of the News of the World that basically we've got something on your boy in the. In the War Office. Head of the War Office. And by the way, that he's a minor politician because the Head of War is beneath the Minister of Defense. But still, you know, you might want to do something about this. But to be fair to Macmillan, and here is where the parallels with Starmer are fascinating, is that the Chief Whip had already questioned Perfumo over his affair with Christine Keeler. And Perfumer had said, I know you may find it hard to believe he had a reputation as something of a ladies man, but I'm telling you, it's the truth. I did not have an affair with this woman. And the Chief Whip chose to believe him over this woman, this young girl who danced in a cabaret office. Now, what's fascinating is the two things. And the first thing is you've been very impressed, haven't you, by Kemi Badenoch and the way she's executed and criticized and interrogated Starmer. Would you agree?

[B]

Yes. Generally, I thought she didn't do brilliantly at PMQs this week. I thought she could have asked much more direct short questions. But I think she's been very forensic, she's been very calm. There'd be no sort of histrionics, particularly. And I think she has been impressive on it.

[A]

Yeah, I think she's been far too precipitous. She's come out an early on called Keir Starmer a liar when he's many things. But I think we now know he probably hasn't lied, overtly lied, and I think that slightly undermined her authority. And it's very different from the way Harold Wilson approached or launched his attack, where rather than go in with heavy boots on Howard macmillan saying, you could have uncovered this, I came to you with issues around security and questions about this. Months ago. He actually held back. Held back, used patience, which is a real political virtue, and then he challenged the House and he basically said to the House, this, ladies and gentlemen, isn't so much about a scandal, but it's also about. More about security. And I think that is where the power of Wilson's attack sat, is that he was patient and then he delivers his killer blow. Quote, what we are seeing is a diseased acquiescence, a corrupted and poisoned appendix of a small and unrepresentative section of society that makes no contribution to what Britain is, still less to what Britain can be.

[B]

You say that, but that's the first time I've heard those words. They weren't memorable at the time. When you use a word like acquiescence, I haven't got a clue what that means, do you? Nor would most normal people.

[A]

I thought it was a brilliant killer line. I loved it. I've read all his speech and that's the bit that stood out for me. But he actually.

[B]

What does it mean, though?

[A]

Filth? Doesn't it?

[B]

I don't know. Could do.

[A]

Are you underwhelmed just because he's Harold Wilson?

[B]

No, No. I think Howard Wilson was in many ways a very clever politician. But that doesn't sort of strike me as a particularly memorable line or two.

[A]

Well, then you could choose. What concerns us directly is that the former Secretary of State for War, faced with rumors and innuendos that could not be ignored, chose deliberately to lie to this House. And in circumstances in which this House allows freedom of personal statement without question or debate on the premise that what is said is said in good faith. But that's very mundane. I much preferred it when he started getting into the Heart of why this really mattered to Britain because it said something about the ruling class at that time. And that resonated with the public. They felt that they had a tawdry leadership they couldn't trust. And that's where we sit today, isn't it? That all this criticism of the Conservative, the, the Labour Party, I've even got them in a muddle, is that it's about trust. Who do we trust? Do we believe in this?

[B]

But you see, the difference between now and 1963 is, as you said before, that came at the end of a very long running Conservative government. They've been in power since 1951, 13 years. And they were very tired. Just as the last Conservative government got now, now got tired. Starmer has managed this in less than two years in that people think of his government as no different from the Tories. He started off with the freebie gate thing, which I think people really were very surprised by and took exception to. And then he sacked all of these people that we've already talked about. The economic figures are dire. We've got another thing out today showing that working people in this country are now, they've had the most tax rises of any of 48 major economies. And there is no explaining that away.

[A]

So it's a dismal backdrop. But I would argue, okay, so Keir Starmer, you could argue he's become the sort of tail end of the last Conservative administration. It feels like it's hard to differentiate between the two. That's the problem. And people are voting against the establishment, whether it's Tory or Labor. Now, isn't that why they're finding the Greens and reforms?

[B]

That's exactly right. And I mean, it's interesting how the Greens are really capitalizing on this, not just reform. And apparently Zach Polanski has been taking lessons from Mamdani's PR people in New York in terms of how he uses social media and he's just hired a permanent videographer to follow him round.

[A]

Well, that I rest my case. That's why Keir Starmer should have picked up his smartphone and talked to the nation on the Tuesday last week. But now can we go to Harold Macmillan's response? Because what was fascinating was when Keir Starmer delivered, I thought his lucid, cohesive response or presentation of what he believed had happened and why he didn't know about this UK SV vetting negation that Mandelson has received. I thought he acquitted himself well. And the standout moment was when he said, turned around and said, I know this is incredible, but it's true. And the whole house laughed. Do you recall that, the end of Starmer speech?

[B]

I do recall that, but again, I think Tim Shipman sort of says, why that wasn't necessarily a wise thing to do. And when you're. When you're making a statement like that, you've got to make sure that you are telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And yet again, he misquoted Sir Ollie Robbins in a way that he quoted something which didn't have the beginning of the sentence or the end of the sentence. And when you add the beginning of the sentence and the end of the sentence, it means exactly the opposite to what he had alleged. And that is a clear case of misleading Parliament. Now, people can say, oh, that's just Westminster talk, it's really boring. But when a Prime Minister starts to get a reputation for doing that, which he is now, again, that's really serious.

[A]

Okay, once more, I would say you're more in the weeds of this, so. Yeah, I hear you. In terms of.

[B]

I mean, it's not actually misrepresentation, it's misrepresented. It's this misrepresentation and it's quite near lying.

[A]

But the takeaway mood music from his speech was, here's the evidence. It all stacks up.

[B]

Which one are we talking about now?

[A]

Keir Starmer.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Which one stacks up? The first one on the Monday.

[B]

Right. Okay. Well, I'm talking about the Tuesday.

[A]

Well, I'm talking about the Monday. And it all stacks up to me not knowing that Mandelson didn't pass a security vetting. And then the gear change. Hey, isn't it extraordinary? Fantastical. I know, right? And I'm Prime Minister, even though. And that was where. Whoa. That I didn't. I agree the gear change there was

[B]

uncomfortable, but the general public doesn't see that as a good thing.

[A]

No, I know. Think.

[B]

Hang on. He's not in control of his own government.

[A]

Well, funnily enough, I think having thought he acquitted himself fairly, then when I looked into the way in which Harold Wilson. Then when I looked into the way Howard Macmillan presented his, effectively his apology to the House because his minister had lied, I thought, actually, no, Keir Starmer got it wrong. And if he knew his history, he would have not said at the end. Isn't that incredible?

[B]

That's a very good point, because not only does Keir Starmer not know his history, he doesn't know his politics either. And John MacDonald was very interesting yesterday with Andrew Marr, where he was basically saying, look, Keir Starmer doesn't have a constituency. There's no such thing really as Starmerites. He said he's got no organization within the Labour Party now that Labour Together has been discredited. He hasn't got anybody really to rally to his cause, which most political leaders need.

[A]

Right, so now, can I just speak to you from 1963, this is what Howard Macmillan said and listen for the parallels with Keir Starmer. He is apologising for John Profumo's lying. The now sacked Minister of War. He says, I do not remember in the whole of my life or even in the political history of the past a case of a Minister of the Crown who has told a deliberate lie to his wife, to his legal advisers and to his ministerial colleagues, not once, but over and over again, who has then repeated this lie to the House of Commons as a personal statement, or which, as the Right Honourable Gentleman reminded us, I. E Wilson implies that it is privileged and has subsequently taken legal action and recovered damages on the basis of a falsehood. This is almost unbelievable, but it is true. It could have been Starmer on Monday.

[B]

It could have been. I mean, it was in a sense. I mean, Starmer kind of did that to an extent.

[A]

He said, isn't this unbelievable?

[B]

But not with the eloquence that Macmillan did.

[A]

Either way, people are tired of Macmillan. He represents privilege. He's a wounded man. What's interesting is he limps on and it ends up being his health, really, that decides he won't fight the next election. It does.

[B]

And then it turned out that actually he was fine.

[A]

Yeah, it does. Undoubtedly. I think with White Dow kneecap the administration, it removes their credibility. And it also, crucially, because it goes on for months, it starts from sort of January time. And it goes on. Goes on and on and on, right through. Think Denning report comes out in about September, just like this Mandelson one. The longer it goes on, the more poisonous.

[B]

But this Mandelson thing would go on for years because we don't know what's going to happen with the police inquiry now. It could be later this year. They decide whether they're going to charge Mandelson or not. I have no insight into whether they would or not. But if they do, it's not going to come to court for at least another year, is it? So we'll be in 2028, 2029 before this, and even then it could still go on after that. So if. If Starmer hopes at some point he can put this behind him. Well, jog on.

[A]

And in all of it, there's that idea that we've sort of failed to learn and politicians have failed to learn, because I was fascinated by why it ever came, given the libel laws of the time and stuff. It ever came to light, the affair. And if you dig into it, it's a. An absolute loyal dog of Wilson's, a guy called Wig George. Wig, yeah. And he really resented Perfumo, that he'd crossed him, they'd crossed each other. And John Lewis, a man who hated Stephen Ward, and they both had personal vendettas and they are the ones that pushed it onto the floor of the House of Commons under that privileged. You know, you can say what you like without exemption in the House. And that's how it ended up being exposed, because of enemies Perfumer had made.

[B]

Do you remember about 10 or 15 years ago, there was a West End production of the Whole Profumo Scandal? I think Andrew Lloyd Webber wrote the music for it and I went to see it. It was absolutely brilliant. And there was. I've actually still got the soundtrack and there's one great song in it. Would you like me to sing a little rendition?

[A]

I think this is queuing us into the last section of the pod.

[B]

I think it is.

[A]

My goodness. I'll just sit back and listen. Yes.

[B]

You've never had it so good. You've never had it so often. I can't remember the rest. I was trying to look up the lyrics, but it was a very good ditty available on itunes.

[A]

Can I give you a limerick? There was a young girl called Christine who shattered the party machine. It isn't too rude to lie in the nude, but to lie in the house is obscene.

[B]

It doesn't quite scan at the beginning, does it? I do like a good limerick.

[A]

Christine is a bit.

[B]

I used to be really good at doing spontaneous limericks where somebody would give me a place and I would say that give me a place. I'm not going to be able to do it now.

[A]

Tunbridge Wells.

[B]

There was a young woman from Tunbridge Wells her farts really did smell. She went to the loo to do a poo and I can't do the last line now.

[A]

There was an old man from St Bede's who swallowed a packet of seeds tossed the grass grey out of his arse and his chest was covered with Weeze. Or.

[B]

Yeah, you haven't just made that up.

[A]

Bubbles in the Bath by Iver Windybottom. Or in Ian's case, because he's so Old Rusty bed springs by I.P. knightley. Go on off. Let's have a break.

[C]

If you work in university maintenance, Grainger considers you an MVP because your playbook ensures your arena is always ready for tip off. And Granger is your trusted partner, offering the products you need all in one place, from H vac and plumbing supplies to lighting and more. And all delivered with plenty of time left on the clock. So your team always gets the win. Call 1-800-GRAINGER visit grainger.com or just stop by Grainger for the ones who get it done.

[B]

So we have some questions if you'd like to contribute a question to the next episode, which we'll be recording with me in Washington D.C. on Monday.

[A]

It's not me. Oh, no, it is me in Washington.

[B]

With me.

[A]

With me. Yeah. You can have with me.

[B]

Yeah. And you can email wherepoliticsmeetshistorylobal.com or leave a question on the Instagram feed at where politics meets History. Would you like to commence?

[A]

This is from Jonathan. It's quite long. I'll try and sub it down, but it basically speaks to what we've been speaking about and my complaint at the beginning of the pod and I feel mea culpa. We have actually just climbed into the cesspit and guddled around as usual. He says, when will the media stop talking about Mandelson? A Westminster Village story if ever there was one. Whilst Ian gets excited by it all. Excited, are you, Ian? I wonder if he lives in an echo chamber of thought given his work and role on lbc. I understand it is in his interest, but the rest of us just want the country to be run better. I really sympathize.

[B]

I mean, that's really. That's ridiculous. I don't live in an echo chamber. A lot of people disagree with me.

[A]

He says, sorry for the rant and the possible non question, but I suspect it is nonsense like Mandelson's story, which switched people off politics. And not because people all think politicians corrupt or on the take, but rather the fact they and the commentators focus on this, which is quite frankly bullshit. He then says, in addition, I expect some of the opposition parties focus on it because they lack the answers to the problems facing the country and the world.

[B]

You see, that is a typical example of somebody who, if this had been a conservative politician being appointed to an ambassador or a post and had failed the security vetting, they would be on it like rats at a trap.

[A]

I don't think that's true.

[B]

Well, I absolutely do.

[A]

I think There is a large proportion. It's interesting you said at the beginning of this show, oh, LBC's numbers have gone up, the barb's gone up. Yet there is a cohort of individuals, no matter what their political colors, who will tune into live news and go through the churn and look for the cadavers and enjoy siding and picking over the detail. But I think for the vast majority, actually it drains political trust and it exacerbates turn off.

[B]

What drains political trust is that these people get up to no good. It's not the reporting of it. I mean, what would, what would you say if the media just thought, oh, this is a non story, we're not going to cover it. I mean that would be a dereliction of duty in my view.

[A]

I think that we know the appointment of Peter Mandelson was a dud. We're clearly aware of that. We've been aware of that since September. Many of us guessed long before. And I'll remind you again that you were one of the ones supporting the appointment.

[B]

Yeah, I was and I've been open about that.

[A]

Unlike some others given it's an understandable mistake. Therefore you could argue of informed by the Trump nonsense, these constant raking over of how it happened when we understand that politicians are busy, they've only got a certain bandwidth. No, the decision had been made a

[B]

failure of the state. That's why it happened. It was a failure of this word process.

[A]

Yeah, exactly.

[B]

And I think that is an important thing for us to discuss.

[A]

It is, but it ends up just being, oh, he's a shit weasel. No, he's more of a shit weasel. They're all shit weasels. That's how they get to the top. I mean there is a bit of that. You have to be pretty ruthless to run a department office like the Foreign Office. And Ollie, by the way, Ollie Robbins had knocked off most of the people who worked in international development he'd got rid of because there was no funding. It's not like he hasn't sacked people. And I'm sure he isn't always Mr. Perfect. That comes with the job of running things.

[B]

Nobody is perfect. No, but I mean, as people now know, in hindsight there were enough warning signs, I suppose. I mean, I didn't know of his deep relationship with Epstein. I suppose I knew that he had of his. I knew that he'd been sacked twice, but I don't think that was necessarily meaning that he would be a bad ambassador. In fact, he was quite a good ambassador for the six months he was there. He did what he was supposed to do. Anyway. Let's have another one from Sarah who says hello, Professor Ian Dale and Tess. You see where this is going, can't you?

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

I have just finished listening to episode 115, the man who Sold the War, and once again I am incensed at Tessa's unspoken, unbelievable hypocrisy and inability to either acknowledge or apologize for it. Now this is her justification for her allegation. The only Benny Hill character on this pod is Tessa because she keeps alive negative stereotypes. Biddy, old man, etc. And in one episode at least nudged her boobs up like Les Dawson used to in his heyday.

[A]

How does she know that I did?

[B]

Because I think I alluded to it.

[A]

Thanks for that. Thanks, Ian. You know, who needs enemies?

[B]

She criticized you, Ian, for saying young woman and then brazenly called you an old man for the hundredth time. Seriously annoying in total. Double standards. Ah. I do have a question though. I've always wished we could have a cross party government. So if this was the case, who would you choose to fill the main positions in the cabinet? Now, do you acknowledge her criticism?

[A]

I think we discussed earlier about my tendency to shoot from the hip and I think it is sometimes much easier to take the moat out of Ian's eye than it is to take the beam out of my own. If I've got that motto the right way around.

[B]

No idea what that means.

[A]

Yeah, it is you know, to that idea that you're. You level at somebody for their failings and you don't deal with your own. And there's an expression, a motto that goes with it, but at the same time it's not like I'm not trying to self improve, it's just occasionally I get over excited and.

[B]

Well, that's all right then.

[A]

Yeah, and you can criticize me. It's just. The problem is, while I have an idea of the more modern and contemporary mores, because I have probably a teenage daughter and I'm obviously younger than Ian and therefore it's easier for me to criticize and and find fault with him. Ian very much is heavily invested in the conservative world of being 60 plus, surrounded by conservative friends, and he doesn't observe when I make blundering errors.

[B]

Most of my friends are not conservative, most of my friends actually are on the left and I would say I have more female friends than I have male friends.

[A]

But you could pick me up on words like biddy, but you actually quite enjoy them. That's the difference.

[B]

Because I Don't get offended.

[A]

I know, but language is important so I don't mind you picking me up on my hypocrisy. I think it is important you can.

[B]

Well you, you've made a rod for your own.

[A]

I probably have. Yeah.

[B]

Right, your turn.

[A]

I did pick you up with the word cool girl. And we're going to come back to that because this is from autistic lawyer. She was fascinated to hear because I put it on our Instagram, our weapon Instagram that I was filming about Christine Keeler and the Profumo scandal. She said it always saddened me that Christine Keeler was vilified whilst John Perfumer was allowed to slip away and rebuild his life. He was, he was knighted for his services to charity at the end of his life life.

[B]

Talk about CBE wasn't knighted. He never became Sir John Profumo.

[A]

Well, he got okay, but he already had an OBE from the war. I mean that's quite a lot going on there, isn't there OB well to

[B]

be fair to him, I mean his charitable work in the East End was quite immense.

[A]

Yeah, he washed dishes for a long time and then suddenly, you know, became a CEO. I think of the Toynbee Trust or something. You know it does help, doesn't it? If you belong to the those and such as those class. That's all I'm saying. It was much easier for him to become a CBE for charitable endeavor than it ever would have been for Christine Keeler who didn't have private means to live off while she washed disses for 20 years.

[B]

Well what did she do after the scandal? She made quite a lot of money from a book.

[A]

She made bits and pieces of pin money but she, I mean you can't compare the two. He was a man of private means.

[B]

So who was it? Is it Corey will remember this is it. Chris, our other producer has links to Christine.

[A]

Yes, we've mentioned this before. Yeah, I mean that's why he's such a. A fine looking chap. Anyway, she continues talk about a woman being made to carry the can. She had such a tragic life in many respects. I always really like the sound of her. I know the scandal was of its time, but I'm not convinced a woman would be treated that differently these days. Please champion her.

[B]

I think that's probably true actually.

[A]

What was interesting and why I feel I didn't do a good job today is that I want to champion her. She flaunted the main asset that was available to her which was her exquisite exterior, her appearance and that's how she got on and got up to London, despite coming from a very dysfunctional, impoverished background. The problem is every alley that. That led her down was a false hope, was a false dawn, and she was eventually called out, berated and accused of being a slut, harlot and a prostitute in Parliament as well as in the press, when all she was doing was giving men what they wanted. And that's a really difficult circumstance.

[B]

Let's not get prissy about the language. She was taking money for sex, so therefore it's perfectly reasonable to call her a call girl or a prostitute, because

[A]

that's what she was taking money for sex. Well, she got paid for taking her clothes off and strutting around a cabaret club called Murray's. And then she had several relationships which. From which she acquired, hang on, living conditions and financial security.

[B]

Stephen Ward was effectively her pimp.

[A]

No, he wasn't. He didn't pay. He didn't. He. He allowed. They lived together, they didn't have sex together. She went and stayed in his spring cottage, she stayed in his flat. But he didn't have.

[B]

He procured men to have sex with her?

[A]

No.

[B]

Didn't he?

[A]

No. He was convicted for immoral earnings, for acquiring money through immoral means, I. E. For being a pimp. But it didn't. In terms of Christine and Mandy Rice Davis. No. In fact, it cost him in many cases to look after them and to hold on to them as friends. They definitely helped service his life. They gave him an asset with which he could then trade on to climb up the slippery pole because the likes of Lord Astor and perfumer love bonking them. So he came with these luscious ladies, busty women from a lower class.

[B]

So he didn't take any money from anyone.

[A]

It wasn't about money for Steven.

[B]

Stephen Ward, but you're being very careful with your words here. Did he accept money from men who.

[A]

No, no. But what. What he acquired was cultural capital. So then he's their osteopath and they pay him for, like, in kind. He's their artist. He did. Amazing.

[B]

But he was convicted for.

[A]

Yes, I know, but he was wrongfully convicted. There's been huge amounts of raking over the coals about Stephen Ward because even if you agree he was wrongfully convicted. Convicted because I don't believe Kristen Keeler was a prostitute and therefore it's a wrongful conviction. Or Mandy Rice Davis. Even if you believe that, I still believe he was morally wrong.

[B]

He was more that. Then you have to ask the question. Well, if he didn't, do you have to accept money to be called a prostitute? So I'm not sure what the answer to that question is.

[A]

It's a looser term. But I think you do have to accept money. I think it's a hard and fast currency. A lot of women marry men because they're rich. I mean, it's a very gray area, Ian, but it's.

[B]

It can be effectively almost coercive control, can't it? Where? Yeah, he. I mean, if she lived with him, he was providing with accommodation, food, whatever, and in return she would go off with the men that he introduced her to.

[A]

And that's what's interesting because now the Sexual Offenses act has a new clause in it since 2003 where it's about trust and the abuse of power. So if I'm over 18 and I have power over you, you, even if you are above the age of consent, I. E. 16 or 17, what I'm doing could be deemed illegal. He was clearly wasn't in a. Arguably in a position of trust. It's. It's really dark and complicated. But don't forget the age gap. He's a man who's 50 and she's 19 and Mandy Rice Davis is 16. Yeah, that's. That's dark. I mean, that's 30.

[B]

Well, it can be. I mean, it doesn't necessarily have to be. I mean, I. I know somebody I know who is 27 is having an affair with a woman over 50. Now, by your definition, that's dark. It absolutely isn't dark.

[A]

But he's not having an affair with these girls, he is trading them. When Christine Keiller was approached by Perfumo, she said, contact Stephen Ward and they contact Stephen Ward and he encourages Christine Keeler to have an affair with Perfumo. So this, it's the slipperiness of it. And that's why there's echoes with Epstein, because of that grooming aspect. And what did actually Stephen Warden get out of this?

[B]

That's absolutely right.

[A]

He got it, emboldened his position. It gave him something extra to trade with the upper classes. Remember, he was just a vicar's son. He was a man, a boy done good from a minor private school. So he was always trying to climb

[B]

the great opening line for a novel. He was just a vicar's son, but. Right, have we got time for one more? Ross says good day to Dr. Dunlop and Professor Dale. When I last wrote you both, I was bemoaning the lot of the most discriminated against minority on God's green earth. Short men said topic, even in jest, seemed to upset the good doctor, for which I apologize. This time I'd like to ask about something rather more serious. The nhs. Why we have it compared to other nations and what are we going to do about it? Ian, I know you've touched on this before about the negative experience you had with your mum.

[A]

Mum.

[B]

Having been through significant issues with my dad and his NHS care in the latter years, I'm now finding the same level of rank incompetence with the care of my mum. The highlight of which was instead of using an ambulance to drop her back off at home after an appointment, they used a taxi who just dropped her off vaguely near her house and left this for an 80 year old with significant disabilities and quite severe dementia and now known knowledge of things like house door keys. Now, I've worked with and for the NHS and can attest to the waste, bureaucracy, entitled attitudes and frankly bone idleness of some of the staff, both medical and support. So how did we decide upon the NHS as a model historically? Why social democratic countries such as Denmark, Iceland, Finland and that other exemplar of Anglo Saxon capitalism, France, never adopted the same health care model. And what do we do about it now?

[A]

Goodness, that's a whole podcast and we're at the table.

[B]

You know, I think it is, yeah. Should we actually park that and make it a section of a future podcast? Because I think it does bring up a lot of issues. I mean, I think we all judge the NHS through our own experiences, don't we? And we have to be careful about that in some ways because I had a terrible experience actually with both my parents, but my own experience over the last few years has actually been really positive.

[A]

Well, we know all about your experience, don't we? Just quickly. Of course it comes as post war. It's part of the consensus. What will we in the war for? To all be together. And that is a hatch match and dispatch issue where from birth to death you're going to be looked after health wise by the state. And it's a kind of a pledge, a promise to the people. And it's one that historically we've always been very proud of. I will remind you of the opening night of the Olympics in 2012. What was the set peak? It was a celebration of the nhs. Lots of dancing nurses and doctors.

[B]

Do you not think it's become fetishized, though?

[A]

A bit. It's a sacred cow we can't touch. Even Jacob Rees Mogg will go, oh, don't talk about the nhs.

[C]

I know.

[B]

And you see that that is what I can't stand. I really hate that. Because we should not be thinking of any institution, whether it is beloved by many or not, as beyond reform. On that controversial bombshell, let's clap.

[A]

Because that's what we were forced almost to do in Covid.

[B]

Well, that is true. I didn't have to do it because I was. My radio show and actually carrying the clapping live.

[A]

And I actually refuse to do it because I. It reminds me of communism sauce.

[B]

You're such a controversialist. Right, well, I will speak to you on Monday live from Washington D.C. i

[A]

will be a bit anxious before my Westminster event and.

[B]

Well, I really hope it goes well. And I mean, you're not. I think this is a campaign that is not going to be an easy one to win. But if anyone can, Tessa Dunlop can.

[A]

I understand also. I just want to. One should never apologize for one's performance. But it has. It's encroached on my sleep a bit.

[B]

The level everything encroaches on.

[A]

You never have good sleep. But the problem is, and it makes me realize why it's so difficult for first generation groups to get any space in the national narrative. Because actually, I'm working with a team of exceptional Romanians, but they don't have any political contacts and they don't have any press contacts. And so all of that goes through me. And they're working very much in their second language.

[B]

Corey. I wonder whether we'll ever do an episode where the word Romania never gets to mention.

[A]

No, you fucking won't. Duti. Dumuddi. That's a really, really, really rude word. Cut that, Cory. In Romanian. Bye.

[B]

Bye.

[A]

I told you to go into your mother's. Oh, I know, right? This has been a global player, original production.