�鶹��ý

In this interview, Malcolm Adcock narrates his early interest in politics as well as the people who influenced him as a young man. Then he explains how he helped raise the status of the church in his town while he was mayor, but also how he dealt with the conflicts between his religious standards and his role as town mayor. This interview was conducted on June 14, 2021, by Richard Davis, BYU professor emeritus of political science.

Richard Davis: Maybe you could first say what your current position is. What’s your current job?

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah. So I work full time as the associate area director for the communication department in the Europe Area of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and I’ve been in that role since 2009, actually.

Richard Davis: Maybe you could tell us a little bit about your background; I mean, where did you grow up, and were you an adult convert? Maybe a little bit about your family.

Malcolm Adcock: Sure. So I’m a Londoner by adoption; I was actually born just outside Norwich in Norfolk in eastern England, and my parents moved to London. So really, [during my] formative years I grew up in London, and actually my parents were pioneers, I suppose in the Latter-day Saint sense, in the UK, and they joined the Church in the late 1950s. I grew up in that pioneering Latter-day Saint home.

Richard Davis: Okay. So tell us what position or positions you’ve served in government or politics.

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah. So I’ve served in local government; I served as mayor of the town of Daventry in Northamptonshire in the English Midlands, and I also served as a town councilor for that area. I was on the council for eight years from 2003 to 2011 as a town councilor. So during that time I served two terms as mayor, and so it’s a full term of one year, and then a shorter term because someone else had resigned, and they decided to recycle me, as it were. But I also served as a deputy mayor in those instances as well, and chair of, or certainly member of, various committees on the council over about an eight-year period.

Richard Davis: So when did you first become interested in public service?

Malcolm Adcock: Well, sadly—I say, sadly, rather nerdily—as a twelve-year-old. I like—and this is nerdy, really—I think you can be forgiven for doing some silly things as a twelve-year-old, but I turned up at school on the day of a general election wearing a rosette for the political party that I supported. So “rosette,” is that a term that you would relate to?

Richard Davis: Not really, no.

Malcolm Adcock: Imagine a round—a piece of ribbon that is fashioned in a round—it’s fashioned as sort of a circle, with the ribbons sort of pushed up together. You possibly have a different term in the States and . . .

Richard Davis: Sort of like a campaign button?

Malcolm Adcock: A campaign button, but it was made of ribbon. So that’s typical. That’s typically in the UK, so you have the party insignia in the middle, and then you have these woven pieces of ribbon. So I turned up at school completely, you know, completely off the wall. And as a twelve-year-old—you know how a lot of twelve-year-olds will maybe know all the names of the national football team or their local team? I knew all the names of the members of the cabinet. Which, as I say, was really sad.

In fact, I can remember my parents were quite encouraging. I can remember going to a very large political meeting; you might call it a rally. But what it was—it was the MP [member of Parliament], who was also the shadow minister who, in fact, became the minister in the government because my party was elected. But anyway, I can remember going to this very, very large meeting and seeing this MP speak. So I thought that was great. And then a little bit, just a little bit later, another party got elected and there were some very, very tight votes in Parliament.

I can remember getting on the tube—I’ll speak British, obviously if there’s anything you don’t understand you can ask me to translate—but I can remember jumping on the tube from northeast London to the Palace of Westminster and going in and looking at those votes, sitting in the Strangers’ Gallery in the House of Commons, looking at those very tight votes as a sixteen-year-old. Yeah so, happy memories.

Richard Davis: You were definitely a prodigy of politics.

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah.

Richard Davis: So who has influenced you—think about political leaders, religious leaders? Who would you identify?

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah. So thinking about religious leaders, President [Spencer W.] Kimball and President [Gordon B.] Hinckley. So growing up, they really influenced me as I suppose they came across as great communicators. And then, politically, I think probably a little bit later on in life. Politically, some people that I’ve met and one person I worked with—I can remember when I was working with the BBC, for BBC network television many, many years ago, we interviewed a member of the Labor government at that time, on I think it was a road safety topic.

And the person was the minister of state at the Home Office, and his name was Alun Michael, and he actually became the first secretary in Wales, so the leader of the Welsh nation. Now the title of the office is first minister, actually, in Wales, as you may know. But Alun Michael—I’m not saying he was—there’s no such thing as a perfect politician, of course, but he came across as very down-to-earth. That’s what struck me about him. And then, and I’ll mention this name as well, as I got involved in local politics a very good friend and, to some degree a mentor, was Alan Hills, and I was deputy mayor to him. And he was certainly a very, very capable politician, and also I’d say a capable public servant. So again, I think he came across as a great communicator but very, very down-to-earth in terms of relating to individuals.

The other person was an MP who is now in the House of Lords. And I had quite a few interactions with the MPs. I was actually at an old people’s home one afternoon, and we got chatting about American politics actually, and Tim Boswell was a member of the Conservative Party, and I made some remark and he said, “What makes you assume that if I was in the States I would be a Republican?”

And I think two things came across to me. Number one: that American politics, you know, that the spread of views is different to the UK, the UK is to the left of you. But also there is diversity within the Conservative Party. This MP made the point that within Parliament, there was actually a lot of cooperation. It’s not all Punch and Judy politics, not all confrontational politics for the cameras. Why do I say that? That’s influenced me, because one thing I think a lot of people are sick and tired of is this confrontational approach—it’s sickening. It really is confrontational politics. Not saying that everyone should be—there shouldn’t be a bipartisan, you know, neutral field all the time, or indeed at all. So this man influenced me, I think, just reflecting on those remarks.

Richard Davis: What made you decide to run for office, this was 2003 you said?

Malcolm Adcock: Well, I think I wanted to make a difference. I was interested from a personal point of view, wanted to make a difference, and wanted to have some sort of influence really for good. Sounds quite idealistic doesn’t it, but I think those are my motivations.

Richard Davis: Did anything about the gospel lead you to that conclusion, that I should make a difference in this?

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah, I mean it was a desire. It wasn’t something that I felt I had to do, I don’t want this to sound inappropriate, but of course many senior leaders of the church, members of the Twelve, and President Joseph Smith, of course, have stood for political office. So that was inspiring to me. And the idea that, for I may be misquoting this, but you know, “For evil to triumph, it just takes good men to do nothing.” I probably got that quote slightly wrong, but . . .

Richard Davis: That was pretty close, and I think it was a British politician who said that.

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah, Edmund Burke. So apathy can, you know, ultimately lead to dictatorship. And it’s really important that people engage, you know, and we can make a difference.

Richard Davis: Did your religious affiliation come up in your campaigns?

Malcolm Adcock: No, no, not at all. I think if I was standing for a national office, it probably would have done. No, it didn’t. My faith was known, certainly in the Daventry town council, it was certainly known, and I can talk about that if you’d like me to.

Richard Davis: Yes, please do. But first, so when you were running for office, it was never an issue within the campaign.

Malcolm Adcock: Never an issue; it was certainly not an issue.

Richard Davis: But while you were on the council?

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah. So as mayor, you’re the first citizen of the town. You also are an ambassador for the town, and you’re also a bit of a, I suppose a figurehead, in the sense that you represent the community. There is a religious aspect to your service as mayor—to have a chaplain to the mayor. But I had two chaplains: a Church of England vicar from the parish church and a local GP. So the Church of England vicar, and also a local GP, general practitioner or family doctor, who also happened to be branch president of the Daventry Branch at the time. So he was a well-known local figure. I mean, doctors are known in the community. So yeah, that was great, and in fact the stake choir sang at my inauguration, so that was great.

Richard Davis: It did not cause any problems with anybody.

Malcolm Adcock: No, not at all. In fact, I used some church quotes. I can remember using a quote from the Book of Mormon regarding service, you know, “When ye are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your God” (Mosiah 2:17). So I can remember using that either in a program or in a speech. You know, something of general appeal, if you like, to the audience.

Richard Davis: So how do you feel that the gospel affected your approach to your office?

Malcolm Adcock: I think wanting to be honest upfront. There’s a phrase used several times in the scriptures, “Wise as serpents, and harmless as doves” (Matthew 10:16), and of course, there are alternative uses of that phrase, as I’m sure you’re aware, as “wise servants” (Joseph Smith Translation). So I thought, I think that sums things up. You know, as a politician you certainly need to be wise, worldly-wise, maybe as wise as a serpent and as harmless as doves, but you’re also a wise servant. And so the motivation was to be wise, and you know, that was the desire, the motivation. Didn’t necessarily always happen, I suppose, but—to try and make a difference.

Richard Davis: Did you seek inspiration for decisions you had to make as a counselor or a mayor?

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah, I can’t actually remember any specific instances. I mean certainly I was prayerful. There may well have been times when things were particularly tense, when there were divisions of opinion, where I prayed for guidance. I can certainly remember a lot of meetings which were very, very fraught and actually quite entertaining if you were sitting in the public gallery, and I’m sure that, you know, I called on the powers of heaven to help me in chairing those difficult meetings.

Richard Davis: So did you find any kind of a conflict between maybe what you felt was right and what you felt your constituents wanted? And, if so, how did you deal with it?

Malcolm Adcock: No, no, not at all. I mean you’re looking at local issues here. So you didn’t have the—let me say—the conflict. You might be slightly conflicted on some national issues where the public morals may be going one way. So attitudes to certain sexual issues perhaps, abortion is a probably case in point, maybe euthanasia. So none of those issues came up at a local level.

Richard Davis: So there were no seemingly moral issues that you had to deal with.

Malcolm Adcock: No, not really, no. I think the only example I can think of was, I can remember, we had a social event in the mayor’s parlor where—I mean effectively it’s myself and my wife, who was the mayoress actually, my companion in office, like the first lady of the town, if you like. Anyway, we’d organized it, and I took the view not to serve alcohol. I’m not saying there’s a right or wrong answer there. My default position was, as an individual, was not to serve alcohol and that, of course, was emanated from the fact I don’t drink, and I live the Word of Wisdom. Whereas, we had a large fundraising event at a hotel called the Mayor’s Ball; it was a charity ball, attended by probably hundreds of people. If you’re holding a large dinner, and that was actually organized by other people, although I was involved in the organization, it would be actually not possible to have a public event without alcohol. I’m sure at the White House, you know, if you’re president of the United States and there’s a large event at the White House, I’d be surprised if they’re completely dry in 2021, you know. So organizing that smaller event, where I was pretty much the organizer, I made the decision at the time not to serve alcohol. With the larger events where perhaps other people were involved, there was a respect, I suppose, for the choice of others that, of course, they would want to go to the bar or have a drink at their table.

Richard Davis: Was there any criticism for that smaller event?

Malcolm Adcock: Well, interestingly enough, I can remember one person making a comment at the smaller event, and I think he was a bit disappointed that it wasn’t alcoholic punch. I mean, now, there’s others—I’m not saying there’s a right or wrong answer. I wouldn’t want to be dogmatic on this.

Richard Davis: Did you feel like the reputation of the church was being affected by your service?

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah, I think so. I mean, there’s a certain network of leaders who are aware of your church membership so . . . You know, so I think that was positive, and I don’t think there was any detriment to me as an individual. I was invited to get involved in Rotary, and so I think as an individual, and having got involved in Rotary, I think church membership became known. I can remember actually offering a blessing on the food in a large, very large Rotary event, and I can remember—I suppose the most appropriate way of putting it was I prayed from the heart, and I think that was probably surprising to a lot of people.

Richard Davis: Because the prayers are generally more stilted or something?

Malcolm Adcock: Generally, more rehearsed. I’d say so, and I think someone made a comment, which is probably a good comment. You know, I don’t want to inappropriately draw attention to myself on that, but I think that was a surprise to the person who made the comment. And I think someone said, “Oh yes; he’s a Mormon.” Of course, we would say now Latter-day Saints, but they said Mormon.

Richard Davis: How did you choose the party that you did?

Malcolm Adcock: Well, I haven’t actually mentioned my party. I was a Liberal Democrat, and again that has a completely different connotation in the UK to in the US. Actually in my teens I supported the Liberal Party. So there is, I’m sure you’re fully aware—the Liberal Party comes from a very strong Victorian tradition with, you know, Gladstone, Lloyd George, Churchill . . .

So that was my party affiliation, and it still is, of course, although I don’t wear that on my sleeve as a church employee. I think there are many aspects of liberalism which actually—which I admire, which I still do admire, which pretty much summarized my own—reflected my own personal political code. And just linking back to Tim Boswell’s remarks on cooperation within Parliament. You know, every party is a broad coalition. Well, any party, but we can use the Labour Party. Here’s an example, you know. I don’t think it’s inappropriate to say that on the one end of the Labour Party membership, and including MPs, you had in the past Marxists, and on the other end, you had, and certainly do have, Blairites: so that’s huge!

Within the Conservative Party I can remember having a discussion probably fifteen years ago, with a prominent local leader in the Conservative Party. And he said, “Oh, it’s possible to be a conservative and a socialist.” Now of course, what he meant, and again this is where we can have a lot of debate and discussion, he didn’t mean the kind of socialism or communistic-socialism which church members condemned in the 1950s and ’60s and probably still do. But anyway, he was arguing that you can be a conservative and be compassionate in terms of social issues. You know, poverty, et cetera. So the point I’m making is that I felt that being a Liberal and later a Liberal Democrat reflected my views, but it doesn’t mean to say I agree with every single issue that my party stands for; or indeed, that if I was in another party, I would necessarily agree with every issue.

Richard Davis: Did your understanding of the gospel affect your choice of a party?

Malcolm Adcock: I wouldn’t say it affected my choice. Certainly, growing up as a teenager, I used to get slightly hot under the collar hearing some Latter-day Saints, American Latter-day Saints, who would naturally assume that the only way to vote would be Republican. In fact, I can remember talking to a senior leader with the church—actually a general authority, in fact—about twenty years ago, and he was sort of half joking saying, “Some people will be shocked at seeing a Democrat in the temple.”

So I’ve never wanted to assume that my party choice is the gospel choice. It’s my personal choice. But I believe it reflects good principles, you know. But I know people in the Conservative Party who follow good principles. I know a prominent leader in the Labour Party, who follows good principles. But I think the great tradition of cooperation, or the equivalent of in the building of Zion, is something that was always at the back of my mind. Cooperation rather than competition. You need a degree of competition to bring out the best in individuals, of course, and because we don’t live in a perfect world.

The other aspect is the idea that we are internationalist; we are global. You know, we are global. Make friends with your enemies, and they may become your friends. I can remember going to the Frankfurt Temple when the London Temple was being refurbished, and I met a German brother. We were performing some proxy work in the temple, and he obviously had remembered World War II. He was completely tickled by the fact that there was this Brit and this German working together in the temple. So as a church, we’re global; as a gospel, you know, we’re global. And so that internationalist aspect appealed, I think.

Richard Davis: So, for someone to be involved at the local level or the national level, in most countries, it requires you to affiliate with, to be involved with a party. How do you deal with that? I mean, you just described the internationalist view of the gospel which we are to hold. But at the same time, to participate at the local level, we seem to have to be partisan. Have you thought about that sort of dichotomy?

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah, absolutely. Partisanship for the sake of partisanship is really something that I dislike intensely. And also partisanship for the sake of partisanship can lead to great dangers. It can lead people to make very, very corrupt decisions, and get involved in corrupt actions, so I thought about that.

The town council was not always partisan, but you were broadly elected on party lines. And I can remember one party staging a walkout. It was a mass walkout of the town council meeting. And I just thought that was so immature. You know, OK, say your piece; have a debate; have a vote; but to stage a walkout, I just thought they were acting like school kids. But most of the time, I sought compromise, I think, as chairman of the council.

Richard Davis: So you mentioned this general authority who said, you know, “People might be surprised there are Democrats in the temple.” Let’s put that in the UK setting here. Do members have that sort of sense that you have to be of a particular political party in order to be an active Latter-day Saint? If so, how do you deal with that?

Malcolm Adcock: Yeah, I don’t get that sense now. I think looking back over the decades, there may have been the view among some people who felt quite strongly that you could not be a member of the Labour Party and be a good church member. So that’s probably pretty much a parallel I would say. So anyway, certainly a few decades ago there were probably a few church members who felt that it would have been against your religious principles to be Labour.

Now my own interpretation is they had interpreted what church leaders were saying about communism and socialism. So I think that was their interpretation, and—yeah, I respect their interpretation, by the way, but I disagreed at the time, and I still do. I think there was a view that you couldn’t be a member of the Labour Party and be a good church member, with the parallel that you couldn’t be a Democrat and be a good church member. Or at least some may have thought, “Well, you could still be a good person, but voting along those lines was unacceptable.”

Richard Davis: So what lessons have you learned about politics and public service that you’d like to share with young Latter-day Saints, particularly in the UK, but perhaps anywhere?

Malcolm Adcock: Well, I think I would say, get involved. You may become a little bit cynical but carry on anyway; get involved. You know, you can make a difference. You’ll make a lot of friends in all political parties. Take off the political party blinders and focus on making a difference. Disagree when you need to disagree because of your political principles, but work together as much as you can, and it’s a lot of fun. It really is a lot of fun. You can make an impact.