Since the Liberal Democrats have not been in power during these periods it is hard to evaluate what they would have done had they actually been in power and therefore this makes it harder to palce them on the political spectrum. As a result, the best evidence I can use is their manifestos even though as I have mentioned before Governments tend to deviate from them; Taking their latest pledge not to accept a rise in university fees as a current example of this.
Now that I have completed my research into all their manifestos and found out what they actually did whilst in power I shall begin the analysis of each of the parties.
The first thing that I will do is compare their manifestos as to what they actually did so that I can cancel out any policies that they failed to achieve or disregarded/changed whilst in power. After I have done this I will begin looking at them in relation to each of the other parties manifestos.
Then I will construct myself a table saying where each of theparties stand on housing, education, defence etc. Once this table has been complete I will then look at the results from my questionnaires about the political spectrum and then begin to plot a graph for each party looking at where their policies lie on this. I will do this graph for every year of the general election, find the most consistant place and then analyse if and how they have moved on the political spectrum since Thatcher came into power.
Monday 2 April 2012
What labour did when in power 97 - 01
Labour conversion
Successive heavy general election defeats gradually convinced Labour to accept much of the new settlement. From outright repudiation of the policies at the 1983 general election, Labour steadily came to accept successive tranches of Thatcher's policies.
Labour accepted the need to prioritise economic stability and encourage private enterprise.
Some of these policies, including sales of cheap shares in privatising utilities, cutting direct taxes, and trade union reforms, were widely popular.
Globalisation also meant that there were international pressures for national governments to pursue ‘prudent’ economic policies. Labour gradually accepted the need to prioritise economic stability, low inflation and borrowing, and encourage private enterprise.
In addition, de-industrialisation and the decline of the working class and trade union membership meant that Labour’s traditional electoral base was being eroded. Gaining the support of an increasingly middle class electorate was crucial for electoral victory as Britain underwent demographic and economic change.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/thatcherism_01.shtml
Last Updated: Thursday, 10 May 2007, 07:38 GMT 08:38 UK   |
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version | How will history judge Blair? | ||||||||||||||||||||
| How will history judge Tony Blair's premiership? Time will tell, but here are three instant expert views:
IAN KERSHAW, PROFESSOR OF MODERN HISTORY, SHEFFIELD UNIVERSITY
Measured against the peace-time record of British prime ministers since the end of the First World War, few of whom achieved much, Mr Blair's premiership compares favourably. Measured against the shambolic record of the last Conservative government, under Mr Major, it compares even better. But measured against the expectations of 1997 (for the moment leaving Iraq out of the equation), and judged by perceptions of the present state of British society, the 10 years of Mr Blair will surely go down in history as a lost opportunity, a time when much was promised but relatively little attained. Of course, Blair transformed the Labour Party and presided over three consecutive general election victories, a feat which had eluded every previous Labour leader. But to what purpose? Undeniably, a decade of sustained prosperity and economic stability, unparalleled in recent times, has been a remarkable achievement, even if Gordon Brown was the main architect of the economic success. On constitutional matters, devolution in Scotland and Wales has been successful, at least in the short term, though probably it has only fended off rather than excluded a more damaging nationalist challenge (at least in Scotland) to the United Kingdom's integrity. But in the workings of British government, the Blair era has not been beneficial. The use of "spin doctors" and unelected advisers has been harmful to democracy. Ten years of presidential-style government have eroded the authority of the House of Commons. And effective reform of the House of Lords is still a distant dream. The expectations of 1997 were quite unrealistic. In the euphoria of finally getting rid of a clapped-out, shoddy Conservative government long past its sell-by date, quite illusory hopes were invested in the new Labour regime. Deep-seated problems
Blair's own propaganda inflated these hopes by hyped-up claims that his premiership marked the start of a new era. Disillusionment was inevitable. In reality, the deep-seated structural problems of the health system, education, transport, crime, juvenile disorder, urban decay, and inner-city deprivation were never going to be overcome, whatever the colour of the government, within a decade or so. Even so, there is remarkably little substantial improvement to show for 10 years of Labour government, particularly in the position of the less well-off in society. Yet what is Labour for, if not above all to serve their interests. The introduction of a minimum wage, set at a modest level, was admittedly a step in the right direction. The government also uses statistics ad nauseam to demonstrate major improvements in health, education, crime reduction, and so on. But few people are persuaded. To those at the sharp end, the improvements are often scarcely visible. Overall, the feeling is that taxes have gone up while public services have deteriorated. For many living in the most deprived inner-city areas, there is little sense that the insecurity produced by crime, disorder, vandalism and anti-social behaviour has been much reduced. In schools and hospitals marginal improvements at best can be seen, and many professionals complain that things are even worse than when Labour took power. Despite the money poured in, the health service is still in poor shape. In schools, new buildings can provide better conditions. But the stress levels for teachers are enormous. Students now face high fees and indebtedness, though few of their lecturers would acknowledge a significant positive transformation in universities. Doctors, nurses, teachers, policemen and others suffer, too, more than ever from the oppressive bureaucracy of an unconstrained control culture. Disappearing idealism Meanwhile, transport remains a mess, with no integrated planning or joined-up thinking in view. Heads here have been firmly stuck in the sand while the problems mount. The litany could continue. The biggest indictment overall is that, after ten years of a Labour government, people have little or no sense of greater social fairness. The idealism built into Labour's social vision has all but disappeared. No wonder there is widespread apathy about party politics, which are as riddled with sleaze as ever they were under the Tories. Labour now seems to stand for little more than the claim that it can manage the problems of British society a bit better, and a bit more humanely, than can the Conservatives. And even that claim is open to question. However Blair's domestic achievements are judged, his place in history will be primarily shaped by the Iraq war. Iraq will forever stand out in bold red in the debit column of his time in office. It was an avoidable disaster. And it was a disaster bearing Blair's personal hallmark. One word can epitomise a premiership for posterity. For Anthony Eden it was "Suez". For Blair, it will be "Iraq".
ANDREW ROBERTS, HISTORIAN AND BIOGRAPHER Before 11 September 2001, Tony Blair was set to go down in history as a second-division prime minister, one of those who stayed in power for a long time but without having any appreciable effect on the story of his times. If anything, he was something of a mild wrecker: over devolution, the House of Lords, hunting, and the Lord Chancellorship, he seemed happy to rip up ancient British arrangements without giving much thought as to what would be likely to replace them. Then came 9/11. Suddenly, everything changed. 'Shoulder to shoulder' No fewer than 67 Britons died on that day, and Blair showed a side of his personality that had been impossible to discern before: Churchillian leadership. With his announcement that Britain would stand "shoulder to shoulder" with the United States, and backing that up with sending large numbers of British troops to both Afghanistan and Iraq, he carved a place for himself in the first rank of British premiers since 1900. Blair was watching television in Brighton when the third plane hit the Pentagon at 2.43pm (British time), and then put in a short appearance at the Trade Union conference there. Visibly shaken, he told the delegates: "There have been the most terrible, shocking events in the United States of America in the last hours. "I am afraid we can only imagine the terror and carnage there and the many, many innocent people who have lost their lives. This mass terrorism is the new evil in our world today." Later he recalled, in an interview on Boston television: "Sometimes things happen in politics, an event so cataclysmic that, in a curious way, all the doubt is removed. "From the outset, I really felt very certain as to what had to be said and done." This was underlined soon afterwards in his powerful address to the Labour Party conference the next month, in which Blair said of the American people: "We were with you at the first. We will stay with you till the last." In this he was as good as his word. Blair had fought wars before, of course. Kosovo and Sierra Leone had seen British troops deployed by him, both successfully and with minimum casualties. The post-9/11 invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were to be of an altogether different - and larger - order, although the casualties were also amazingly light. Blair proved himself an exemplary war leader. WMD danger Under the sincere impression that Saddam Hussein of Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction (WMD) - a view shared by the intelligence services of every major country in the world, as well as by the United Nations' own weapons inspectors - he appreciated the importance of overthrowing the Baathist regime as soon as the Taleban regime was deposed in Afghanistan. The dangers of WMDs possibly falling into the hands of anti-Western terrorists groups could only be obviated by a full-scale US-led invasion by the Coalition of the Willing, and none proved more willing than Blair. (The fact that it later transpired that Saddam had most probably destroyed his WMD was entirely immaterial; Blair believed Saddam had had them at the time, not least because he had used them extensively on his own people in the late 1980s.) In Britain a vicious and disgraceful campaign began, attempting, on the flimsiest of evidence taken wildly out of context, to accuse Blair of deliberately lying in order to take the country to war. Its smears and slurs will not stand the test of historical analysis. The defeat of the enormous Iraqi army in only three weeks in March 2003; the establishment of democracy in Iraq, with a 70% turnout in nationwide elections on 15 December 2005; the stalwart defence of Iraq against an unexpectedly long and violent terrorist insurgency; the loss of only tiny numbers of British troops by any historical or operational standards: all will be credited to Tony Blair by posterity. Similarly the burning out of Al Qaeda and the Taleban from the most important areas of Afghanistan is another of his fine achievements. Prime ministers are not judged by posterity on issues to do with transport, health, education, or even - most of them - on economic indicators. They are judged by the One Big Thing that happens during their premierships. That is why Neville Chamberlain's Munich Agreement, Anthony Eden's Suez Crisis, Edward Heath's Three-Day Week, and John Major's ERM debacle have left them branded as failures. Equally, Winston Churchill's Blitz orations, Margaret Thatcher's saving of British capitalism and Tony Blair's vigorous prosecution of the War against Terror will leave them noted by history as highly successful prime ministers.
ANTHONY SELDON, TONY BLAIR'S BIOGRAPHER The verdict of history on all Prime Ministers as they leave office is hotly disputed, but few in modern British history have been subject to so much departing hostility as Tony Blair. Yet Tony Blair's successive election victories alone guarantee that he will be remembered as Labour's most accomplished electoral leader. Having succeeded John Smith as Labour Party leader in 1994, he spent three years preparing his party to be fit for office, and stripping it of "Old Labour" policies on defence, trade unions and the economy. The party came to power in May 1997 on the crest of a wave of popular emotion which swept away John Major's discredited and exhausted Tories. The party won a second landslide in 2001, and, in 2005 a third victory, albeit on a much reduced majority. Economic strength Underpinning these victories was Britain's powerful economic performance. Tony Blair was fortunate in this inheritance in 1997, and in having such a capable chancellor in Gordon Brown, but good leaders to some extent create their own luck. At home, Blair had high ambitions for building world-class public services, transforming the constitution, reducing inequality and attacking lawlessness. But in the beginning progress was painfully slow. In his first term (1997-2001), Blair focused on reforming the constitution and introducing welfare reforms, which paved the way for reductions in pensioner and child poverty. But the former owed more to the legacy of his predecessor, John Smith, while the latter was the achievement principally of Gordon Brown. For Blair personally, his first term was a learning experience, when mistakes were made and valuable time squandered. Only in the second and third terms did his personal ideas fructify into his "choice and diversity" agenda, extending Margaret Thatcher's liberal reforms into the welfare state. But by the time he began to introduce these policies, including top-up fees for universities, foundation hospitals and city academies, his political capital was waning and he had to push his agenda through in the face of opposition from his own party. In his third term (2005-2007), shorn of the need to win another general election, he extended his policies into new areas, including nuclear energy, welfare, pensions reform, road pricing and greater independence for schools and health. Fighting off the successive Brown challenges were essential for a prime minister who, unlike Mrs Thatcher, was embedding his personal agenda so late. Northern Ireland push The popular view is that Blair's first term was his most successful, and the second and third terms then became progressively worse. In fact, the very opposite is the case. To no area of British life did Tony Blair give more consistent attention as prime minister than the affairs of Northern Ireland. From his earliest weeks in power he decided that completing the peace process would remain a priority and his hard work reaped dividends through the Good Friday Agreement of 1998.
He never lost sight of the need to give attention to the province and the fact that it has been largely peaceful during his 10 years owes much to his own efforts and determination. In Europe he was less successful. He was passionate about building a qualitatively new relationship between Britain and the European Union. But in his early months in power he was outflanked by Gordon Brown and the Treasury over taking Britain into the Euro. His best chance gone, he was unable thereafter to take Britain into the single currency, or to take part in the new constitution, which foundered in 2005. European role Many commentators thought both failures a blessing for Britain. Blair did, however, play a pivotal role in extending the membership of the EU from 15 to 27 states, and toiled hard to ensure free-market rather than dirigiste and federalist values prevailed. Blair's European policy was hampered by the hostility, often vitriolic, of Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroeder. But Blair's own lack of long-term thinking on the EU, or full follow-through to his seminal speech to the European Parliament in June 2005, in which he proposed a bold new vision for the EU, also was responsible. Abroad, his "Gladstonian" or "Wilsonian" foreign policy inspired his major speech in Chicago in April 1999 in which he articulated the doctrine of the "international community". This advocated humanitarian intervention in the affairs of countries under tyrannical regime under certain conditions. Blair used this approach to justify his intervention in the Kosovo crisis in 1999, when he urged a more aggressive military approach upon a reluctant American administration. It also, in Blair's mind, provided much of the intellectual justification for the war against Iraq in 2003. Iraq remains the most controversial aspect of Tony Blair's premiership. Blair still believes that it was right for Britain to support the Americans over Iraq, to remove a brutal dictator who he considered a menace to his own people and threat to world peace. Serious mistakes Yet even loyal Blairites must now concede that serious mistakes were made: in the overselling of the intelligence, in the woefully inadequate planning for the postwar situation (with the US chiefly culpable) and in not doing more to rein in the excesses and inconsistencies of the Bush administration. Tony Blair has always believed that Britain's interests were best served by standing shoulder to shoulder with the American administration, despite the resulting unpopularity at home and in Europe, and that any criticism of Washington should be made in private rather than in public. The Iraq war sacrificed some of Tony Blair's domestic authority, his time, and ultimately detracted from his efforts to bring peace in the Arab Israeli conflict, to do more to eliminate poverty in Africa and to combat global warming. All three were cherished causes to him. Again, starting work earlier in these areas would have allowed Blair to achieve much more. That fact notwithstanding, few doubt that Britain's standing in the world, and in Europe, is higher in 2007 than in 1997. All prime ministers are limited by external forces: in Tony Blair's case it was the erosion of support due to the Iraq war, the unremitting hostility to much of his reform agenda from his chancellor, Gordon Brown, a lack of Blairite ministers of quality to run the departments of state, or supporters in the party at large. At his best, as in his response to the death of Princess Diana in 1997, to 9/11, or to the London bombings in July 2005, he was able to find a language that chimed with the national mood that few prime ministers, or indeed US presidents, have matched. But the obstacles he encountered, his lack of governing experience, and his lateness in discovering his personal agenda, meant his achievements were less than he hoped for, or promised. Prime ministers leave amid the noise of the immediate, in Blair's case the cash-for-honours scandal, anger over Iraq, turbulence over his succession and rows over the future direction of policy. But, as long as a transition is free of scandal, history judges premierships in a more dispassionate way. No-one can know for sure what his successors will do - the key factor which forges historical judgments. But it is very unlikely that Blair's successors will revert to Old Labour, or that David Cameron will not build substantially on what Blair has achieved in power since 1997. These will be the ultimate tests of his legacy. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6636091.stm | ||||||||||||||||||||
Ten years of presidential-style government have eroded the authority of the House of Commons 
What conservatives did when in power 92 - 97
http://www.social-policy.org.uk/lincoln/Page.pdf page 10
His style of leadership was a stark contrast to his predecessor's with Mr Major running a much more inclusive cabinet.
His successes included reaching agreement with other European nations on the Maastricht Treaty and bringing about an IRA ceasefire in 1994 which laid the foundations for the Good Friday Agreement.
But his premiership was dogged by divisions in his party over Europe and accusations of government sleaze.
In June 1995, stung by criticism of his leadership Major took the unprecedented step for a British prime minister of resigning as head of his party, forcing a leadership vote.
Although he won the vote he remained deeply unpopular and the party failed to unite behind him.
The party and Mr Major struggled through to the 1997 general election but it was no surprise when Labour swept to power - with the Conservatives suffering their heaviest election result of the 20th century
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/673348.stmWhat conservatives did when in power 87 - 92
http://www.social-policy.org.uk/lincoln/Page.pdf pages 9 - 10
1987-1990: Prime Minister – Third Term
Margaret Thatcher & Gorbachev at RAF Brize Norton, 7 December 1987.
The legislative platform of the third-term Thatcher Government was among the most ambitious ever put forward by a British administration. There were measures to reform the education system (1988), introducing a national curriculum for the first time. There was a new tax system for local government (1989), the Community Charge, or 'poll tax' as it was dubbed by opponents. And there was legislation to separate purchasers and providers within the National Health Service (1990), opening up the service to a measure of competition for the first time and increasing the scope for effective management.
All three measures were deeply controversial. The Community Charge, in particular, became a serious political problem, as local councils took advantage of the introduction of a new system to increase tax rates, blaming the increase on the Thatcher Government.(The system was abandoned by Margaret Thatcher's successor, John Major, in 1991.) By contrast, the education and health reforms proved enduring. Successive governments built on the achievement and in some respects extended their scope.
The economy boomed in 1987-88, but also began to overheat. Interest rates had to be doubled during 1988. A division within the government over management of the currency emerged into the open, Margaret Thatcher strongly opposing the policy urged by her Chancellor of the Exchequer and others, of pegging the pound sterling to the Deutschmark through the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM). In the process, her relations with her Chancellor of the Exchequer, Nigel Lawson, were fatally damaged, and he resigned in October 1989.
Behind this dispute there was profound disagreement within the government over policy towards the European Community itself. The Prime Minister found herself increasingly at odds with her Foreign Secretary, Sir Geoffrey Howe, on all questions touching European integration. Her speech at Bruges in September 1988 began the process by which the Conservative Party — at one time largely 'pro-European' — became predominantly 'Euro-sceptic'.
Paradoxically, all this took place against a backdrop of international events profoundly helpful to the Conservative cause. Margaret Thatcher played her part in the last phase of the Cold War, both in the strengthening of the Western alliance against the Soviets in the early 1980s and in the successful unwinding of the conflict later in the decade.
The Soviets had dubbed her the 'Iron Lady' — a tag she relished — for the tough line she took against them in speeches shortly after becoming Conservative leader in 1975. During the 1980s she offered strong support to the defence policies of the Reagan administration.
But when Mikhail Gorbachev emerged as a potential leader of the Soviet Union, she invited him to Britain in December 1984 and pronounced him a man she could do business with.She did not soften her criticisms of the Soviet system, making use of new opportunities to broadcast to television audiences in the east to put the case against Communism.Nevertheless, she played a constructive part in the diplomacy that smoothed the break-up of the Soviet Empire and of the Soviet Union itself in the years 1989-91.
By late 1990, the Cold War was over and free markets and institutions vindicated. But that event triggered the next stage in European integration, as France revived the project of a single European currency, hoping to check the power of a reunited Germany. As a result, divisions over European policy within the British Government were deepened by the end of the Cold War and now became acute.
On November 1 1990 Sir Geoffrey Howe resigned over Europe and in a bitter resignation speech precipitated a challenge to Margaret Thatcher's leadership of her party by Michael Heseltine. In the ballot that followed, she won a majority of the vote. Yet under party rules the margin was insufficient, and a second ballot was required. Receiving the news at a conference in Paris, she immediately announced her intention to fight on.
But a political earthquake occurred the next day on her return to London, when many colleagues in her cabinet — unsympathetic to her on Europe and doubting that she could win a fourth General Election — abruptly deserted her leadership and left her no choice but to withdraw. She resigned as Prime Minister on November 28 1990. John Major succeeded her and served in the post until the landslide election of Tony Blair's Labour Government in May 1997.
1987-90: Prime Minister – third term
| 87 Oct 19 Mo: | 'Black Monday': Dow Jones fell 23 per cent |
|---|---|
| 88 Feb 08 Mo: | Gorbachev announced Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan from May |
| 88 Mar 07 Mo: | Sterling 'uncapped' on MT's insistence and rose above 3DM |
| 88 Mar 15 Tu: | Budget: highest rate of income tax cut to 40 per cent |
| 88 May 17 Tu: | Interest rates cut to 7.5 per cent (lowest 1979-90); MT publicly supported Lawson |
| 89 Jan 31 Tu: | NHS White Paper published (Working for Patients) |
| 89 Jun 03 Sa: | China: Tiananmen Square massacre |
| 89 Jun 20 Tu: | MT clash with Howe and Lawson on ERM line at Madrid Council (met again 25 Jun) |
| 89 Jun 26 Mo: | MT set conditions for ERM entry ('Madrid conditions'); rejected Social Charter |
| 89 Oct 26 Th: | Lawson resigned as Chancellor of the Exchequer; Major replaced him |
| 89 Dec 10 Su: | Czechoslovakia: end of Communist rule (Havel President 29 Dec) |
| 89 Dec 22 Fr: | Romania: dictator Ceausescu overthrown (killed 25 Dec) |
| 90 Feb 10 Sa: | Kohl in Moscow: Gorbachev agreed German reunification |
| 90 Mar 11 Su: | Lithuania declared independence of USSR |
| 90 Mar 31 Sa: | Trafalgar Square riot against Community Charge or 'poll tax' |
| 90 Apr 01 Su: | Strangeways prison siege (ended 25 Apr); disturbances in other gaols |
| 90 Jul 14 Sa: | Ridley resigned over comments on Germany |
| 90 Aug 02 Th: | Iraq invaded Kuwait; MT with Bush in Aspen |
| 90 Aug 09 Th: | UK announced commitment of forces to the Gulf |
| 90 Oct 03 We: | German reunification |
| 90 Oct 05 Fr: | Britain joined ERM; interest rates cut by one per cent to 14 per cent |
| 90 Nov 01 Th: | Howe resigned |
| 90 Nov 13 Tu: | HC: Howe's resignation speech bitterly critical of MT |
| 90 Nov 14 We: | Heseltine stood for Conservative leadership |
| 90 Nov 20 Tu: | Conservative leadership election first ballot (MT 204:152 Heseltine) |
| 90 Nov 22 Th: | MT announced decision not to contest second ballot |
| 90 Nov 27 Tu: | Conservative leadership election second ballot; Major became leader |
| 90 Nov 28 We: | MT resigned as Prime Minister; John Major succeeded her |
What conservatives did when in power 83 - 87
http://www.social-policy.org.uk/lincoln/Page.pdf This source is talking about how social policy changed within the conservative party since 1945
1983-1987: Prime Minister – Second Term
Margaret Thatcher & Ronald Reagan at Camp David, 22 December 1984.
The second term opened with almost as many difficulties as the first. The government found itself challenged by the miners' union, which fought a year-long strike in 1984-85 under militant leadership. The labour movement as a whole put up bitter resistance to the government's trade union reforms, which began with legislation in 1980 and 1982 and continued after the General Election.
The miners' strike was one of the most violent and long lasting in British history. The outcome was uncertain, but after many turns in the road, the union was defeated. This proved a crucial development, because it ensured that the Thatcher reforms would endure. In the years that followed, the Labour Opposition quietly accepted the popularity and success of the trade union legislation and pledged not to reverse its key components.
In October 1984, when the strike was still underway, the Irish Republican Army (IRA) attempted to murder Margaret Thatcher and many of her cabinet by bombing her hotel in Brighton during the Conservative Party annual conference. Although she survived unhurt, some of her closest colleagues were among the injured and dead and the room next to hers was severely damaged. No twentieth-century British Prime Minister ever came closer to assassination.
British policy in Northern Ireland had been a standing source of conflict for every Prime Minister since 1969, but Margaret Thatcher aroused the IRA's special hatred for her refusal to meet their political demands, notably during the 1980-81 prison hunger strikes.
Her policy throughout was implacably hostile to terrorism, republican or loyalist, although she matched that stance by negotiating the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985 with the Republic of Ireland. The Agreement was an attempt to improve security cooperation between Britain and Ireland and to give some recognition to the political outlook of Catholics in Northern Ireland, an initiative which won warm endorsement from the Reagan administration and the US Congress.
The economy continued to improve during the 1983-87 Parliament and the policy of economic liberalisation was extended. The government began to pursue a policy of selling state assets, which in total had amounted to more than 20 per cent of the economy when the Conservatives came to power in 1979. The British privatisations of the 1980s were the first of their kind and proved influential across the world.
Where possible, sale of state assets took place through offering shares to the public, with generous terms for small investors. The Thatcher Governments presided over a great increase in the number of people saving through the stock market. They also encouraged people to buy their own homes and to make private pension provision, policies which over time have greatly increased the personal wealth of the British population.
The left wing of the Conservative Party had always been uneasy with its chief. In January 1986, enduring divisions between left and right in the Thatcher Cabinet were publicly exposed by the sudden resignation of the Defence Minister, Michael Heseltine, in a dispute over the business troubles of the British helicopter manufacturer, Westland. The fallout from the 'Westland Affair' challenged Margaret Thatcher's leadership as never before. She survived the crisis, but its effects were significant. She was subjected to heavy criticism within her own party for the decision to allow US warplanes to fly from British bases to attack targets in Libya (April 1986).There was talk of the government and of its leader being 'tired', of having gone on too long.
Her response was characteristic: at the Conservative Party's annual conference in October 1986, her speech foreshadowed a mass of reforms for a third Thatcher Government.With the economy now very strong, prospects were good for an election and the government was returned with a Parliamentary majority of 101in June 1987.
1983-87: Prime Minister – second term
| 83 Nov 25 Tu: | US invasion of Grenada |
|---|---|
| 84 Mar 12 Mo: | Miners' strike began |
| 84 Jun 25-26: | Fontainebleau European Council; long-term European budget settlement |
| 84 Oct 12 Fr: | Brighton bomb: failed IRA attempt to assassinate MT and her cabinet |
| 84 Nov 06 Tu: | Reagan reelected US President |
| 84 Nov 20 Tu: | Flotation of British Telecom: key privatisation measure |
| 84 Dec 16 Su: | Gorbachev visited Chequers: MT described him as a man she could do business with |
| 84 Dec 19 We: | Hong Kong: MT signed Joint Agreement with China |
| 85 Mar 03 Su: | NUM voted to end coal strike |
| 85 Nov 15 Fr: | Anglo-Irish Agreement signed at Hillsborough: consultative role for Republic |
| 85 Dec 02 Mo: | Luxembourg European Council; Single European Act agreed (ended 3 Dec) |
| 86 Jan 09 Th: | Westland: Heseltine walked out of cabinet; replaced at Defence by George Younger |
| 86 Jan 24 Fr: | Westland: Brittan resigned; Channon replaced him at DTI |
| 86 Jan 27 Mo: | Westland: emergency debate, ending the crisis |
| 86 Apr 15 Tu: | US air raids on Libya, mainly from British bases; MT attacked for allowing them |
| 86 Oct 11-12: | Reykjavik (Reagan-Gorbachev) Summit; talk of abolishing nuclear weapons |
| 86 Nov 15 Sa: | Anglo-US Summit at Camp David: MT and Reagan issued arms control statement |
| 87 Feb 22 Su: | 'Louvre Accord' to halt decline in $; Lawson secretly began shadowing DM |
| 87 Mar 28 Sa: | MT visited USSR (ended 1 Apr) |
| 87 Jun 11 Th: | General Election: Conservative Government formed (101 majority)  |
Sunday 1 April 2012
What conservatives did when in power 79 - 83
http://www.social-policy.org.uk/lincoln/Page.pdf pages 7 - 9
1979-1983: Prime Minister – First Term
The new government pledged to check and reverse Britain's economic decline. In the short-term, painful measures were required. Although direct taxes were cut, to restore incentives, the budget had to be balanced, and so indirect taxes were increased. The economy was already entering a recession, but inflation was rising and interest rates had to be raised to control it. By the end of Margaret Thatcher's first term, unemployment in Britain was more than three million and it began to fall only in 1986. A large section of Britain's inefficient manufacturing industry closed down. No one had predicted how severe the downturn would be.
But vital long-term gains were made. Inflation was checked and the government created the expectation that it would do whatever was necessary to keep it low. The budget of spring 1981, increasing taxes at the lowest point of the recession, offended conventional Keynesian economic thinking, but it made possible a cut in interest rates and demonstrated this newly found determination. Economic recovery started in the same quarter and eight years of growth followed.
Political support flowed from this achievement, but the re-election of the government was only made certain by an unpredicted event: the Falklands War. The Argentine Junta's invasion of the islands in April 1982 was met by Margaret Thatcher in the firmest way and with a sure touch. Although she worked with the US administration in pursuing the possibility of a diplomatic solution, a British military Task Force was despatched to retake the islands. When diplomacy failed, military action was quickly successful and the Falklands were back under British control by June 1982.
The electorate was impressed. Few British or European leaders would have fought for the islands. By doing so, Margaret Thatcher laid the foundation for a much more vigorous and independent British foreign policy during the rest of the 1980s.When the General Election came in June 1983, the government was re-elected with its Parliamentary majority more than trebled (144 seats).
1979-83: Prime Minister – first term
| 79 May 04 Fr: | MT appointed Prime Minister |
|---|---|
| 79 Jun 07 Th: | European Elections |
| 79 Jul 31 Tu: | Lusaka Commonwealth Meeting began (ended 8 Aug) |
| 79 Aug 27 Mo: | IRA murdered Mountbatten and 18 soldiers (Warrenpoint) |
| 79 Oct 23 Tu: | Exchange controls abolished |
| 79 Nov 29-30: | Dublin European Council: budget row beginning |
| 79 Dec 25 Tu: | USSR invaded Afghanistan |
| 80 Jan 02 We: | Steel strike began (ended 3 Apr) |
| 80 Jun 02 Mo: | Cabinet agreed European budget proposal; short-term settlement |
| 80 Sep 22 Mo: | Iran-Iraq war began |
| 80 Nov 04 Tu: | Reagan elected US President |
| 81 Feb 10 Tu: | NCB announced pit closures (abandoned 18 Feb) |
| 81 Mar 01 Su: | Second Republican hunger strike began (ended 3 Oct) |
| 81 Mar 10 Tu: | Budget: counter-Keynesian - increased taxes at bottom of depression |
| 81 Mar 26 Th: | Social Democratic Party (SDP) formed ('Alliance' of SDP & Liberals, 16 Jun) |
| 81 Nov 26 Th: | Crosby by-election: Shirley Williams won Conservative seat for SDP |
| 82 Apr 02 Fr: | Falklands: Argentina invaded |
| 82 Apr 03 Sa: | Falklands: UN SCR 502 demanding Argentine withdrawal; British Task Force sailed |
| 82 Apr 25 Su: | Falklands: South Georgia recaptured |
| 82 Apr 30 Fr: | Falklands: US 'tilt' in favour of Britain; Total Exclusion Zone put in force |
| 82 May 02 Su: | Falklands: Argentine cruiser General Belgrano sunk by British sub HMS Conqueror |
| 82 May 04 Tu: | Falklands: HMS Sheffield hit by Argentine Exocet missile |
| 82 May 21 Fr: | Falklands: British Forces landed at San Carlos Bay |
| 82 Jun 14 Mo: | Falklands: Argentine surrender |
| 83 Mar 23 We: | Reagan announced 'Star Wars' (Strategic Defence Initiative); MT supports |
| 83 Jun 09 Th: | General Election: Conservative Government formed (144 majority) |
The above is from http://www.margaretthatcher.org/essential/chronology.asp#chron79-83 I will now look at other sources in order to see if there are any other interpretations of what she did whilst in power during the first term. This is due to the fact that this source may have vested interests as it is a website solely about Thatcher
Thatcherism
At the 1983 general election, in spite of unemployment doubling to some three million, the government won a landslide victory thanks in large part to Labour’s divisions and its left-wing policies.
Thatcher's government insisted that it could no longer be a universal provider.
It is interesting to consider the fate in the 1980s of the five features of the post-war consensus outlined previously.
1. Trade unions now operated in a tighter legal framework, including: the requirement for pre-strike ballots; the end of the 'closed shop' (union membership as a precondition of employment in a specific industry); and making unions liable for damages incurred in illegal strikes. They were hardly consulted by the government and their influence waned in part because of the abandonment of income policies and rising unemployment.
2. The spread of privatisation of the major utilities altered the balance of the mixed economy. Gas, electricity, telephony, British Airways and later British Rail were all privatised. There was also a huge sale to tenants of council housing.
3. The government abandoned its commitment to full employment, stating this was the responsibility of employers and employees, and accorded priority instead to keeping inflation low.
4. Welfare state benefits were increasingly subject to means-testing.
5. Government insisted that it could no longer be a universal provider. More should be left to the market, the voluntary sector and self-help.
Thatcher's mandate
The recapture of the Falkland Islands from Argentina in 1982 was important for the success of the Thatcher project. It coincided with an improvement in the public standing of the government and of Thatcher herself. The victory seemed to vindicate her claims in domestic politics that she could provide strong leadership and stand up for the nation. The war rhetoric could now be turned against the enemies within - particularly the trade unions.
There are academic disputes about the extent to which military success boosted Conservative chances in the 1983 election. There were signs of a revival in the polls and greater economic optimism even before the capture. But what if the Falklands had been lost? Would the government have survived?
Labour could not exploit dissatisfaction, because it was seen as weak and divided.
Thatcher was respected but not liked by the British public. For all the talk of sweeping election successes, government only gained an average of 42% of the vote at general elections. But the peculiarities of the British electoral system and the split of the non-Conservative vote between the Labour and Liberal-Alliance parties meant that the government was able to win over 60% of seats in the House of Commons.
Surveys showed limited support for many of Thatcher’s values. Professor Ivor Crewe’s 'The Crusade that Failed' noted the lack of support for Thatcher’s policies on 'tax-and-spend' and replacing the dependency culture with an enterprise culture. And there was greater approval for a more equal society and for social and collective provision of welfare as against Thatcher's vision of people looking after themselves.
But Labour could not exploit this dissatisfaction, because it was not trusted on the economy or defence and was widely seen as weak and divided.
This is from the BBC website so that it is more likely to give an all round view as they have to report facts. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/thatcherism_01.shtml
Thursday 15 March 2012
Liberal / Lib Dem Manifestos
1979 Manifesto
1992 Manifesto
1997 Manifesto
- Representative Parliament and Government
- Electoral reform - Proportional system
- Open Government
- Accountable Government
- Reform Parliament
- Fixed dates for Parliamentary elections
- Replace the House of Lords for a democratic second chamber
- Decisions to be made at a local level
- Equality for men and women
- Legislation to protect individual rights
- Recruit more police
- Modernise prisons
- Increase non-custodial sentences
- Decrease restrictions on immigration
- Reduce inflation
- National minimum wage
- Reduce personal taxation
- Improve current housing
- Reduce class sizes in schools
- Reduce unemployment
- Representative Parliament and Government
- Electoral reform - Proportional system
- Open Government
- Accountable Government
- Decentralise Government
- Reform Parliament
- Fixed dates for Parliamentary elections
- Replace the House of Lords for a democratic second chamber
- Compulsory secret ballots in trade unions
- Equality for men and women
- Recruit more police
- Modernise prisons
- Increase non-custodial sentences
- Support NATO whilst USSR have nuclear weapons
- Support ban of chemical weapons
- Push for multilateral disarment
- Cancel Trident
- A new Bill of Rights
- Prevent monopolies
- Reduce Government regulation in nationalised industries
- Decrease restrictions on immigration
- Reduce personal taxation
- Increase child benefit
- Up rate pensions twice a year
- Increase unemployment benefit
- Raise the upper limit of national insurance
- Improve current housing
- Invest in renewable energy
- Reduce class sizes in schools
- Oppotunity for a wider range of subjects
- Improve primary school teachers training
- Improve NHS standards
- Representative Parliament and Government
- Electoral reform - Proportional system
- Open Government
- Accountable Government
- Reform Parliament
- Fixed dates for Parliamentary elections
- Replace the House of Lords for a democratic second chamber
- Devolve powers to the nations and regions of Britain
- Equality for men and women
- Legislation to protect individual rights
- Recruit more police
- Modernise prisons
- Increase non-custodial sentences
- Multilateral disarment
- Invest in renewable energy
- Reduce unemployment
- National minimum wage
- Reduce personal taxation
- Increase child benefit
- Increase the basic state pension
- Improve current housing
- Tackle inequalities in healthcare
- Reduce class sizes in schools
- Improve teacher training
- Uphold the right to pay for private education
1992 Manifesto
- Representative Parliament and Government
- Electoral reform - Proportional system
- Open Government
- Accountable Government
- Reform Parliament
- Fixed dates for Parliamentary elections
- Replace the House of Lords for a democratic second chamber
- Decisions to be made at a local level
- Invest in infrastructure
- Reduce unemployment
- Increase investment in education
- Protect private pensions
- Equality for men and women
- Create a new Bill of Rights which will centre a new written constitution
- Recruit more police
- Modernise prisons
- Increase non-custodial sentences
- Increase child benefit
- Increase the basic state pension
- Increase invalidity benefit
- Abolish the poll tax
- Break up monopolies
- Reduce inflation
- National minimum wage
- Reduce personal taxation
- Improve current housing
- Invest in renewable energy
- Get rid of nuclear fission power
- Reduce class sizes in schools
- Give teachers better training
- Increase oppotunities for higher education
- Abolish student loans
- Reduce inequalities within healthcare
- Reduce waiting lists in hospitals
- Support NATO, maintaining a minimum nuclear deterrent
- Restrict Trident
1997 Manifesto
- Representative Parliament and Government
- Increase funding for schools
- Reduce primary school class sizes
- Improve teacher training
- Strengthen school discipline
- Increase oppotunities for higher education
- Keep inflation low
- Invest in infrastructure
- Reduce unemployment
- Reduce monopolies
- New office to reulation privatised utilities
- Increase police force
- Build more housing
- Raise housing standards
- Alternatives to custodial sentences
- Cut hospital waiting lists
- Reduce inequalities within healthcare
- Raise standard of care in NHS
- Dcentralise power to regions, nations and communities
- Create a new Bill of Rights
- Open Government
- Reform Parliament
- Elected House of Lords
- Proportional representation for voting system
- Fix parliamentary terms
- Crack down on tax evasion
- New top rate tax of 50p
- Expand private pensions
- Equality for men and women
- Support NATO
- Sustain Trident until a stage where multilateral disarment can be achieved
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)