Margaret thatcher

Thursday

11 Apr 2013

Ross Clark

Why are lefties so sycophantic to Margaret Thatcher?

I’ve been scratching my head for the past half hour trying to work out how I would react if I were a Conservative MP and a BBC reporter stuffed a microphone in front of me and told me that Arthur Scargill had just died. I know I wouldn’t punch the air, but a syrupy tribute? I think not. It would go something like this: ‘I’m sorry to hear that. Scargill was a charismatic leader to his followers but one whose legacy was to destroy the industry he loved, and all for his own ego.’ Would I expect to be hauled over the coals for saying that? Surely it is not

Rod Liddle

Margaret Thatcher: faultless on the Falklands but a disaster at home

I’m afraid we have to use Nelson Mandela as an example once again. He is proving very useful in his dotage, old Nels, as a comparison for stuff. A sort of benchmark. So, when the BBC’s Eddie Mair kebabed Boris Johnson and called him a ‘pretty nasty piece of work’, it seemed to me relevant to ask if he would level the same sort of charge at Nelson, were Eddie ever to be afforded an interview with the sainted man. Nelson’s organisation, remember, blew things up with bombs, and people died: he was a terrorist — whereas in effect all Boris did was schtupp some ditsy babe and tell Michael Howard

Nicholas Garland

All the Iron Ladies

The day Mrs Thatcher became Leader of the Opposition was a nightmare. Her victory over Mr Heath meant that I had to do a cartoon featuring her for the next day’s Daily Telegraph. But her arrival had been so swift that I barely knew who she was, and had almost no idea what she looked like. I had a problem. I don’t remember getting the photographs from her file in the picture library to draw from. My memory begins as I sat at my desk and looked through them. They were all close-ups of her teeth and upper gums, bared in smiles, under various pantomime ugly-sister hats. In those days, all

David Willetts

Working for Mrs Thatcher

A doctor providing geriatric care once told me of the damage Mrs Thatcher had done to the NHS. He used to employ a simple test to find out whether his elderly patients had become seriously gaga. He would ask them who the Prime Minister was: as their minds weakened so the only name they came up with was Winston Churchill. But after Mrs Thatcher had become Prime Minister even the most confused of his elderly patients gave the right answer. Now of course his test can work again. Right through until the middle of the next century, elderly people in nursing homes will be assuring polite young doctors that Mrs

Awaugh

Trying to get the mad, broody chicken off her addled eggs

A friend who is not normally receptive to left-wing or republican ideas suddenly exclaimed at dinner in my house the other day that he was bored, sickened and disgusted by the Queen and all the royal family, and thought it was high time they were removed. In the mood of the moment, nobody seemed disposed to disagree, although compassionate noises were made from some quarters about the Queen Mother and the Waleses. In the ensuing discussion, everyone observed that they were not aware of having felt this way before, but agreed that they felt it now — that is to say, at about 9.45 p.m. on Saturday, 12 August 1989.

Ludovic Kennedy

Three faces of Thatcher

Politicians can be divided into two categories; those whose public face is different from their private face and those for whom they are the same; put another way, those who feel it necessary in public appearances to put on an act, and those who manage to remain themselves. Among the latter are (or were) such disparate characters as Jack Kennedy, Willy Brandt, Jo Grimond, Edward Heath, Neil Kinnock; and among the former Adolf Hitler, Winston Churchill, Richard Nixon, Harold Wilson and Arthur Scargill (if you don’t like that list, you are welcome to make your own). Prominent among the last-named is our Prime Minister, but she is almost unique in

Charles Moore

After the Brighton bomb

It is worth pointing out yet again that Mrs Thatcher really was very brave last Friday. It would have been no disgrace to her if, once she had realised how narrow had been her escape, she had felt weak and — as did a few of the Tory wives in the Grand Hotel — had sat down and cried. There would have been nothing cowardly in cancelling what remained of the Conference in honour of the dead and injured. But the fact that she did neither of these things and the way that she conducted herself that day confirms that she has an extraordinary amount of that particular kind of

Charles Moore

Mrs Thatcher goes to Brussels

‘Délégation Royaume Uni. Salle 4’ announces a scruffy piece of paper projected onto the black and white television screens of the Centre Charlemagne. The journalists hurry upstairs for the latest from Mr Bernard Ingham, Mrs Thatcher’s press secretary. Mr Ingham is not conspicuously communautaire. He tells us who spoke in the session — Mr Lubbers, Herr Kohl, Mrs Thatcher and ‘Mr Papandreou — I always call him Mr Papadopoulos’. A nodding acquaintance with recent Greek history would have made Mr Ingham realise that such a slip, though easier on the tongue, is as politically uncomfortable as calling M. Mitterrand ‘Marshal Pétain’. But then Mr Ingham is not paid to spread

Alexander Chancellor

The Falklands victory

A little rejoicing is now in order, but only a little. We may rejoice that the Falklands war did not end in a bloodbath at Port Stanley, that the Argentinians did not stage a last doomed defence of the islands’ capital. We may rejoice at the performance of our armed forces who have conducted themselves with great skill and courage and with as much humanity as is possible in war. We may rejoice that they achieved their objectives, for to have lost a war against the Argentinians would have been an unthinkable disaster. We may rejoice that the conflict has accelerated the decline of the British Labour party. We may

Ferdinand Mount

Mrs Thatcher’s triumph

There was never a more disenchanted victory. The moment the size of the Tory swing was known, the doubts began, not least among those hundreds of thousands who had voted Conservative for the first time in their lives. Would the unions allow Mrs Thatcher to govern? Would the promised tax cuts be blown in betting shops and strip clubs, instead of fructifying in the pockets of the people? Would investors once again be fatally attracted to the hustlers and twisters? Was there any way of bridging the growing gulf between North and South? Did the British people as a whole have any stuffing left in them? Could any government muster

Patrick Cosgrave

Clear choice for the Tories

If I start with a reference to the sorry condition of the Tory party, I hope readers will not immediately turn to another page. If only the Tories can take a fairly cool look at themselves, it will quickly be apparent that the condition is not as serious as all that; and that it is certainly capable of repair. Housman’s ancient ‘three minutes of thought’ will suffice to show that there is only one direction in which the Tories can go. Once their collective mind is concentrated on that fact the rest will be, if not easy, at least far advanced in ease from the complicated and tragic business of

The Spectator

Her brilliant career

In 1975, when Keith Joseph dropped out of the race for the Tory leadership and his campaign manager stepped into his place, almost no one took it seriously. She was ‘precisely the sort of candidate… who ought to be able to stand, and lose, harmlessly’ said the Economist. Only one publication in Britain backed her then, and our endorsement is reprinted in our supplement. The values she represented are the ones The Spectator has championed for decades: small government, low taxes and personal freedom. And a preference for those who enter politics to do something, rather than be someone. Mrs T admired The Spectator’s writers so much that she hired two of them:

Wednesday

10 Apr 2013

Isabel Hardman

‘If only people could see the real Margaret Thatcher’: Lords pay tribute

Today’s debates in Parliament about Baroness Thatcher were supposed to be a tribute to the first female Prime Minister. If you were looking for the most faithful rendition of this, you should have been sitting in the House of Lords, not the Commons this afternoon. In the Other Place, the debate is always rather more civilised and measured, though it has grown rather rowdier in recent years. But today the speeches painted a fascinating picture of Margaret Thatcher, not least because many of them came from those who worked with or in opposition to her when she was in power. Some were notable by their silence: Lord Howe arrived with

Steve Hilton

‘She was Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, Lady Gaga; all rolled into one’ – Steve Hilton on Margaret Thatcher

Tomorrow’s Spectator includes a three-page symposium on Margaret Thatcher from a selection of her friends colleagues, admirers and sparring partners. Here’s the full version of what Steve Hilton – No.10’s strategy officer from 2010-2012 – has to say about our first female Prime Minister. I was lucky enough to meet Mrs Thatcher (as I will always think of her) on a few occasions, and one in particular stood out. We talked about Communism, and my family’s experience in Hungary. I was feeling incensed at the time because of the way in which the ruling elite dabbled in capitalism for their own personal enrichment, but denied the opportunities of enterprise to

Steerpike

The guru speaks

A Maggie-tastic jam-packed Spectator tomorrow. Amongst the tributes, the words of Steve Hilton stuck out: ‘I saw her as thrillingly anti-establishment; as much of a punk, and as brilliantly British, as Vivienne Westwood, who once impersonated her on the cover of Tatler. Margaret Thatcher had the virtues most valued in today’s culture: innovation, energy, daring. She was Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, and Lady Gaga all rolled into one — and a thousand times more consequential than any of them. In today’s techno-business jargon, she was the ultimate political disruptor: determined to shake things up, unleash competition, challenge and confront vested interests. To be transformative, being reasonable doesn’t get you very

Jonathan Jones

Margaret Thatcher in six graphs

With the debate swirling about Margaret Thatcher’s legacy and her government’s record, it’s worth taking a look at what the cold, hard economic data has to say about her time in office. Of course, growth rates and unemployment figures can’t tell us everything about a period, but they can at least provide a bit of substance to mix with the well-worn rhetoric. 1. Average growth. Under Thatcher, GDP rose by 29.4 per cent — an average of 0.6 per cent growth per quarter. (That’s the same as the average growth rate from 1955 to 2013.) 2. Manufacturing jobs lost, but more service jobs created. A net of 1.6 million

Freddy Gray

Football, Thatcher and political hooliganism

It was never going to take long for football to become part of the Thatcher death row. Almost any big media story that involves stupidity, mawkishness, and tribal loyalty will inevitably be sucked into the national game. On Monday, Manchester United decided not to stage a minute’s silence for Mrs T – no surprise there – and now it’s turning into a nationwide fight. Some football people want to honour the Iron Lady, but the FA is reluctant. Reading FC chairman John Madejski has called for a tribute ahead of his side’s game against Liverpool FC, but the Liverpudlians so despise Thatcher that they will find the idea too offensive

Alex Massie

Margaret Thatcher: An Accidental Libertarian Heroine

It is 34 years since Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister. Coincidentally, she entered Downing Street 34 years after Clement Attlee won the 1945 general election. The whole history of post-war Britain is cleaved, neatly, in two. If the first half of that story was dominated by a left-led consensus, the second has been a triumph for liberalism. We have lived in an era of liberal emancipation and are much the better for it. Mrs Thatcher, of course, was a great economic liberal. Her approach to economics, guided by Smith, Hayek and Friedman, stressed the importance of individual endeavour. Remove the dead hand of state control and Britain could flourish again.

Sebastian Payne

Introducing our first ebook: Margaret Thatcher in The Spectator 1975-1990

No publication understood the Thatcher project better than The Spectator. We backed her for the leadership in 1975 when no other national publication would. We understood her opportunities, foibles and genius when many of our rivals were baffled by this coarse-sounding lady and her popular appeal. We have put together 21 essays from the period into our first-ever ebook: Margaret Thatcher in The Spectator 1975 – 1990. It’s available today on the Kindle, for just 99p. It begins with Patrick Cosgrave advocating Thatcher as Tory leader, then gives a six-month and one-year progress report. Ferdinand Mount describes the uneasiness that followed the 1979 triumph. Then, as now, The Spectator was

Isabel Hardman

MPs line up to pay respects to – and criticise – Margaret Thatcher

This afternoon’s tribute debate in the House of Commons will continue until 10pm, with many MPs wanting to pay their respects to Margaret Thatcher. There will be many speeches about how the former Prime Minister inspired and shaped the politics of those speaking. But there will also inevitably be those who want to talk about the negative aspects of her legacy. Ed Miliband, who gave a measured tribute on Monday, faces the challenge of giving a speech that isn’t insincere but that remains respectful too. Some of his MPs, such as John Healey, who has written a forceful piece for PoliticsHome, are boycotting the event. Others, such as David Winnick,