Excellent piece! In 10 minutes, it told me the highs and lows of Macleod’s career, his background, character, achievements and legacy. It’s a masterpiece of the mini-biography: balanced, factual and without Mr. Haynes’ opinions obtruding too much. He misses out though, Macleod’s editorship of the Spectator, which is odd.
I wonder if he would like to work this up to a series of profiles of the editors of the Spectator. I wonder what light that would shed on British history?
Derek M
3 years ago
Best PM we never had, an amusing if ultimately futile game, not least because you can never tell how someone seemingly suitable performs in office (Anthony Eden anyone?) but for what it’s worth Enoch Powell would be my choice and on the Labour side Hugh Gaitskell or Peter Shore
I’D say Joseph Chamberlain. If MacLeod ‘s health had matched Heath’s – but I still agree with Lord Salisbury about Africa! We should have given Southern Rhodesia independence- she should have been the role model for the entire continent.
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago
Very informative and well written. When, a few weeks ago, we were all counting up the the number of Chancellors since whenever it was, none of us included McLeod.
Alexander D Macmillan
3 years ago
BBC Alba has a a good programme on Iain Macleod and his family background on the Isle of Lewis. It compares and contrasts him with the traitor Donald Maclean, a contemporary also of Hebridean extraction. You can catch it on BBC iplayer and there are good English subtitles.
When the former Lord Home became Prime Minister, Harold Wilson (then Leader of the Opposition) complained that “This is a counter-revolution. After half a century of democratic advance, of social revolution, of rising expectations, the whole process has ground to a halt with a fourteenth Earl.”
I’ve always loved Douglas-Home’s retort: “I suppose, Mr Wilson, when you come to think of it, is the fourteenth Mr Wilson.”
I remember reading a comment about that elsewhere, when Douglas-Home was speaking to Robert Menzies, then Australian PM:
“During post prandial cognacs , ADH started to tease RM about the Australian pronunciation of “Menzies” , and suggested that as they were both of Scots provenance , the Aussie PM should pronounce his name in the Scottish way, i.e., Mingies.
RM considered this for a nanosecond and said : “I’ll look into it when I get Hume”.”
And according to the Aberdeen Evening Express it’s Baillie Vass.
George Bruce
3 years ago
Today, though, we live in a world where 77% of British politicians flunked the most basic test of coin-toss statistical logic.
Worth following the link -although it is 9 years old and it is Labour MPs rather than politicians in general (so no marks for accuracy for the author.)
It is interesting that so many more Labour politicians could not answer compared to the Tories. I had not really thought there would be such a difference. More women (weaker in maths in general)? More black people in there as affirmative action?
I am sure Johnson, Gove and Hancock would not even understand the question, let alone have a stab at the answer. They’re all innumerate, the whole stupid pack of ’em.
I guess we are all wondering if Diane Abbott was among the number.
it’s actually so shocking, that once you hear that more than 5% failed the test, it hardly matters whether it was 50% or 80%.
can they all read and write?
Well, I sat here and worked out in my head that the chance of one toss coming up heads is 50%, and the chance of a second is 50% of that, thus arriving at the correct answer of 25%. My niece (a woman, you may be surprised to read) is not only vastly superior to me at mathematics, but she read the subject at a good university, and now teaches it.
Averages are useful, but not necessarily a a good predictor of individual performance.
Michael Whittock
3 years ago
Iain Macleod was a tragic loss to the Heath government before it had really started. The chances are that his management of the economy in a politically very volatile period would have been more effective and sure-footed than his successor’s – Anthony Barber. He would have been a wise counsellor and calming influence in the 73-74 conflict with the unions. Although Edward Heath did not want to surrender the leadership of the Conservatives after the election defeats of 1974, I think he could have been persuaded to give way to McLeod. Maybe the main reason for doing so was that he was not Margaret Thatcher. Iain Macleod would definitely have won the 79 election and, I agree would have avoided the “brutal endgames of the Thatcher era”.
I think it’s fascinating to consider what might have been for one of Macleod’s contemporaries if death had not likewise intervened. Anthony Crosland died very suddenly in 1977, aged 58. At the time he was Foreign Secretary in the Callaghan government. Like Macleod he did not suffer fools gladly, and was not particularly keen on developing political relationships and would therefore never have become Leader of the Labour Party.
Crosland will go down in the annals as the author of “The Future of Socialism”1956. Its influence has been deep and long-lasting. It’s an attempt to reformulate Labour’s political philosophy. It shows the need to revise traditional socialist thinking taking into account the changes in British society. Therefore Crosland downplayed nationalisation and class conflict, and emphasised equality, social welfare and personal liberty and the encouragement of a mixed economy and entrepreneurship. This would not have gone down withe Party in the 80s, so I wonder if Crosland would have joined the SDP and his good friends Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams. It would have finished him politically and perhaps he may have returned to academia with a seat in the Lords.
Anthony Crosland’s sudden death in 1977 while serving as Foreign Secretary was what gave Dr David Owen his political prominence and his status as a politician in the 1980s, albeit in opposition. David Owen was the Minister of State at the FO under Crosland, having been put there by Jim Callaghan in 1976. Very unusually, the Foreign Secretaryship was not handed to one of the ‘big beasts’ in Callaghan’s cabinet; as one of the ‘three great offices of state’, a Minister already with Cabinet experience would normally fill it. On the death of Crosland, Callaghan instead promoted the Minister of State from outside the Cabinet, only 39, over the heads of his colleagues, to the third most important cabinet post after PM and Chancellor. Had this not happened, David Owen might not have made the Labour Cabinet at all before 1979, and would not have had the status that the FO post gave him or the confidence to push for the creation of the SDP as one of the ‘Gang of Four’.
Ah, so that’s why it was so well written and interesting. I wondered why the standard of Haynes’ writing had suddenly improved so dramatically. And it seemed a very strange subject for him to be interested in.
Pierre Pendre
3 years ago
Maudling’s problem before corruption caught up with him was narcolepsy. When Bernadette Devlin whopped him in the Commons in 1972 Jak drew a cartoon of the incident for the Evening standard. He showed Maudling sprawled on the front bench with a black eye and had one Tory saying to another: “By jove, that almost woke Reggie up.”
J Bryant
3 years ago
As others have said, an excellent piece of biography. Very readable and entertaining. It certainly makes you think about the role of chance in who makes it to the top of the greasy political pole and who doesn’t.
Frederick B
3 years ago
McLeod may have been a Tory but he was no conservative. I remember, at the age of 17 in 1962 or 63, being unpleasantly surprised by reports of a speech given by McLeod to Young Conservatives on race relations. Even today – even today – it was a speech more likely to come from the left of the Labour Party than from a Conservative.
dunnmalcolm966
3 years ago
A far more charitable evaluation of Macleod’s career than he deserved. He enhanced his reoutation most by dying prematurely. The truth is he was not a nice man at all.
Jorge Espinha
3 years ago
He must have been quite a character. If you’re correct, we need people like him. However, there’s a catch. Do we have the electorate to elect people like him? I don’t think so.
Regarding the empire, I understand the will and need to get out of there quickly. France achieved nothing in Algeria. It betrayed the overall population of Algeria, it betrayed the European population of the colony and finally it betrayed the loyal Algerian muslins. The same can be said about my country Portugal and its 3 colonial wars in the 60’s and 70’s in Africa.
But, getting out quickly isn’t the same as getting out cleanly. Like it or not, Europeans had a responsibility. The people of Africa didn’t ask to be colonized and didn’t ask to be arranged inside arbitrary borders that disregarded history and ethnicity. So Mr Mcleod wanted to tell Africans “sorry, my bad” and scamper off? Most of Africans in the 60’s had little contact with the colonial administration, to a greatextent, Africa remained quite African. But Europeans had changed things irreversibly , the countries were dysfunctional, the local administration and technical elites were almost non-existent. And the “freedom fighters” were financed by the soviet union. The Empires in Africa started badly and were finished in a hasty and irresponsible way. And Africans still pay the price. McLeod wasn’t a visionary in that aspect, he was just another callous European that didn’t care.
PS: I was born in Angola from Portuguese parents
Last edited 3 years ago by Jorge Espinha
Stephen Follows
2 years ago
If that photo’s anything to go by, he faked his own death and came back disguised as Leon Brittan.
‘discern noise from signal.’
That’s a keeper.
Enjoyed this piece. Thank you very much.
A very interesting and enjoyable article, thanks.
Excellent piece! In 10 minutes, it told me the highs and lows of Macleod’s career, his background, character, achievements and legacy. It’s a masterpiece of the mini-biography: balanced, factual and without Mr. Haynes’ opinions obtruding too much. He misses out though, Macleod’s editorship of the Spectator, which is odd.
I wonder if he would like to work this up to a series of profiles of the editors of the Spectator. I wonder what light that would shed on British history?
Best PM we never had, an amusing if ultimately futile game, not least because you can never tell how someone seemingly suitable performs in office (Anthony Eden anyone?) but for what it’s worth Enoch Powell would be my choice and on the Labour side Hugh Gaitskell or Peter Shore
I’D say Joseph Chamberlain. If MacLeod ‘s health had matched Heath’s – but I still agree with Lord Salisbury about Africa! We should have given Southern Rhodesia independence- she should have been the role model for the entire continent.
Very informative and well written. When, a few weeks ago, we were all counting up the the number of Chancellors since whenever it was, none of us included McLeod.
BBC Alba has a a good programme on Iain Macleod and his family background on the Isle of Lewis. It compares and contrasts him with the traitor Donald Maclean, a contemporary also of Hebridean extraction. You can catch it on BBC iplayer and there are good English subtitles.
… a blood relationship with the late Mrs McLeod Trump, originally of Tong, Stornaway would be an interesting linkage.
It’s not Alec Douglas-Hume, it’s Alec Douglas-Home. Look it up.
According to John Lennon in A Spaniard In The Works it was Alec Doubtless-Whom.
When the former Lord Home became Prime Minister, Harold Wilson (then Leader of the Opposition) complained that “This is a counter-revolution. After half a century of democratic advance, of social revolution, of rising expectations, the whole process has ground to a halt with a fourteenth Earl.”
I’ve always loved Douglas-Home’s retort: “I suppose, Mr Wilson, when you come to think of it, is the fourteenth Mr Wilson.”
I remember reading a comment about that elsewhere, when Douglas-Home was speaking to Robert Menzies, then Australian PM:
“During post prandial cognacs , ADH started to tease RM about the Australian pronunciation of “Menzies” , and suggested that as they were both of Scots provenance , the Aussie PM should pronounce his name in the Scottish way, i.e., Mingies.
RM considered this for a nanosecond and said : “I’ll look into it when I get Hume”.”
This is so funny. Thank you for giving me a hearty chuckle this afternoon. Sincerely.
I do wonder whether the articles on this site are edited by a congress of Gibraltarian apes.
And according to the Aberdeen Evening Express it’s Baillie Vass.
Today, though, we live in a world where 77% of British politicians flunked the most basic test of coin-toss statistical logic.
Worth following the link -although it is 9 years old and it is Labour MPs rather than politicians in general (so no marks for accuracy for the author.)
It is interesting that so many more Labour politicians could not answer compared to the Tories. I had not really thought there would be such a difference. More women (weaker in maths in general)? More black people in there as affirmative action?
I am sure Johnson, Gove and Hancock would not even understand the question, let alone have a stab at the answer. They’re all innumerate, the whole stupid pack of ’em.
Gove might have a chance. Hancock no chance. Boris would simply steal the coin.
. . . and then deny it had been him! (he)
And that’s what makes him the best PM we’ve got (to borrow a Rab Butler one-liner)
John, you don’t ask much of a PM!
I guess we are all wondering if Diane Abbott was among the number.
it’s actually so shocking, that once you hear that more than 5% failed the test, it hardly matters whether it was 50% or 80%.
can they all read and write?
Agree completely. Here in the States our Democrats claim to be the “party of science”. No one has claimed the “party of mathematics” mantle.
Well, I sat here and worked out in my head that the chance of one toss coming up heads is 50%, and the chance of a second is 50% of that, thus arriving at the correct answer of 25%. My niece (a woman, you may be surprised to read) is not only vastly superior to me at mathematics, but she read the subject at a good university, and now teaches it.
Averages are useful, but not necessarily a a good predictor of individual performance.
Iain Macleod was a tragic loss to the Heath government before it had really started. The chances are that his management of the economy in a politically very volatile period would have been more effective and sure-footed than his successor’s – Anthony Barber. He would have been a wise counsellor and calming influence in the 73-74 conflict with the unions. Although Edward Heath did not want to surrender the leadership of the Conservatives after the election defeats of 1974, I think he could have been persuaded to give way to McLeod. Maybe the main reason for doing so was that he was not Margaret Thatcher. Iain Macleod would definitely have won the 79 election and, I agree would have avoided the “brutal endgames of the Thatcher era”.
I think it’s fascinating to consider what might have been for one of Macleod’s contemporaries if death had not likewise intervened. Anthony Crosland died very suddenly in 1977, aged 58. At the time he was Foreign Secretary in the Callaghan government. Like Macleod he did not suffer fools gladly, and was not particularly keen on developing political relationships and would therefore never have become Leader of the Labour Party.
Crosland will go down in the annals as the author of “The Future of Socialism”1956. Its influence has been deep and long-lasting. It’s an attempt to reformulate Labour’s political philosophy. It shows the need to revise traditional socialist thinking taking into account the changes in British society. Therefore Crosland downplayed nationalisation and class conflict, and emphasised equality, social welfare and personal liberty and the encouragement of a mixed economy and entrepreneurship. This would not have gone down withe Party in the 80s, so I wonder if Crosland would have joined the SDP and his good friends Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams. It would have finished him politically and perhaps he may have returned to academia with a seat in the Lords.
Anthony Crosland’s sudden death in 1977 while serving as Foreign Secretary was what gave Dr David Owen his political prominence and his status as a politician in the 1980s, albeit in opposition. David Owen was the Minister of State at the FO under Crosland, having been put there by Jim Callaghan in 1976. Very unusually, the Foreign Secretaryship was not handed to one of the ‘big beasts’ in Callaghan’s cabinet; as one of the ‘three great offices of state’, a Minister already with Cabinet experience would normally fill it. On the death of Crosland, Callaghan instead promoted the Minister of State from outside the Cabinet, only 39, over the heads of his colleagues, to the third most important cabinet post after PM and Chancellor. Had this not happened, David Owen might not have made the Labour Cabinet at all before 1979, and would not have had the status that the FO post gave him or the confidence to push for the creation of the SDP as one of the ‘Gang of Four’.
This essay is flagrantly plagarised from Vernon Bogdanor’s lecture given at Gresham college:
Iain Macleod and Decolonisation – Professor Vernon Bogdanor – YouTube
Ah, so that’s why it was so well written and interesting. I wondered why the standard of Haynes’ writing had suddenly improved so dramatically. And it seemed a very strange subject for him to be interested in.
Maudling’s problem before corruption caught up with him was narcolepsy. When Bernadette Devlin whopped him in the Commons in 1972 Jak drew a cartoon of the incident for the Evening standard. He showed Maudling sprawled on the front bench with a black eye and had one Tory saying to another: “By jove, that almost woke Reggie up.”
As others have said, an excellent piece of biography. Very readable and entertaining. It certainly makes you think about the role of chance in who makes it to the top of the greasy political pole and who doesn’t.
McLeod may have been a Tory but he was no conservative. I remember, at the age of 17 in 1962 or 63, being unpleasantly surprised by reports of a speech given by McLeod to Young Conservatives on race relations. Even today – even today – it was a speech more likely to come from the left of the Labour Party than from a Conservative.
A far more charitable evaluation of Macleod’s career than he deserved. He enhanced his reoutation most by dying prematurely. The truth is he was not a nice man at all.
He must have been quite a character. If you’re correct, we need people like him. However, there’s a catch. Do we have the electorate to elect people like him? I don’t think so.
Regarding the empire, I understand the will and need to get out of there quickly. France achieved nothing in Algeria. It betrayed the overall population of Algeria, it betrayed the European population of the colony and finally it betrayed the loyal Algerian muslins. The same can be said about my country Portugal and its 3 colonial wars in the 60’s and 70’s in Africa.
But, getting out quickly isn’t the same as getting out cleanly. Like it or not, Europeans had a responsibility. The people of Africa didn’t ask to be colonized and didn’t ask to be arranged inside arbitrary borders that disregarded history and ethnicity. So Mr Mcleod wanted to tell Africans “sorry, my bad” and scamper off? Most of Africans in the 60’s had little contact with the colonial administration, to a greatextent, Africa remained quite African. But Europeans had changed things irreversibly , the countries were dysfunctional, the local administration and technical elites were almost non-existent. And the “freedom fighters” were financed by the soviet union. The Empires in Africa started badly and were finished in a hasty and irresponsible way. And Africans still pay the price. McLeod wasn’t a visionary in that aspect, he was just another callous European that didn’t care.
PS: I was born in Angola from Portuguese parents
If that photo’s anything to go by, he faked his own death and came back disguised as Leon Brittan.