In his next chapter, in which Denning displayed his bias by suggesting Ward helped the Russians in its heading, Denning details how Ward enlisted the help of Lord Astor to arrange for him to meet with the Foreign Office and offer his services. The offer was declined, says Denning, but Ward then approached Sir Godfrey Nicholson (who Denning feels the need to point out is a loyal Englishman) to meet Ivanov. Instead, Ward was able to meet with Nicholson and Sir Harold Caccia from the Foreign Office, where again Ward offered to put Caccia in touch with Ivanov, another offer that was declined. Denning says Ward repeatedly attempted to engage the UK as an intermediary between the US and Russia during the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962, approaching the Foreign Office, Nicholson, Astor and Lord Arran for such an opportunity. However, he believed all these machinations were poorly thought out rather than deliberately harmful.17

Denning deftly summarises the assault Johnny Edgecombe was accused of carrying out on Lucky Gordon, and the later shooting at Ward’s flat by Edgecombe on 14 December 1962, in his report. However, he is quick to point out that Ward caused Keeler to be in Rio Café in the first place because he was keen to have sex with a black woman, and that this is how Keeler became involved with the scene in the first place. He draws attention too to the interest a retired solicitor, called Michael Eddowes, had in hearing Keeler’s account of her recent relationships with Profumo and Ivanov, when he arrives to talk to Keeler after the police had questioned her regarding Edgecombe’s alleged offences, for which she would be an important witness.

The report then turns to the party held on 23 December 1962. There Keeler speaks to former MP John Lewis, who Denning explains was interested in the story, recommending a solicitor and making a point of seeing Keeler so that he could find out more. Lewis was well aware of the security implications in what he had heard, says Denning, and relayed the story to George Wigg MP, with the two then having almost daily contact on the matter.19

The press became involved in Keeler’s affairs through acquaintances telling her that a newspaper would buy her story, says Denning within his report. On their advice, he says, Keeler visited the News of the World and the Sunday Pictorial, arranging a deal with the latter. Telling them of her two contrasting social scenes alongside details of how Ward had asked her to obtain information from Profumo, Denning said the newspaper reporters realised that the espionage edge to the story made it even more interesting.20

Denning then includes in his report the never-published but signed-off story by Keeler in which she refers to Profumo as reckless because it would have been easy for someone, perhaps a Russian, to hide a tape recorder and/or a camera in her bedroom, which could have then left him open to blackmail.21

Keeler’s version of events as it was to appear in the spiked tabloid article goes on to suggest that she was seeing both Profumo and Ivanov at the same time, with the two lovers narrowly missing each other as they came and went. The piece finishes with Keeler stating that someone had asked her to find out when the Americans would give nuclear weapons to Germany and that while she would not say in the paper who that was, she felt it was her duty to tell security officials.

Denning says Keeler also told Detective Sergeant Burrows this version of events when he contacted her about being a witness in the Edgecombe trial.

According to the report, Ward found out that Keeler had spoken to the press on 26 January 1963, and that he did what he could to stop publication of the article, including contacting Astor and his counsel Rees-Davies. Rees-Davies went to the Solicitor-General who in turn passed the matter onto the Attorney-General, who requested a meeting with Profumo.

Next, Denning turned his attention to criticisms levelled at the police over the incident. He establishes that the police operate independently of the Home Office, and that the private lives of individuals are not of concern unless the security of the country is endangered, and then it would be correct to contact the Security Service. Denning also explains the role of Special Branch, which is to deal with subversive or terrorist organisations, offences against the security of the state and to keep a watch on ports. Special Branch and the Security Service work in cooperation with each other, he explains.

According to Denning, on 26 January 1963, Keeler told Burrows that Ward was procuring girls, that she had associated with Profumo and that a request had been made for information about atomic secrets. Burrows thought this was a matter for Special Branch and an appointment was made for 1 February 1963, with Keeler. Burrows was due to attend this meeting along with Detective-Inspector Morgan of Special Branch and Sergeant Howard of the drug squad. However, the meeting was cancelled by the Commander of Special Brach and never took place. This was because of the press speculation that could occur if Keeler was seen to be (or spoke about being) interviewed by Special Branch.

In this chapter, Denning concedes that there was then some ‘failure in co-ordination’22 between the police and Special Branch as Keeler was not interviewed by the police, and an appointment made with Ward by the drug squad, at which Ward failed to show, was not chased up either. While Special Branch appeared to see that this was primarily a criminal matter rather than a security one, Denning accepts that an eye should still have been kept on the security issues.23

Denning also draws attention to Ward calling Marylebone Lane station himself to report the theft of potentially sensitive photos taken at the Cliveden swimming pool, showing both him and Profumo with women, including Keeler. The pictures included one image of the well-known wrestling match, with Keeler perched on Profumo’s shoulders. Ward suggested that it was Paul Mann that had stolen these images, potentially in order to sell them to the press. Ward apparently told the police the photos and the fact that Keeler had sold her story to the Sunday Pictorial could bring down the government.24 Here Denning says Special Branch acted correctly and brought the matter to the Security Service, with the responsibility to take the situation further resting there.

As Denning continued through the events, he turned to discuss the role of the legal representatives of Ward, Profumo and Astor, who were all worried about their reputations. With Keeler’s story sold to the press, and Keeler due to become a witness in the Edgecombe trial, it was likely they might each be named in the papers. Negotiations were entered into to persuade Keeler not to honour her contract with the Sunday Pictorial, which Denning explains would be lawful if Keeler received a sum that could be considered fair, rather than a compensation fee that could be considered as extortion. However, negotiations fell apart over who had offered what and Denning says he could not resolve as to exactly what had happened.

He does say, however, that Keeler was unlikely to be asking for too high a figure as extortion, because if she had wanted to, she could easily have kept the ‘Darling’ letter and used that to do it herself.

Denning does then show Keeler some sympathy, asking people not to judge her as she was young, and had, since the age of 16, been caught up in a sinful environment.25

Since no compensation was decided upon, Denning says Keeler went and signed the Sunday Pictorial proofs on 8 February 1963.

Perhaps a large part of the public interest in the Profumo scandal is the idea that much went on behind the closed doors of the establishment. The Denning Report shows us at least one example of the machinations of Parliament, explaining that it is an accepted convention that ministers that believe they may need legal help can ask the advice of the Law Officers, the Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General. The report says that on 28 January 1963, the counsel for Ward spoke to the Solicitor-General about the article that might name Astor and Profumo. The Solicitor-General then spoke to the Attorney-General who decided it was important enough to summon Profumo to his house at 11.00 pm.

According to the report, at this initial meeting, Profumo stuck to his story that Keeler was merely an acquaintance and no sexual impropriety had taken place. Denning records that in this meeting the war minister went as far as trying to discredit Keeler as a drug addict who had been sleeping with West Indians and was short of money, and that his use of ‘darling’ in a letter saying he could not attend a cocktail party was a consequence of him being married to an actress.26 Interesting then that Denning was still happy to describe Profumo in glowing terms, despite the fact he wasn’t above making up stories about Keeler to make her look like the guilty party.

Denning also explains that the role of the Chief Whip is to keep up the good name of the government and its ministers, and therefore conversations between the Law Officers and the Chief Whip are necessary. But since Profumo said he was happy to pursue legal action if anyone published what he claimed were false allegations about him, the Attorney-General and the Chief Whip were prepared to accept his protestations of innocence. Clearly Denning laid no blame at the feet of the government reps at this meeting.

With this in mind, Denning turns to answer the question of why, when Profumo had said he would take legal action, he didn’t do so when a subscription-only newsletter called Westminster Confidential did print a story not-so-subtly linking him with both Keeler and Ivanov on 8 March 1963. Denning explains that this was because Profumo’s legal advisor and the Attorney-General decided that the newsletter had too small a circulation (around 200) and that they would wait for a larger publication to run the story, and because they did not want to draw attention to the other scandal contained in its pages that concerned someone else. How selfless!

With several interested parties hoping to stop Keeler’s version of events being made public, for those following the story, it wasn’t too much of a leap to wonder who benefitted from Keeler’s disappearance and non-attendance at the Edgecombe trial and if that person, or persons, may have arranged for her to travel overseas, willingly or otherwise. Denning addressed this public concern by stating in his findings that Paul Mann took Keeler to Spain in car along with Kim Proctor, thus making clear that the government or its ministers were not responsible. Within the report, however, he does allude to the fact that in early February 1963, Ward had thought of the idea and raised it with Paul Mann.27

Denning’s questioning of Paul Mann uncovered Mann’s explanation that, at the time of the trip to Spain, Keeler was distressed because she believed two men had been paid to hurt her.28 Thus, the three of them travelled across France into Spain and got to a remote fishing village and then to Madrid without realising the consequences of leaving the UK. Making the point that the three friends had very little money between them, Denning then explains that a deal was negotiated for the story of Keeler’s disappearance and that the newspapers arranged for the return trip home. Once back in the UK, Keeler attended Scotland Yard and the Central Criminal court to pay the £40 forfeit for not attending the Edgecombe trial.

Because of speculation that Profumo or Astor may have been involved in Keeler’s disappearance, Denning asked for bank accounts and other financial details from both men. Then, employing an expert accountant, Denning says the accounts were examined for any payments that might link the lord and the minister to Keeler or Mann. Denning states that he found no evidence that Mann or Keeler received any money related to her disappearance and that there was no evidence linking Profumo or Astor to it either.29

Denning also addressed the role the press played in the Profumo scandal. With regards to the front page of the Daily Express on 15 March 1963, Denning reported that the Daily Express had told him that the juxtaposition of the two stories – Keeler’s disappearance and Profumo’s resignation – was entirely coincidental. While accepting this reasoning unquestionably, it seems, he admitted that the move had caused quite a stir.

The report also discusses the meeting of the five ministers that followed the discussion in the Commons on 21 March 1963, in which Wigg and Castle brought up the rumours surrounding Profumo using Parliamentary Privilege. This was the meeting attended by the Chief Whip, Leader of the House Macleod, the Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General and William Deedes, which Profumo and his solicitor were later called to attend so that Profumo’s personal statement could be drafted. Denning says that this meeting was not pre-arranged, and that it was organic.

Denning also quashes the suggestion that this meeting was in fact an investigation into the truth (or not) of the rumours, which he says it was not.30

The statement made at this meeting went on, of course, to prove to be false, however. Denning mentions in this chapter that Valerie Hobson had excused her husband’s conduct that evening because of his use of sleeping pills and tiredness from being roused and working on the statement at such an unusual hour; if it wasn’t for these circumstances, Hobson told Denning, her husband would not have made the statement.31 Thank goodness that Denning managed to find an ‘independent’ witness to clear up why Profumo lied!

Despite Profumo’s statement being false, Denning says the Prime Minister believed it was the truth. This was not because he had himself spoken to Profumo but rather that he had been kept fully informed of the matter by the Chief Whip and his Private Secretary. Macmillan had also thought that if there ‘was anything in it’, talking to the Attorney-General and the Chief Whip, who were friends of his own age, would have revealed as such.32

Denning reinforces his belief that the PM did not know that Profumo was lying when he issued his statement to the House, dealing in his report with an incident in early March. In the incident, Profumo was reported as saying to a friend that he’d become involved with a girl and that he’d written her a letter the Sunday Pictorial had got hold of. Because the paper could print it any day, he’d had to confess to Valerie, the PM and his boss. As damning as this sounds, within the investigation Denning maintains that he was satisfied that both Mr Profumo’s friend and the Conservative MP misinterpreted what Mr Profumo said, and that the war minister had meant he’d got into a difficult situation because of a friendship with a girl, and that he’d had to tell his wife, the Chief Whip and the PM’s secretary about it (rather than the PM himself). Denning says Profumo hadn’t confessed to an actual affair at all, he closed the paragraph stating that there was nothing that suggested that the Prime Minister knew Profumo was lying in his statement to the House.33 Given what Profumo said, it does sound like an easy ‘misinterpretation’ to make.

Another rumour Denning addressed in his investigation was that the security services were so worried about Profumo’s relationship with Keeler (and presumably therefore Ivanov and Ward) that it had sent anonymous letters to the war minister’s wife. Because of this, Denning says, on 27 March, the Home Secretary met with the Commissioner of the Police and the Permanent Under-Secretary of State. At this meeting, Denning says the security services said there was no truth to the rumour, and that since Ivanov had left the UK, any security issues had been resolved, and that Ward’s personal life was not its business.

It was at this meeting, of course, that Robertson tells us that the Home Secretary then instructed the police to find another reason to prosecute Ward if it couldn’t be under the Official Secrets Act. Denning phrases it slightly differently in his report, however, with the Home Secretary asking the Commissioner if there was interest from the police, to which the reply was that there might be grounds for a criminal prosecution of Ward if the police were able to get all the details. The outcome of the conversation, according to Denning, was that the Commissioner then thought further about prosecuting Ward. Which of course led to a CID investigation into allegations that Ward was living off immoral earnings, and the subsequent interviews with Keeler during which her statement said she had had intercourse with Profumo. The investigation also allowed for Ward’s phone to be tapped and the questioning of those he knew and worked with.

Once the investigation into Ward, and questioning of his friends and patients, began, understandably, Ward was concerned, although Denning describes the actions Ward then took as out of the ordinary within his report. However, if it were your own reputation and livelihood being threatened, you might not find such actions unusual. Ward telephoned and then met the PM’s Private Secretary to discuss his concerns. During this meeting, Denning says that the main objective of the visit was stop the police inquiry and to blackmail the government by threatening that, unless the inquiries were dropped, he would expose Profumo’s affair with Keeler. Although it’s worth noting that Ward was never charged with blackmail, and this is just Denning’s opinion, even if it is stated as if it were fact.

Ward also wrote of his concerns to the Home Secretary and received a reply that made it clear that the police do not act under his direction.

However, Denning tells us that Ward continued to send letters that eventually led to questions about security being raised by Harold Wilson and resulted in Macmillan instructing the Lord Chancellor to begin an inquiry on 30 May. It was the knowledge of this upcoming investigation that led to Profumo’s confession that he did sleep with Keeler and that his statement to the House had been untrue. And thus, on 21 June, Denning was asked to undertake his inquiry.

Towards the end of his report, Denning turns once again to defend the Security Service, whose role in the Profumo Affair, he reminds the reader, was only to protect the country against Russia and its agents. He concludes that the Service kept to this role and considered that the moral (or immoral) behaviour of Profumo was not their concern. And while Profumo’s character defect (just the one in his apparently flawless personality) may have made him a security risk at one time, when the security services discovered the information, Profumo had ended the affair and Ivanov had returned to Russia.34

Denning examines all the contact the Security Service had with Ward in 1961 and 1962, when the Service decided Ward was not a security risk in himself. It did, however, take steps to warn Profumo about his relationship with Ivanov and consider if Ward offered a way in to Captain Ivanov, who might be convinced to defect. Any criticism of the Service for its conduct over this period is wrong, says Denning, because during 1962 the Security Service was watching Ward and Ivanov and keeping the Foreign Office informed.35

Denning continues his examination of the events in 1963, which is when he believes that on 28 and 29 January the Security Service first learnt of an association between Profumo and Keeler. Here Denning dismisses Ward’s claims that he had told the Service as early as July 1961. Instead, he is content that since Ivanov had left the country, and Profumo was not sharing a mistress with the Russian and that there was no evidence that information had passed from Profumo to Keeler, the Service was correct to accept there was no risk to security.

There was also no security risk the next month, when on 7 February, it was reported Keeler had reported in her police statement that Ward had asked her to discover atomic secrets. He says the Security Service dismissed Keeler’s claims.36

Denning reported that he was happy with how the Security Service had handled any risks and reported to those concerned, taking all reasonable steps to protect the country.37 He stated that there was no evidence to support that there had been a security leak.

Having established that there was no security risk, Denning does ask who can be held responsible for what had happened. He considers the culpability of the Security Service, the police and the press but concludes that ultimately Profumo should bear the primary responsibility because he entered into the affair with Keeler and lied about it in the House of Commons.

And while Denning may have held prejudiced, misguided and even incorrect opinions on the Profumo Affair, on this one point at least, he was spot on.

Chapter 19

Did Profumo Fell Supermac and the Conservatives?

The Profumo Affair has often been blamed for the fall not just of Harold Macmillan but also of the government he left behind. But isn’t it weird that a premier could be so affected by something clearly not of his doing? What kind of government can be toppled by a single minister and his affair with a little-respected woman?

We’ve seen recently how a party can turn on its Prime Minister if it is believed their continued leadership could bring the government into disrepute with the public. The first signal that Profumo’s deceit had ultimately ended Macmillan’s career as PM came directly after the debate in the House on 17 June. As he left, Macmillan was said to have looked visibly broken, while American Ambassador David Bruce reported back that Macmillan could prevent the Conservatives being re-elected. Journalist Christopher Booker called Macmillan’s showing in the House the most ‘broken’ of his career and former Parliamentary Private Secretary Anthony Barber thought the PM was ‘crestfallen’.1

And Macmillan certainly knew he had fared badly, telling Rab Butler he was heartbroken and finding himself joined only by his son Maurice and his son-in-law Julian Amery in the Smoking Room after having left the Chamber. The Gallup polls also signalled problems. Only 23 per cent of voters polled thought Macmillan should remain PM and showed that he was at his lowest point in popularity. Colleagues recalled that during the Profumo Affair, the Prime Minister appeared aged and friendless.2

Despite all this, and the rumours that the 1922 Committee were discussing his replacement, Macmillan himself told Butler that he didn’t want to resign over just the Profumo Affair.3

The scandal was, of course, not an event that happened in isolation. It came after other spy scandals had dominated the headlines. And it came at a time when Macmillan was already getting older and perhaps therefore seen to be ‘out of touch’ with a society keen to modernise; after all, the ‘Swinging 60s’ were coming, whether the older members of society were keen on a new social order or not. Horne says that 1963 made for a ‘hysterical’ atmosphere for the Profumo story to break and that the British people were all too ready to accept scandalous stories about anyone.4

Macmillan’s apparent belief in Profumo’s denial of the affair with Keeler was part of his downfall. When the truth came out, Macmillan looked stupid for not realising, or knowing, that his minister was lying to him, his colleagues and the country. But Macmillan desperately wanted Profumo’s version of his innocent acquaintance with Keeler to be true. Against the backdrop of disappointing security lapses, Macmillan was keen for Profumo to be proven to be an upstanding example of the Tory Party. Profumo’s strong denial, and the following up of that with legal actions for libel against foreign press that ran the story, including Paris Match and Il Tempo, helped Macmillan see what he wanted to. Horne says that Macmillan’s wife Dorothy also thought it was unlikely that Profumo would stoop to the depths of perjury to defend himself. How ironic that Keeler was so criticised, and legally pursued, for doing the exact same thing as Profumo, and not to save her own skin, but simply to comply with what she’d been asked by others that it suited.

Horne says that Macmillan wrote in his memoirs saying he truly believed Profumo, because in his eyes, a statement made in the House, and backed up by those made in a libel court, could be nothing but true.5