Margaret thatcher pdf

Books by Margaret Thatcher. Details if other :. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — Margaret Thatcher by Margaret Thatcher. Statecraft ratings Open Preview See a Problem? Preview — Statecraft by Margaret Thatcher. Welcome back. Not long after leaving office, Thatcher was appointed to the House of Lords, as Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven, in She wrote about her experiences as a world leader and a pioneering woman in the field of politics in two books: The Downing Street Years and The Path to Power In , she published the book Statecraft , in which she offered her views on international politics.

Around this time, Thatcher suffered a series of small strokes. She then suffered a great personal loss in , when her husband of more than 50 years, Denis, died. The following year, Thatcher had to say goodbye to an old friend and ally, Ronald Reagan.

In fragile health, Thatcher gave a eulogy at his funeral via video link, praising Reagan as a man who "sought to mend America's wounded spirit, to restore the strength of the free world, and to free the slaves of communism. In , Thatcher celebrated her 80th birthday. A huge event was held in her honor and was attended by Queen Elizabeth II , Tony Blair and nearly other friends, family members and former colleagues. Two years later, a sculpture of the strong conservative leader was unveiled in the House of Commons.

Thatcher's health made headlines in , when she missed a celebration at 10 Downing Street, held in honor of her 85th birthday by David Cameron. Later, in November , Thatcher spent two weeks in the hospital for a condition that was later revealed to cause painful muscle inflammation. In , she sat out such a number of major events, including the wedding of Prince William in April, and the unveiling of the Ronald Reagan sculpture in London in July.

Additionally, in July , Thatcher's office in the House of Lords was permanently closed. The closure has been seen by some to mark the end of her public life. Battling memory problems in her later years due to her strokes, Thatcher retreated from the spotlight, living in near seclusion at her home in London's Belgravia neighborhood. Thatcher died on April 8, , at the age of She was survived by her two children, daughter Carol and son Sir Mark.

Thatcher's policies and actions continue to be debated by detractors and supporters alike, illustrating the indelible impression that she has left on Britain and nations worldwide. Gillian Anderson portrayed the former prime minister in season 4 of The Crown.

We strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn't look right, contact us! Subscribe to the Biography newsletter to receive stories about the people who shaped our world and the stories that shaped their lives. Now, thoughts and ideas, that interests me. Margaret Thatcher When I'm out of politics I'm going to run a business, it'll be called rent-a-spine. Margaret Thatcher I usually make up my mind about a man in ten seconds, and I very rarely change it.

Margaret Thatcher There are still people in my party who believe in consensus politics. I regard them as Quislings, as traitors I mean it. She doesn't see politics as it is, which is a lot of give and take". Young, , p The Old Testament prophets did not say, 'Brothers, I want a consensus. Unions had therefore got Britain into a death-spiral by both encouraging public spending and simultaneously reducing the ability of Britain to afford such expenditure because of reduced productivity.

The trade unions were regarded as being behind both the growth of inflation and the declining productivity of the s, and so eliminating the role of the unions in setting pay and working conditions was essential. Heath introduced trade union reform with the Industrial Relations Act , but these were immediately repealed by the Labour Government in The unions were the most obvious targets but any restrictive practices that hindered competitive flexibility would be confronted. She went against the aristocratic tradition that dominated in the military, the judiciary, and the financial elite in the City of London and many segments of industry, and sided with the brash entrepreneurs and the nouveaux riches.

She supported, and was usually supported by, this new class of entrepreneurs such as Richard Branson, Lord Hanson, and George Soros. The traditional wing of her own Conservative Party was appalled. The UK has insulated itself from competition, and Thatcher wanted to unlease competitive forces.

Thatcher was convinced that the British could rise to the challenge, whilst many others were less sure. The great political reform of the last century was to enable more and more people to have a vote. Now the great Tory reform of this century is to enable more and more people to own property.

Popular capitalism is nothing less than a crusade to enfranchise the many in the economic life of the nation. We Conservatives are returning power to the people. That is the way to one nation, one people. HSBC, After continuing evidence of profiteering, the rules were tightened in and Lawson wrote : 'Harold Macmillan had a contempt for the party, Alec Home tolerated it, [and] Ted Heath loathed it.

Margaret genuinely liked it. She felt a communion with it. Party conferences became times to subject the whole cabinet to long sessions listening to party members. The cabinet hated it, but Thatcher was sure it was doing them good.

Milton Friedman famously observed that: "the thing that people do not realize is that Margaret Thatcher is not in terms of belief a Tory. She is a nineteenth century Liberal. But her party consists largely of Tories. They don't really believe in free markets. They don't believe in free trade. They never have as a party. No one, thank heavens, is like anyone else, however much the Socialists may pretend otherwise. We believe that everyone has the right to be unequal but to us every human being is equally important.

Conservative Party Conference, 10 October, I think her temperament and background make her impatient with the whole sort of Establishment culture and way of thinking, even of talking. Continuity on foreign policy, military reductions and EU relations for instance.

The middle classes sacred cows, the NHS, mortgage tax relief and student grants were left unreformed. External events also played a role in the choice of which battles were fought. Thatcherism was not a system worked out through discussion. It was a largely hidden philosophy executed directly by Margaret Thatcher in office.

Several of the core institutions of plural governement were weakened during her tenure, notably cabinet, parliament and local government. A get-up-and-go, instead of a sit-back-and-wait-for-it Britain. Inspired by Robbins and Hayek, Thatcher regarded inflation as more than an inconvenience, and more than a sign of bad government.

She regarded it an enemy of society, and a sign of a pathological society. With statements such as this Thatcher was signalling that inflation, and not unemployment would be the key macro-economic goal of her government.

From this goal came the need to confront the trade unions. It was widely believed that inflation had been one of the main factors for the collapse of the Weimar republic and the rise of Hitler and the coup in Chile was justified by many Conservatives as being the best way to defeat inflation.

The appointment of Sir Derek Raynor as her efficiency expert within days of taking office demonstrated the importance that she gave to introducing proven methods of modern business management from the private sector. Click here to sign up. Download Free PDF. A Leader at War. A short summary of this paper. Download Download PDF. Translate PDF. The episode, which could have caused her political death, ended up giving her unassailable force, for many years.

The first part of this essay analyses the major problems which the outburst of the crisis created to Mrs Thatcher and defines her strategy for resolving it.

The second part goes deeper into the management of the crisis by Mrs Thatcher, by highlighting her swiftnesse of response and clarity of intentions, her elaboration of a positive values system, her capacities of managing international relations, and, last but not least, her luck.

The last paragraph analyses the consequences of the war both on the representation of Margaret Thatcher leadership and on the British political landscape as a whole. The declassification of documents from the s and 80s has enabled scholars to reconsider these matters, providing highly useful details that have enriched the comprehensive picture1. The following pages will analyse how Margaret Thatcher confronted the crisis during the spring of , how this experience came to characterise her image as a leader, and with what particular consequences.

The Crisis The Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands created two major problems for Margaret Thatcher: the need to respond to attacks against her government for not having prevented the disaster; and the need to develop and carry out a strategy to repair the damage. It reached its climax during the day of 3 April, with the debate at the House of Commons, and with the subsequent meeting of the Committee. Despite her less than brilliant performance in opening the parliamentary debate 3, the Prime Minister left the Commons substantially unscathed.

Firstly, because she astutely began her speech by affirming her intention to restore the British administration of the Falklands, at the same time communicating that her government had already decided to equip a task force which would be sent to the South Atlantic.

Secondly, because the necessity of responding to a military attack imposed within the House the tacit agreement not to weaken too much who had to tackle the Argentine invasion. It was the very gravity of the situation, in short, that allowed for a convergence towards a sort of suspension of judgment, which Enoch Powell expressed with particularly dramatic ars oratoria 4.

Not surprisingly, critiques came from the benches of the opposition parties. Nonetheless, the criticism that rendered their position truly precarious was launched from within the parliamentary majority. It quickly became clear that at least one of these two ministers would need to be sacrificed, as a political scapegoat6.

In the afternoon of 3 April, the Committee held a decisive meeting, during which the rancour of numerous back-benchers emerged with even 2 House of Commons, Debates, 3rd April Clark, A. For Kenneth Baker, «she was not at her best» Baker, K. For Norman Fowler, «her speech went as well as was possible, given that it was being made on the stickiest of sticky Parliament wickest» Fowler, N. It arose in the context of remarks which she made about defence against the Soviet Union and its allies; but there was no reason to suppose that the right hon.

Lady did not welcomed and, indeed, take pride in that description. In the next week or two this House, the nation and the right hon. Lady herself will learn of what metal she is made», House of Commons, Debates, 3rd April , col. It could be of some interest what the Speaker of the House of Commons refers in his memoirs: «During the course of the debate, I saw Mrs.

It was therefore obvious that the government wanted him to speak in the debate», Thomas, G. At least one of them, perhaps both, would have to resign» Owen, D. Both Nott and Carrington took part in this meeting.

The former managed the encounter better than the latter. In fact, Carrington «as a peer […] had struck up none of those friendships and understandings with back-benchers on which all» front-benchers «have to rely when the pressure builds»8.

Additional heat arrived from critiques made by the press, starting with The Times. Toward what goal, and by what means? The second problem, namely that of the strategy for resolving the crisis, proved to be much more intricate. The thorny question was how to pinpoint the goal to pursue, and the means by which it could be achieved. This process imposed managing the crucial aspect of the legitimacy and advisability of an eventual use of arms.

It was on this terrain that Margaret Thatcher had to confront the greater dangers. From the moment of receiving the news of the imminent Argentine landing on the Falklands shores, the Prime Minister firmly identified the objective that the government needed to achieve: the re-stabilisation of the status quo.

In order to accomplish this mission, it would be necessary to consider using all available resources, including military ones. Consequently, on the evening of 31 March Thatcher already authorised the preparation of a naval task force. Its departure for the Southern Atlantic was approved by the government on 2 April, in a meeting during which only one cabinet member, John Biffen, expressed some doubts9.

Appreciation for the measure was conveyed even by those who spoke in the House of Commons on 3 April. The Prime Minister, however, was aware of the fact that support for her decision was more apparent than real, both within the House and within her own party and government One part of the problem was represented by the Labour Party. The run-of-the-mill weekly meeting is to be avoided. A whip reads out the business of the coming week, the minutes of the last meeting are recited, there may be a listless question or two from a predictable source and that is that.

What humour there is can only be of the unconscious kind. Unleashed, we run the gamut of our emotions: jingoism, anti-semitism, obscurantism, cant and self-righteousness; all play their part.

We can, when pushed to do so, flourish our political prejudices like so many captive princes paraded through the streets of Imperial Rome. Why not hold such meetings in the Coliseum? According to Critchley the meeting on 3rd April was «the most exciting committee meeting I ever attended […] Mrs.

Thatcher had made what was probably her lamest speech in the Chamber, and the party was reeling from shock and indignation. There was to be blood all over the floor», ivi, p. Nott, J. On the contrary, the account of the chairman of the Committee is more sugarcoated. See Du Cann, E. See also Nott, J. The Foreign Secretary himself was well aware that his membership in the House of Lords was a weakness for the Cabinet in that moment: Carrington, P.

Labour MPs were divided between those who declared their opposition to the task force expedition, and those who instead held the deployment of force in the Southern Atlantic to be inevitable. Within this second group, there were those who sought to limit the military role to a simple element of reinforcement of the British diplomatic position, in view of negotiations with Argentina, and on the other hand those who were disposed towards accepting the recourse to arms as an extrema ratio.

Not even among this latter group, however, was there a fixed consensus about what might be considered as the right quantity of force to use.

These divisions were destined to grow even more pronounced, and in dramatic fashion, with the development of events The result was the continual re-positioning of the PLP. At first, the Party supported the sending of the task force, while insisting that it would be used only as a means of applying pressure to obtain the retreat of the Argentines via diplomatic actions. Once military operations had begun, involving the Navy and Air Force as well, Labour moved to impede an escalation, and invited the government to involve the UN in the management of the crisis.

Finally, Labour split in two, on the occasion of the vote in the Commons on 20 May, which gave the green light to the counter-invasion of the Falklands: the majority of Labour MPs abstained, but more than thirty dissidents voted against military operations.

Inevitably, the status of parliamentary minority undermined the possibility of the Labour Party to influence the decisions of the government. Even within the Conservative Party and the government itself, in fact, the determination of the Prime Minister to pursue the objective of reinstalling the status quo provoked some bewilderment.

Many held doubts about the potential of obtaining victory, in case of an armed conflict, whether for logistical or diplomatic reasons. Such reasons made it all the more necessary to guarantee the benevolent neutrality of the United States, something which could not easily be taken for granted According to John Nott, the doubts regarding the decision to launch the task force, expressed by John Biffen in the Cabinet meeting of 2 April, were shared by several others The prevailing idea within the government was that of the difficulty of the enterprise, a skepticism kept in check only by the shared understanding that some kind of action was needed as payback for the national humiliation.

While for Margaret Thatcher the final objective had to remain the re-claiming of the status quo — to be attained if possible by diplomatic means, or by arms if necessary —, for other members of the Cabinet the reaching of an accord, which could be presented as 11 Benn, T. II and Boyce, D. For these latter, the task force was an instrument of pressure, to be used during diplomatic negotiations.

According to John Nott on the evening of 2 April only a few believed that the force would have entered into actual combat Two politically distant men, Nigel Lawson and Jim Prior, fully agree that if the Argentines had accepted one of the proposals for peace debated between April and May, the majority of the Cabinet members would have imposed the recall of the task force This move, according to Prior, would have had dramatic repercussions for the Conservative Party, breaking it in two: sixty or more MPs would have voted against such a hypothesis, and some of them would have resigned the whip