Talk:Harold Wilson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

QUERY: in the 'Death' section of this article it says, "Not long after Wilson's retirement, his mental deterioration from Alzheimer's disease began to be apparent. He rarely appeared in public after 1985 and died of colon cancer in 1995, at the age of 79." - Is this what is meant?? Surely the deterioration of his mental health was apparent BEFORE his death!?--TymShepherd 04:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

What's with the MI5 plot section? Does this really deserve mention? john 07:44, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Maybe if it's well known trivia, but it's the first I've heard of it. Mackensen 17:06, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The Wilson Plot is much discussed in the context of the history of MI5 and deserves a mention here, although its effect on Wilson's career was minimal. Perhaps a special article on it is mentioned. See 'The Wilson Plot' by D. Leigh, or 'Smear' by S. Dorril and R. Ramsay for book-length treatments.Dbiv 12:40, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

QUERY: No mention of his frequent visits to Stalin's Moscow, nor of the deal to sell Rolls Royce Nene and Derwent engines for a few thousand tons of wheat (enough for a slice and half for every UK citizen). The Soviets reverse-engineered these jet engines (they were well behind in jet technology at the time) and the resultant RD-45 engine and its derivatives went on to power the MiG-15 through to MiG-19 jet fighters. Nice one, Harold.

Contents 1 Esq? 1.1 Plot against Wilson 2 beatles song 3 Glaring Omission 4 deliberate collapsing of the value of the British pound 5 Favouritism 6 Member for ... 7 Rhodesia? 8 contradiction between this page and The Lavender List page 9 Family 10 Lavender paper 11 Retirement

[edit] Esq?

The section on Wilson's titles claims that from the time of his birth he was entitled to use the term "Esq." Surely this is not the case? Even given the broader and less technically accurate meanings of the term esquire, using it from birth would be unlikely. Grutness...wha? 01:56, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Response: In the UK, unlike the US, the expression Esq. is used simply as an alternative to Mr. and has no other connotation. Nandt1 13:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Rehabilitation

Coming across the Wilson page for the first time, I felt it would benefit from more of an explanation for his contemporary popularity (he did win four elections as PM - more than any other Labour leader including Blair, and more than any other 20th century British party leader), and a nudge towards the need for his reputation to be revived in light of recent events. In response to the question of the M15 plot, it is important, not only for the importance Wilson gave it (when most opinon felt he was being paranoid) but for the fact that with the release of government papers since then his suspicions turned out to be well founded.Marvin Khan 22:53, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Plot against Wilson

This Enough of this cover-up: the Wilson plot was our Watergate from The Guardian, 26th of March 2006, may be a useful source regarding the plot against Wilson. Alun 09:47, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] beatles song

shouldnt it say that he was mentioned in a beatle song. taxman. not many people have that distinction.

Authenticity check: A search reveals that the phrase "regarded by many" appears in the text. Is the phrase a symptom of a dubious statement? Could a source be quoted instead? Perhaps the "many" could be identified? Might text be edited to more genuinely reflect specific facts? —Wetman

[edit] Glaring Omission

It is extremely puzzling that there is no mention whatsoever of Wilson's personal life.

A more politically significant omission is the absence of a discussion of Wilson and Barbara Castle's aborted effort to reform industrial relations (labor law) in the UK -- the plan known as "In Place of Strife". This episode led to a confrontation with the trades unions, from which the government in effect backed down. It provides an important part of the background to the subsequent more decisive assault by Margaret Thatcher upon the legal status of British labor unions. It would be good to see a qualified contributor take this on. Nandt1 13:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] deliberate collapsing of the value of the British pound

Lyndon LaRouche speaks of the first Harold Wilson government collapsing the british pound as a direct attack on the Bretton Woods system. What is known about the collapse of the pound under Wilson?

Response: Far from being "deliberate" in any way, the Wilson government resisted devaluation for three years, arguably at considerable economic and financial cost. They let the exchange rate go only when they had no real alternative. "Collapsing" is, in addition, a somewhat hyperbolic description of a devaluation of roughly 15%. Nandt1 13:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Favouritism

I believe that that the introduction is basic spin. It says that Wilson was one of the most electorall successfull PM becuase he won four elections. Whom ever wrote that failed to mention that two of them was was witha wafer thin majority and with another one he didnt even have a plurality of votes. (81.79.9.113 20:57, 7 April 2006 (UTC))

The point you make about the closeness of the election results is factually accurate - but it doesn't change the fact that narrow victory or otherwise, minority government or majority - he still emerged the overall victor in 4 General Elections. And that does make him one of the most electorally successful Prime Ministers. There is an article about individual elections that relates the detailed results. Davidpatrick 06:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, describing him as the "most electorally successful politician" seems problematic. One could easily argue that Blair or Thatcher, who both won three elections with solid majority, have been more electorally successful than Wilson, who only had one solid win (1966). The only reason that Wilson has so many victories is because his 1964 majority was so small that he had to try again in 66, and because he didn't even have a majority after the first 1974 election. It is fair to say that he won the most general elections of any 20th century PM (and probably is tied for the most of any PM - of other PMs, Walpole, Liverpool, and Gladstone all won 4 (if you count 1885 as a Gladstone victory), but nobody has won more than that), but it is not fair to say he was the "most electorally successful" - one could easily make cases for both Thatcher and Blair as more successful, and even for people like Attlee or Campbell-Bannerman or Lloyd George who won enormous single victories. john k 16:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Member for ...

I have reverted the change of 'Member for' to 'Member of Parliament for'. The version 'Member for' is the accepted standard except that one editor seems to be going round making this unilateral change. Not a huge point, but any views welcome. BlueValour 16:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Accepted standard? I haven't seen any discussion to that effect, and a lot of articles do have the format "[[Member of Parliament]] for "[[constituency]]<nowiki>". For a variety of resaons, I think it makes more sense. :For now, I have reverted the change, because the alternative inserted "<nowiki>[[Member]] for "[[constituency]]" leaves the bare word "member" as the link text, which isn't helpful. If you feel that "Member for" is more appropriate, could we discuss it| I suggest on Category talk:British MPs, unless you see a beter place? --BrownHairedGirl 20:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Fine, start the debate and I will respond.BlueValour 21:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Can't see why the 'standard' is to make a completely useless link. BrownHairedGirl's revision makes much more sense to me. Average Earthman 20:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

'Member of' has served us well until BrownHairedGirl has gone around changing some but not all. If she wants to make the case, fine, we can discuss it but it should have been discussed first before reversing what has been common amongst all MO articles. BlueValour 21:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Rather agree with BlueValour on this. Have been watching BrownHairedGirl go through many of the pages I've created for members of parliamement with some dismay. The normal fashion in the UK is 'Member for' not the longer version BrownHairedGirl has been applying. Indeed the rather 'generic' member of parliament link thats been applied is rather redundent as above the member box I always add Parliament of the United Kingdom info box with its direct link to the UK Parliament where all these 'members' sit. Sorry BrownHairedGirl, I agree with a lot of things you've done in the past but I rather disagree on this, epecially for the longer named constituencies which your new form looks rather bad on. Galloglass 21:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I have not always seen eye to eye with Galloglass but he has done a fantastic job on parliamentary constituencies. BrownHairedGirl should now reverse each and everyone of the changes she has made - as a newly created admin she should realise that you get agreement first and make the change second. BlueValour 22:04, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I'm sorry that this seems to have caused offence -- that was not my intention.

There are several issues here. The first is that the changes which BlueValour has just done have created a useless link to Member, which redirects to Membership, and offfers no hint of any parliamentary context. You may have a case about another form of linking, but "[[Member]] for [[constituency]]" is just silly. Please don't do that :(

Secondly, there have long been hundreds of articles on MPs with succession boxes in the format "[[Member of Parliament]] for [[constituency]]". As well as being widely ued by others, it is the format I have used on every MP article I have created, and on the hundreds more to which I have added succession boxes; this is the first time that anyone has suggested that it is inappropriate, so I'm afraid that I cannot accept that it is somehow an "accepted standard" to use the format "[[constituency|Member for constituency]]". That has been one of several formats in use.

Now, the main purpose of my edit run was to insert {{s-par|uk/gb}} tags and fix categorisation; the "Member of" replacement was but one of many chnages made, so simply reverting those edits isnoy sensible -- it would strip categories and lots of other material.

This is not an appropriate place for a wider discussion on what is apporopriate, so I won't reply further on this talk page: if you want to try to establish a policy on this, I'd be very happy to discuss, but not here. As before, I suggest Category talk:British MPs ... and meanwhile, I will desist from further changes to existing "Member for" entries. --BrownHairedGirl 23:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am sorry about breaking the extra bits you put in. I have reverted to your version, here and elsewhere, but using the [[Member of Parliament|Member]] formulation to produce my prefered style of Member whilst wikilinking to Member of Parliament. As you suggested, I have put some initial thoughts on Category talk:British MPs. BlueValour 03:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rhodesia?

Is it entirely acurate to say "Ultimately Wilson's position led to the end of white minority rule in Rhodesia." I'm entirely sure that Nationalists under Mugabe and Nkomo would claim this, that the incoming Tory government might also claim this, that Samora Michel, Julius Nyrerer, the Apathied government and the American might all put a justifiable claim to having brought down the Smith Government. One can justifiably claim that Wilson's presance (similarily Blair's presance now with regards to Mugabe) in No 10 only strenthened the Smith government. As to the coup plot, while it did occure I'm sure there is no where near enough proof to back up the claim.

[edit] contradiction between this page and The Lavender List page

According to The Lavender List "it was later alleged that the head of Wilson's political office, Marcia Williams, had written the original draft on lavender-coloured notepaper, although no documentary evidence exists to support this claim. Williams, later Baroness Falkender, has always denied this - as did Wilson himself." This contradicts what is written here where it takes for granted that she did write it. Which is correct? JoshuaZ 01:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Family

The article should include a section about the Wilson family. For instance, his children(if any) and his marriage is not mentioned. Can anyone add this section? Thanks--218.103.210.164 13:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lavender paper

"...caused lasting damage to his reputation when it was revealed that the first draft of the list had been written by Marcia Williams on lavender notepaper"

Why? What's the scandal in lavender paper/Marcia Williams? Njál 10:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Retirement

The retirement of Harold Wilson was not particularly surprising. He was a very proud man, and conscious of the way he appeared in public. The Wilsons had a holiday cottage on St Mary's in the Isles of Scilly. In the early days they used to cross on the ferry. This gave Wilson an opportunity to glad-hand the other passengers, which he genuinely enjoyed. However, one year he caught the "Scillonian" on a bad day. The trip from Penzance can be extremely rough, and Wilson was very seasick. Not wishing to take the chance on appearing so badly in public again on a ship where privacy was non-existent, the Wilsons flew over on the helicopter ever after. Such a trip would be totally forbidden nowadays on security grounds, of course. His departure from office was similar. He was aware, as the article hints, of increasing mental impairment. His pride took over, hence he groomed James Callaghan to make a swift transition. I worked in the Cabinet Office at the time, and a colleague who worked fairly closely to the politicians said that there were many signs that Wilson was going. For example, despite his long stint in office, the first time he attended the office Christmas party was not long before he left, and he went far beyond the call of duty in circulating and talking to people. Wilson dreaded the possibility that his increasing disability might lead him to make an inadvertent gaffe in the full glare of the spotlight, his pride would not allow that to happen, and so he retired gracefully. Guy 18:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)