Alanbrooke, the taxpayers' losses in the banks aren't anything like that per year. (The banks' losses are much smaller than the figures quoted.) The total losses on paper are around at the moment round £7bn on Lloyds and £21bn on RBS. They were lower a couple of years ago, totalling £12bn, sunk two years ago and were better last year.
As to the banks' losses: RBS lost £5.2bn last year, and around £750m the year before; £1.1bn in 2010, £3.6bn in 2009, and £24.3bn in 2008. The losses are past-heavy and the future looks much better than for the mines.
If you seriously believe the banks are past their troubles good luck. When interest rates return to real levels and don't have to continue at all time lows as a hidden subsidy to prop up strained balance sheets you will have a point. Until then the banks are still on life support. If they were that good a bet they could go to the market and recapitalise today. But they can't because they still haven't come clean on all their problems.
Newsnight can't even get when Hurd was a cabinet minister right - 1983-1990!!!! Was he never Foreign Sec under John Major?! Some of the researchers they employ on that program are a bad joke.
Must say this summary seems quite appropriate, from comedy website the Daily Mash:
"People with no idea who Thatcher was 'ecstatic' that she's dead THOUSANDS of people under 35 are rejoicing at the demise of a woman they once read about...Guardian website regular Tom Booker said “I was really against everything she stood for, whatever that was."
Hopefully her name will not be used as a bogeyman or icon by people who have no real conception of her time in office from now on, but I doubt it.
Must say this summary seems quite appropriate, from comedy website the Daily Mash:
"People with no idea who Thatcher was 'ecstatic' that she's dead THOUSANDS of people under 35 are rejoicing at the demise of a woman they once read about...Guardian website regular Tom Booker said “I was really against everything she stood for, whatever that was."
@Ricardohos - the BBC 1 coverage has been good, but I think C4 have done the best job - Jon Snow bringing the perspective of his years to the news. There is also a good Jon Snow doc on C4. Newsnight is dire.
Yes, Carlotta. Snow did a really wonderful job. The tone was almost Sunday evening Antiques Roadshow whimsy. By concentrating on the back office and personal he managed to avoid the political divisions and get to the real person behind the public facade.
Perfect for an obituary piece on the day the death is announced.
Must say this summary seems quite appropriate, from comedy website the Daily Mash:
"People with no idea who Thatcher was 'ecstatic' that she's dead THOUSANDS of people under 35 are rejoicing at the demise of a woman they once read about...Guardian website regular Tom Booker said “I was really against everything she stood for, whatever that was."
Must say this summary seems quite appropriate, from comedy website the Daily Mash:
"People with no idea who Thatcher was 'ecstatic' that she's dead THOUSANDS of people under 35 are rejoicing at the demise of a woman they once read about...Guardian website regular Tom Booker said “I was really against everything she stood for, whatever that was."
For a Rightwing satire website, the Mash is funny, which is rare for the Right.
I must confess I only see the occasional piece on there, so I had no idea of their political leanings. That might explain their piece on Hugo Chavez mocking guardian readers though I guess.
"...But they can't because they still haven't come clean on all their problems. " Absolutely. The next 3 years will be a hoot in that regard.
One aspect I heard with regard to Mrs Thatcher was that she had an 'iron' rule quite literally, that she never watched any program about herself whatsoever. Quite understandable I guess, given such a divisive figure.
"We need a fundamental rethink. And a rethink based on the UK's own particular set of circumstances, not just the lastest shit idea doing the rounds from the States and adopted by lefties and management consultants ( pre-distribution, urgh ! ) . Some sacred cows will be slaughtered along the way."
We do indeed, in the same way that we need a re-think about our political/constitutional settlement. Absent a strong, principled PM who is prepared to the think in longer terms than the next GE and party politics, God knows how we get either. Maybe we need a metaphorical earthquake or two; maybe a newish political party could emerge into popularity that breaks the cosy consensus and/or part of the UK could decide to go off on its own.
"...the London publisher Allen Lane says the first volume of Thatcher’s authorized biography, Margaret Thatcher: The Authorized Biography, Volume One: Not for Turning, will be published immediately after her funeral.
She cooperated with Charles Moore, the former editor of the Daily Telegraph, on her memoirs, on the condition that they not be published while she was alive. She did not read the manuscript. "
"We need a fundamental rethink. And a rethink based on the UK's own particular set of circumstances, not just the lastest shit idea doing the rounds from the States and adopted by lefties and management consultants ( pre-distribution, urgh ! ) . Some sacred cows will be slaughtered along the way."
We do indeed, in the same way that we need a re-think about or political/constitutional settlement. Absent a strong, principled PM who is prepared to the think in longer terms than the next GE and party politics, God knows how we get either. Maybe we need a metaphorical earthquake or two; maybe a newish political party could emerge into popularity that breaks the cosy consensus and/or part of the UK could decide to go off on its own.
The problem with the lets make all the accountancy look right approach is it never looks at the full costs. So your fictitious digging a hole scenario while sensible doesn't look at the alternative that the guy sits at home and watches Jeremy Kyle instead. Make him dig a hole, evetually he'll get bored and have the motivation to go off and get a real job and he won't pass bad habits down the generations. It's not a profit item it's insurance. As for chopping up the Uk, you know my views, within a few years you'll have an influx moving south and waving their passports while those who stay will be bitter and twisted and blaming you for everything. The costs don't go away they just change, the bill still ends up being paid by the same people. Better recognise it and control the results you want from it. At present the people paying the piper don't get to call the tune.
And on that bombshell I'm off to bed. Chat to you tomorrow. AB.
USDJPY still racing upwards, now at 99.50, one of the best trades ever. But its in a smaller 5th wave now, just when a trend looks like a sure fire bet (and it is long term), I see it getting to around the 101 area, and then we should be good for a deep retracement, which should shake out a lot of the weak long hands. Potentially could get back into the mid to high 80's, before exploding higher again I think. Will be good to play it on the short side once we get to the 101 area IMO.
GBPUSD is playing funny games - still looking to get to the 1.5425 area, weakness has been greater than I expected after the tear higher on Friday. Staying clear from this for the moment.
Looking for the new moon tomorrow to mark reversal, and quite strong moves to the downside on the markets, we've had a nice initial correction higher after the initial sell off, now is the time to follow through on that. Things beginning to stir on European financial stocks:
The Sun front page may be odd but it is not surprising.
Oh yes it is. That's a headline far more akin to the mysterious death of a celeb. You almost expect them to be touting exclusive pics of the 'crime scene'.
. Every front page will have a full blown portrait of Thatcher as its splash. For an editor differentiating your product tomorrow is very difficult.
It's not difficult, it's impossible. Every paper knows to appeal to it's core readership since there is no choice of story. If the Sun believes most of it's readers think the scene of her death down to it being in bed was the most important thing about her death then it's really beginning to lose it.
The Sun have just gone for an angle which they believe will make their paper stand out from the rest and be appealing to their core readership.
It stands out all right because it's so damned odd. Their core readership are unlikely to be totally uniform in their view over her and her legacy but they're hardly going to miss that the bizarre huge focus on the intimate details of her death are spectacularly missing the point and of no consequence.
At the expense of taste maybe but the circulation figures will tell if they were right.
The Sun can get away with tasteless, it's done it enough in the past. But increasingly peculiar if not just plain nutty? Something's up. They've done this a few times now and either Newton Dunn and Kavanagh are past caring or they are are getting some very strange orders.
Circulation is irrelevant. They'll all make out like bandits for the next few days. Even the Sun will but it will be despite this strange, strange headline.
I must be getting sleepy, as I keep seeing references to Jon Snow and think I'm still looking at the Game of Thrones website I have open in another tab. Best to call it a night I think.
The Sun front page may be odd but it is not surprising.
Oh yes it is. That's a headline far more akin to the mysterious death of a celeb. You almost expect them to be touting exclusive pics of the 'crime scene'.
. Every front page will have a full blown portrait of Thatcher as its splash. For an editor differentiating your product tomorrow is very difficult.
It's not difficult, it's impossible. Every paper knows to appeal to it's core readership since there is no choice of story. If the Sun believes most of it's readers think the scene of her death down to it being in bed was the most important thing about her death then it's really beginning to lose it.
The Sun have just gone for an angle which they believe will make their paper stand out from the rest and be appealing to their core readership.
It stands out all right because it's so damned odd. Their core readership are unlikely to be totally uniform in their view over her and her legacy but they're hardly going to miss that the bizarre huge focus on the intimate details of her death are spectacularly missing the point and of no consequence.
At the expense of taste maybe but the circulation figures will tell if they were right.
The Sun can get away with tasteless, it's done it enough in the past. But increasingly peculiar if not just plain nutty? Something's up. They've done this a few times now and either Newton Dunn and Kavanagh are past caring or they are getting some very strange orders.
Circulation is irrelevant. They'll all make out like bandits for the next few days. Even the Sun will but it will be despite this strange, strange headline.
Pork.
You are overanalysing and seeing conspiracy where none exists.
The subject matter is not solid enough to bear the weight of your deliberations.
"Every paper knows to appeal to it's core readership since there is no choice of story. If the Sun believes most of it's readers think the scene of her death down to it being in bed was the most important thing about her death then it's really beginning to lose it."
The Sun's core readership will be split down the middle - including on an individual basis -on the subject. Their headline reflects that. They've got to say something but anything they say that *isn't* irrelevant will get half their readership riled up.
You are overanalysing and seeing conspiracy where none exists.
The subject matter is not solid enough to bear the weight of your deliberations.
Seth O Logue
Best go back to spinning that Lansley will be PM.
This was the headline of a strange conspiracy website not that of a mass market newspaper that has iconic associations with Thatcher. No amount of inept spin can save it from being an embarrassing misstep and just plain nutty effort.
You are overanalysing and seeing conspiracy where none exists.
The subject matter is not solid enough to bear the weight of your deliberations.
This was the headline of a strange conspiracy website not that of a mass market newspaper that has iconic associations with Thatcher. No amount of inept spin can save it from being an embarrassing sstep and just plain nutty effort.
Well, I would be interested in Lucian's views, but I really can't see any merit in debating the issue to its death.
I am not claiming knowledge just expressing opinion.
Labour shortlisted Purcell's former wife for Euro elections. They also shortlisted Ron Davies' former wife in Wales. Payback for such bad marriages?
Not that any of them have an easy root to election (one have an easier selection but then it would depend on Labour overall performance)
It certainly sounds very entertaining stuff Andrea but I can't claim any knowledge of the inner workings that led them to that. Ron Davies, now that was something the Sun could have fun with.
You are overanalysing and seeing conspiracy where none exists.
The subject matter is not solid enough to bear the weight of your deliberations.
Seth O Logue
Best go back to spinning that Lansley will be PM.
This was the headline of a strange conspiracy website not that of a mass market newspaper that has iconic associations with Thatcher. No amount of inept spin can save it from being an embarrassing misstep and just plain nutty effort.
It could just be designed for search engines. Lots of headlines are these days.
Labour shortlisted Purcell's former wife for Euro elections. They also shortlisted Ron Davies' former wife in Wales. Payback for such bad marriages?
Not that any of them have an easy root to election (one have an easier selection but then it would depend on Labour overall performance)
It certainly sounds very entertaining stuff Andrea but I can't claim any knowledge of the inner workings that led them to that. Ron Davies, now that was something the Sun could have fun with.
I was kind of joking/teasing. Both of them are long standing party activists (and the Purcell's one is trade unionist too) and stood for election before (one in Dundee East 2010; the other in Arfon 2011 other than being a Cllr in Bridgend). I don't know if they are good or bad because I have never seen them in action and I don''t know who are the rejected applicants but they have a decent enough pedigree that would justify their presence on the lists.
There's one Scottish candidate who I can' t find anything about...apart form a pic of him and others with La-Mont dressed in Asian traditional clothes!
@AndyJS - it worked both ways - there were plenty of people who voted for her inspite of her policies, because they recognised and liked the enormous great sense of purpose that she espoused.
The first general election which I personally remember - 1987 really summed up Thatcherism, with the extremely marked differences between Scotland and Wales on the one hand (less so the North of England) and the South (particularly London and the South East). Even a simple class based analysis of the time didn't fit - look how well Mrs Thatcher did on former working class council estates in the south, yet some very middle class seats in Scotland fell to Labour in that election eg Edinburgh South, Bearsden.
Even at that high tide, I can remember Mrs Thatcher emphasising that the 3rd term was going to be about regenerating the inner cities again something that is easily forgotten 25 years later.
Well, I would be interested in Lucian's views, but I really can't see any merit in debating the issue to its death.
I am not claiming knowledge just expressing opinion.
As would I. I strongly doubt he'll think it was a winner but I could be wrong.
In the scheme of things, yes, obviously it is not of that much consequence. Though if you had asked Sun editors who Thatcher did have close associations with and worked during her terms I'm fairly certain even they would have made a far better crack at it than that. They would consider this to be a moment to pay tribute in an iconic way and whatever else that headline is it most certainly does not do that.
I have no problem with you expressing your opinion Avery I'm merely bemused that you think this is not surprising or appeals to the core readership.
There's one Scottish candidate who I can' t find anything about...apart form a pic of him and others with La-Mont dressed in Asian traditional clothes!
The mind boggles. She may have recently been a judge on a panel that gave out awards to Asian Women of Scotland, or something along those lines? Sorry I can't be of more help.
It could just be designed for search engines. Lots of headlines are these days.
They are indeed but not in this case I would have thought. Traffic is through the roof but by the time that came out it's not such an issue. I can't explain it other than a really desperate attempt to find a different angle at the expense of commonsense. Looked pretty late to the game too. Wouldn't surprise me if there was some indecision to put that on the cover.
There's one Scottish candidate who I can' t find anything about...apart form a pic of him and others with La-Mont dressed in Asian traditional clothes!
The mind boggles. She may have recently been a judge on a panel that gave out awards to Asian Women of Scotland, or something along those lines? Sorry I can't be of more help.
It's a Muslims Friends of Labour meeting. One of said friends has been shortlisted. But apart from that pic, I can't find anything else about him online. But he's not the only one...there are 2-3 others out of 73 Euro candidates who seem not to have an online mention at all....but I will track them...before 2014! :-)
When is SNP holding the all members ballot to rank their candidates? Just to know when I have to check for results.
You may remember this guy, Al Qaeda big wig who has a habit of releasing videos with quite uncanny timing before some kind of Islamist inspired 'event' occurs.
He's been on about Syria and a new Caliphate. Will his run of well timed videos continue?
I have read here and in other places that people have been talking about a pay-per-view thingy, whereby people have to pay to see more than 20 articles per month (or some such). But there is nothing on the Telegraph website to say so, and I haven't (yet) had anything popping up to demand that I pay for anything. What's going on?
Also, the same Matt cartoon has been visible (the one with a mouse) since 28th March. Is Matt on holiday?
I have read here and in other places that people have been talking about a pay-per-view thingy, whereby people have to pay to see more than 20 articles per month (or some such). But there is nothing on the Telegraph website to say so, and I haven't (yet) had anything popping up to demand that I pay for anything. What's going on?
Also, the same Matt cartoon has been visible (the one with a mouse) since 28th March. Is Matt on holiday?
The Matt cartoon has been updated, is quite a goodun.
it came in for overseas readers a while ago- it appears to be the worst paywall in the world ever.
i rarely read enough articles to reach it but it has happened once in a while. i have more than one browser installed. just using a different one appears to be sufficient to outfox it (perhaps clearing yr cache would also?)
Also, telegraph blogs are not included.
course the best thing , the crossword, has been inaccessible for ever (best thing for thickos like m'self who are not up to the times or guardian one)
Just visiting the UK, but can I be alone in finding the coverage of the death of Margaret Thatcher yet another symptom of the cost cutting that is driving the British media? The wall-to- wall coverage of pre-prepared and mostly predictable and banal commentary has all but drowned out even the most serious international nuclear stand-off in 50 years.
This shroud waving seems excessive.
At the best of times coverage of international issues in the British press (with the honourable exception of the FT and The Economist) is very poor. Now the media overkill on this single story makes them look even more provincial and blinkered- almost laughably so.
The lack of proportion and moderation is actually rather creepy. The death of an 87 year old woman who has suffered poor health - however controversial her career has been- is not precisely a tragic surprise. The media has been long prepared for this event, which is probably why I find the coverage rather clunky and laboured. It certainly eliminates the need for coverage of more complicated or expensive stories.
it came in for overseas readers a while ago- it appears to be the worst paywall in the world ever.
i rarely read enough articles to reach it but it has happened once in a while. i have more than one browser installed. just using a different one appears to be sufficient to outfox it (perhaps clearing yr cache would also?)
You are correct. As an overseas reader I quickly noticed that deleting the cookie solved the viewing problem. Also I use four different browsers (for web dev project testing) and that also made the issue effectively go away.
I subscribe to the DT crossword though, and pay £1.80 over here for the paper version so they are definitely getting their money out of me regardless of the most ineffective firewall ever.
" At the best of times coverage of international issues in the British press (with the honourable exception of the FT and The Economist) is very poor. Now the media overkill on this single story makes them look even more provincial and blinkered- almost laughably so."
Maybe you should check out the foreign media coverage of the event - extensive to a degree suggesting her international reputation was rather bigger than you suggest.
If there was a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, how would you vote?
Stay 36(-2); Leave 43(+2); WNV 7(+2); DK 14(-2)
Imagine the British government under David Cameron renegotiated our relationship with Europe and said that Britain's interests were now protected, and David Cameron recommended that Britain remain a member of the European Union on the new terms. How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue
Thinking about the way the government is cutting spending to reduce the government's deficit, do you think this is... Good or bad for the economy?
Good: 38(+5); Bad 45 (-5); DK 17(+1)
Fairly 30(+2); Unfairly 56(-1); DK 14(-1)
Necessary 59(+3); Unnecessary 29 (-1); DK 12 (-3)
Too Deep 38(-5); Too Shallow 16(+6); About Right 26(0); DK 20(0)
Too Quickly 40(-6); Too Slowly 16(+3); About Right 28(+3); DK 16(0)
Having an impact on your own life, or not having an impact on your own life? Having: 55(-4); Not Having 34(+5) DK 11(-2)
And who do you think is most to blame for the current spending cuts? Con/LD Coalition: 24(-5); Last Labour Gov 36(-1); Both 30(+7); Neither 4(0); DK 7(0)
The most striking front pages are from the Guardian and the Independent. The Sun one is certainly strange. The Times one is just bland. The others are entirely predictable.
What you can say about the Sun FP is that it reports the event as a news story. All the others seem to be roll-outs of long-prepared plans.
If there was a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, how would you vote?
Stay 36(-2); Leave 43(+2); WNV 7(+2); DK 14(-2)
Imagine the British government under David Cameron renegotiated our relationship with Europe and said that Britain's interests were now protected, and David Cameron recommended that Britain remain a member of the European Union on the new terms. How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue
Although I've no evidence my problem with supporters is a suspicion that what mostly holds them together is a fear of the consequences of leaving. And too much of the pro-EU rhetoric seems to emphasise this rather than the positives. Unfortunately the actions of the EU too often simply feed the anti-EU campaign - e.g. the own goal on Cyprus.
I've been largely avoiding the media and Twitter since the news broke as I expected a predictable food-fight and pleasantly surprised to read that there's been some balanced reporting as well as nonsense.
It's a great shame that papers like the DT were compelled to switch off all their comments as they were infested with tasteless trolling about someone who was still warm.
That anyone feels the desire to do this is just beyond me - when Michael Foot died, I expressed admiration for his oratory even if I totally disagreed with what he stood for most of the time, when Edward Heath passed on - I made a point of noting his motivations/his war-time service.
Not speaking ill of the dead is a very good maxim - I hope those silly adolescents and bitter-minded adults in Glasgow and Brixton are suitably ashamed of themselves. What an unpleasant bunch to literally dance on the grave of an elderly long retired and very ill person.
When Arthur Scargill falls off his perch - I'll find something positive to say about him, and feel sorry for his family.
I'm fortunate enough to be on a train journey to Edinburgh, so have been given a free copy of the Times this morning. George Osborne has written a eulogy to Margaret Thatcher which is well worth reading. One passage in particular stands out for me:
"The word "Thatcherite" has become so overused and misapplied that it bears only a partial resemblance to the programme of government she undertook. Indeed, the other day, before my recent Budget, I was told by someone that I needed to deliver a real Thatcherite budget, "like 1981" they said, and slash taxes. I politely pointed out that the famous 1981 Budget had actually increased taxes substantially, in a determined attempt to bring the deficit down and lower interest rates - and that I was trying to do something similar, principally by cutting spending."
People think those on low/middle incomes, those on benefits and themselves are being asked to bear greatest burden of "the cuts".
Among VI, Cable (40), ahead of Osborne (34) and Balls (28) on "who would make best chancellor"
The benefits system works (net) "well": -42 and is too generous (56) vs not generous enough (14) or about right (18) - with all VI saying "too generous", with "around half" (37) genuinely in need, vs "the majority" (32) or "a minority" (18).
Continued strong support for £26k cap (net) +67, and even among Labour VI : +50.
Opinion split on "bedroom tax" 49/44 in favour, while very strong support (net) +70 for market rents for above average earners in social housing.
Means testing pensioner benefits (+20) even a draw (48/50) among the 60+, while the 1% cap split 45/41.
On "who would handle welfare better" - Labour vs current:
I've been largely avoiding the media and Twitter since the news broke as I expected a predictable food-fight and pleasantly surprised to read that there's been some balanced reporting as well as nonsense.
It's a great shame that papers like the DT were compelled to switch off all their comments as they were infested with tasteless trolling about someone who was still warm.
That anyone feels the desire to do this is just beyond me - when Michael Foot died, I expressed admiration for his oratory even if I totally disagreed with what he stood for most of the time, when Edward Heath passed on - I made a point of noting his motivations/his war-time service.
Not speaking ill of the dead is a very good maxim - I hope those silly adolescents and bitter-minded adults in Glasgow and Brixton are suitably ashamed of themselves. What an unpleasant bunch to literally dance on the grave of an elderly long retired and very ill person.
When Arthur Scargill falls off his perch - I'll find something positive to say about him, and feel sorry for his family.
Scargill was like Derek Hatton, a man of his times who preached Socialism, and ended up profiteering. Has the NUM managed to evict Scargill from his home for life in London?
It shows how Maggie shifted debate that Scargill is irrelevant, and that her last visit to number 10 was as a guest of a Labour Prime Minister.
I thought this comment from a Labour Party member journalist was spot on.
RT @bencobley: In so many ways #Thatcher still defines our politics. Much of Left has defined itself against her since, thereby forgetting what it's for.
No doubt it was meant to be an insult, but I rather liked " Iron Lady: Rust in Peace", it sort of suggested someone who had been on the frontline getting a well deserved break.
@Plato."That anyone feels the desire to do this is just beyond me - when Michael Foot died, I expressed admiration for his oratory even if I totally disagreed with what he stood for most of the time, when Edward Heath passed on - I made a point of noting his motivations/his war-time service."
What you can say about the Sun FP is that it reports the event as a news story. All the others seem to be roll-outs of long-prepared plans.
Long prepared for a reason. You won't find one vox pop from yesterday where anyone brings up those kind of details of her death other than to say it was long expected, she was old and frail etc. Still, with a few notable exceptions the PB tories seem content enough with it and not surprised. Maybe that kind of headline was how she wanted to be remembered by after all if they are representative of the tory mainstream.
If there was a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, how would you vote?
Stay 36(-2); Leave 43(+2); WNV 7(+2); DK 14(-2)
Imagine the British government under David Cameron renegotiated our relationship with Europe and said that Britain's interests were now protected, and David Cameron recommended that Britain remain a member of the European Union on the new terms. How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue
That second question and its answer is the most interesting. The potential for fudge, stitch-up and cries of betrayal seems to be vast!
Most interesting indeed. Not least because these "new terms" remain entirely an article of faith/desperate hope for the Cameroons and there is no sign whatsoever of any treaty or negotiations coming any time soon if ever.
The manner of Thatchers political downfall reiterated yesterday and over the next few days might concentrate a few minds on Europe again in the tory party, but not, I fear, in any way likely to promote harmony between the IN and OUT factions.
Having just read the Guardian leader they seem to be unaware of the irony of criticising Margaret Thatcher ("legacy...of public division, private selfishness and a cult of greed") but actually fighting the current political battle entirely on her terms and even using her obituary to do so.
Having just read the Guardian leader they seem to be unaware of the irony of criticising Margaret Thatcher ("legacy...of public division, private selfishness and a cult of greed") but actually fighting the current political battle entirely on her terms and even using her obituary to do so.
Thatch 1, Graun 0.
I thought the most ironic was Gerry Adams knocking Thatcher for hurting people...
Interesting posthumous Hugo Young obit of Thatcher:
"I think by far her greatest virtue, in retrospect, is how little she cared if people liked her. She wanted to win, but did not put much faith in the quick smile. She needed followers, as long as they went in her frequently unpopular directions. This is a political style, an aesthetic even, that has disappeared from view. The machinery of modern political management – polls, consulting, focus groups – is deployed mainly to discover what will make a party and politician better liked, or worse, disliked. Though the Thatcher years could also be called the Saatchi years, reaching a new level of presentational sophistication in the annals of British politics, they weren't about getting the leader liked. Respected, viewed with awe, a conviction politician, but if liking came into it, that was an accident."
"Are you suggesting, that the mines should have been kept open even though nobody wanted to buy their product, and today they wouldn't be allowed to - remember burning coal is evil and causes polar bears to die?"
That's the irony - all those middle class leftists who claim solidarity with the miners (but who would sh1t their pants if they ever had to visit a pit village) supporting 'progressive' energy policies which would (and are) have shut down coal mining in any case.
If mining had continued at the same level then there would now be a mile high coal mountain stretching from Leeds to Leicester.
There was so much coal above ground in 1984 that Scargill's madness was always going to fail - the fact that he started the strike in Spring was really almost irrelevant.
The Steve Bell cartoon in the Guardian is a tribute fitting to the publication.
Can't get excited tbh, it shows how weak the alternative left is. Bell used to do some fun work but now it's just poor attempts to shock in the hope of being relevant. Most of the "alternative" comedians are now fairly well entrenched establishment figures with views as alternative as a National Trust Cream Tea. Adrian Edmondson seems to be transforming into Jack Hargreaves. On a brighter note Ben Elton has emigrated, something to do with money and tax IIRC.
Good grief - R4 has intvs coming up with Ken Livingstone, Ken Clark and Kissinger - how old his he?! I associate him with *shuttle diplomacy* and pandas.
The Steve Bell cartoon in the Guardian is a tribute fitting to the publication.
Most of the "alternative" comedians are now fairly well entrenched establishment figures with views as alternative as a National Trust Cream Tea. Adrian Edmondson seems to be transforming into Jack Hargreaves. On a brighter note Ben Elton has emigrated, something to do with money and tax IIRC.
Jack Hargreaves?! Isn't he dead now? Who is his Peggy? I haven't forgiven The Archers for killing off Nigel - and for how they treated the actor who'd played him for decades.
"Are you suggesting, that the mines should have been kept open even though nobody wanted to buy their product, and today they wouldn't be allowed to - remember burning coal is evil and causes polar bears to die?"
That's the irony - all those middle class leftists who claim solidarity with the miners (but who would sh1t their pants if they ever had to visit a pit village) supporting 'progressive' energy policies which would (and are) have shut down coal mining in any case.
If mining had continued at the same level then there would now be a mile high coal mountain stretching from Leeds to Leicester.
There was so much coal above ground in 1984 that Scargill's madness was always going to fail - the fact that he started the strike in Spring was really almost irrelevant.
The reason coal stocks were high was in anticipation of a strike and to be able to sit it out. You wouldn't normally leave that amount of coal unused, the strike lasted a year and the power supply stayed on.
It always struck me as odd that just short of a majority of Tory MP's voted against her in 1990 when you consider the payroll vote. What they knew and the rest of us didn't was that she'd completely lost her marbles. Watching her last few months on TV it was quite obvious. Even her vindictiveness to her colleagues was symptomatic
Of course, mining output declined more rapidly in the 11 years before Mrs Thatcher became Prime Minister and in the 11 years after Mrs Thatcher became Prime Minister than during Mrs Thatcher's 11 year tenure in office. The idea that Mrs Thatcher was uniquely or even chiefly responsible for closing down the pits is bizarre, but like so much about her, the legend is impervious to facts.
The Steve Bell cartoon in the Guardian is a tribute fitting to the publication.
Most of the "alternative" comedians are now fairly well entrenched establishment figures with views as alternative as a National Trust Cream Tea. Adrian Edmondson seems to be transforming into Jack Hargreaves. On a brighter note Ben Elton has emigrated, something to do with money and tax IIRC.
Jack Hargreaves?! Isn't he dead now? Who is his Peggy? I haven't forgiven The Archers for killing off Nigel - and for how they treated the actor who'd played him for decades.
Yes JH is dead, but Adrian Edmondson does a wonderful pastiche in "Ade in Britain" where he visits WI fairs and looks at yokels doing strange sorts of woodcraft. At least he's doing something different. Most of the rest of the "alternatives" are still living off what they did in the 80s. R4 comedy is pretty dire these days with the best programme still being Im Sorry I Haven't a clue and it's stuffed with old farts like Barry cryer and TBT. I wish somebody would just tell Jeremy Harding he isn't funny any more.
"She was never much loved, though she would have liked to have been. She believed that she had a direct line to the British people, or at least the section of it from which she sprang: the hardworking, law-abiding, self-denying lower middle class. Although she dominated her party and the government machine, her self-image was of an outsider battling with an inert establishment. Evening visitors to the flat above Downing Street would sometimes find her and her husband, Denis, watching the news, and grumbling about the state of the nation, wanting something done.
This outsider's mentality made her admired - worshipped, almost - by members of the Conservative Party and its core supporters. Others felt grudging respect for her immense willpower. Even the satirists who thrived during the Thatcher years unwittingly enhanced the very reputation that they were mocking. One famous Spitting Image sketch showed Thatcher settling down to dinner with a collection of half-witted Cabinet ministers. Approached by the waiter, she ordered raw steak.
RT @alexforrestitv: Ken Clarke reinforces what Major told me yesterday - Thatcher 'liked rows' and they were always rowing. But he still got promoted. #r4today
I've had several bosses that loved a row because they wanted to test my arguments to breaking point and whether I'd stick to my guns. It does take a certain type to work well in such environments mind - and it can create a lot antipathy if it goes too far.
Margaret Thatcher and Winston Churchill both led the Conservative party for 15 years - to do that under times of significant stress must take their toll - especially on ones ability to be at the peak of performance continually. Perhaps it would be wise if like the USA the UK restricted the number of terms a PM could serve to two.
However, there are a lot of similarities between 1979 and 2010. At both times the country's economy was in a mess and needed radical action to make improvements. MT did have the advantage of a majority. Also a lot of entrenched thinking and practices had to be changed for country to survive and grow - and it is very difficult to deconstruct and construct (growth) at the same time.
Of course MT did not have to deal with a booming Asia nor the consequences of a partial devolution, but she was more positive in her actions. For both her and DC, it was obvious that the time required to put HMS UK back on course would require more than two terms and probably three (as it did if you include JM). Will DC have that opportunity or has his lack of decisiveness and perhaps over-democratic decision-making cost him that time?
BTW is there any other PBer who had the privilege of working with MT on occasions?
"She was never much loved, though she would have liked to have been.
Not sure I buy that - as Matthew Parrish once observed, she 'waded on, doing a great many other people's dirty work and not caring if she got the blame'.
With Thatcher's passing I guess this is Livingstone's 'last hurrah' on the news - listening to him simply reinforces how irrelevant he now is.....
Yes JH is dead, but Adrian Edmondson does a wonderful pastiche in "Ade in Britain" where he visits WI fairs and looks at yokels doing strange sorts of woodcraft. At least he's doing something different. Most of the rest of the "alternatives" are still living off what they did in the 80s. R4 comedy is pretty dire these days with the best programme still being Im Sorry I Haven't a clue and it's stuffed with old farts like Barry cryer and TBT. I wish somebody would just tell Jeremy Harding he isn't funny any more.
I used to like Jeremy Hardy but he's become a caricature of himself which is saying something. BC and TBT/Garden are head and shoulders above younger vintages.
That so few have come through and can cope with a prog like ISIHAC speaks volumes. JAM with Julian Clary remains one of my favourites.
It's one of those days when entire leader columns and obituaries are given over to a single subject and/or person. I'm going to try to wade through them all. It feels like an historic moment in time. Where were you when you heard the news of Margaret Thatcher's death?
"Matthew Parrish once observed, she 'waded on, doing a great many other people's dirty work and not caring if she got the blame'.
I'd agree there - there is something about being hated that makes one impervious to stone-throwing. I've done jobs that required me to be very unpopular for short periods of time, and it does affect you in a strange way because being feared makes your position even stronger - provided you're winning.
Only when it goes on for too long do rebellions fester and get out of control. Mrs T became immune to it and was brought down as a result.
Margaret Thatcher is remembered by as the most capable prime minister of the last few decades, with more than a third of the public saying they consider her to be Britain's most capable leader, according to an IPSOS Mori poll for Reuters in 2011.
36% said Margaret Thatcher was Britain's most capable leader 27% said Tony Blair 11% said Gordon Brown 10% said David Cameron 7% said John Major
At the time of her resignation in November 1990, just over half thought her leadership had been good for the country:
52% said they thought her government had been good for the country 40% said her government had been bad for the country
At the time of her resignation, even though the public considered her government to have been good for the country, her popularity dipped considerably, according to the poll.
60% said they disliked her 39% said they liked her
RT @JananGanesh: Thatcher was "a necessary prime minister", says Martin Amis. Outdoes all our punditry with 4 words, which is why he's had the career he has.
In the coming days, YouGov will be revealing in detail the state of her reputation today in the United Kingdom. Meanwhile, the most recent YouGov poll on her legacy, conducted in November 2011, suggests a divided reputation in which her supporters are more numerous than her detractors.
When asked to consider her time as Prime Minister, 50% said she was a "good" or "great" Prime Minister, compared to 33% who said she was either "poor" or "terrible".
As to her impact on the country, 43% said her time as Prime Minister was good for Britain, whereas 38% said it was bad for Britain.
"...The legal battle has raged for years, but finally the former National Union of Mineworkers leader Arthur Scargill, will have to start paying his own London rent.
At the High Court, Mr Justice Underhill said the NUM was no longer obliged to meet the £34,000 annual bill for the £1.5m three-bedroom flat in the Barbican. Mr Scargill has occupied the apartment, rented from the Corporation of London, since June 1982. He retired in 2002.
At the heart of the matter were the precise details agreed at a meeting of the union’s national executive committee in 1982..."
When the current PM calls himself the heir to Blair, I think her influence may be overstated. Looking forward to a proper assessment when the right comes out of mourning.
I think it's worth revisiting a DT leader from just a few days ago in light of Mrs T death. It's even more apposite now given the trolling of the last 24hrs.
"What it has also done, however, is to highlight one of the Left’s most unpleasant characteristics: its insufferable sanctimony. Labour and its cheerleaders in the media have long displayed a proprietorial attitude towards the NHS and the welfare system, howling down anyone who has the temerity to suggest that, 70 years later, they might need fundamental reform.
Yet this emotional attachment to the achievements of the Attlee government has blinded successive Labour leaders, with the notable exception of Tony Blair, to the key lesson of the party’s landslide victory in 1945. In ousting Winston Churchill from office despite his wartime heroics, voters showed one thing above all: they were not to be swayed by sentiment, but by a hard-headed assessment of what was best for them. Attlee offered hope.
The late Philip Gould, one of the key strategists behind New Labour, once observed that parties could only win elections by persuading the electorate that they were planning for the future and not fixated on the past – Labour’s key task, in the words of Hugh Gaitskell, was “to avoid becoming small cliques of isolated doctrine-ridden fanatics, out of touch with the life of our time”. When he became leader, Mr Blair enthusiastically embraced this approach. The traditional support for the restrictive practices of trade unions, and for unreformed public services, was ditched. The constitutional commitment to nationalisation was abandoned; Labour turned its back on high taxes and excessive spending; and it recognised that reform of health and welfare was overdue.
Comments
"People with no idea who Thatcher was 'ecstatic' that she's dead
THOUSANDS of people under 35 are rejoicing at the demise of a woman they once read about...Guardian website regular Tom Booker said “I was really against everything she stood for, whatever that was."
Hopefully her name will not be used as a bogeyman or icon by people who have no real conception of her time in office from now on, but I doubt it.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/people-with-no-idea-who-thatcher-was-ecstatic-that-shes-dead-2013040865066
For a Rightwing satire website, the Mash is funny, which is rare for the Right.
Perfect for an obituary piece on the day the death is announced.
Curiously this was C4 out BBCing the BBC.
One aspect I heard with regard to Mrs Thatcher was that she had an 'iron' rule quite literally, that she never watched any program about herself whatsoever. Quite understandable I guess, given such a divisive figure.
Bernard Ingham is a great raconteur!
"We need a fundamental rethink. And a rethink based on the UK's own particular set of circumstances, not just the lastest shit idea doing the rounds from the States and adopted by lefties and management consultants ( pre-distribution, urgh ! ) . Some sacred cows will be slaughtered along the way."
We do indeed, in the same way that we need a re-think about our political/constitutional settlement. Absent a strong, principled PM who is prepared to the think in longer terms than the next GE and party politics, God knows how we get either. Maybe we need a metaphorical earthquake or two; maybe a newish political party could emerge into popularity that breaks the cosy consensus and/or part of the UK could decide to go off on its own.
And on that bombshell I'm off to bed. Chat to you tomorrow. AB.
GBPUSD is playing funny games - still looking to get to the 1.5425 area, weakness has been greater than I expected after the tear higher on Friday. Staying clear from this for the moment.
Looking for the new moon tomorrow to mark reversal, and quite strong moves to the downside on the markets, we've had a nice initial correction higher after the initial sell off, now is the time to follow through on that. Things beginning to stir on European financial stocks:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-08/european-financials-drop-7-month-lows
and the Japanese government bond market is in a state of flux:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-08/japan-bond-market-halted-second-day-row
All this is classic topping action, non-confirmations all over the place, and risk off beginning to assert itself.
It stands out all right because it's so damned odd. Their core readership are unlikely to be totally uniform in their view over her and her legacy but they're hardly going to miss that the bizarre huge focus on the intimate details of her death are spectacularly missing the point and of no consequence.
The Sun can get away with tasteless, it's done it enough in the past. But increasingly peculiar if not just plain nutty? Something's up. They've done this a few times now and either Newton Dunn and Kavanagh are past caring or they are are getting some very strange orders.
Circulation is irrelevant. They'll all make out like bandits for the next few days. Even the Sun will but it will be despite this strange, strange headline.
RIP
You are overanalysing and seeing conspiracy where none exists.
The subject matter is not solid enough to bear the weight of your deliberations.
The Sun's core readership will be split down the middle - including on an individual basis -on the subject. Their headline reflects that. They've got to say something but anything they say that *isn't* irrelevant will get half their readership riled up.
Best go back to spinning that Lansley will be PM.
This was the headline of a strange conspiracy website not that of a mass market newspaper that has iconic associations with Thatcher. No amount of inept spin can save it from being an embarrassing misstep and just plain nutty effort.
Payback for such bad marriages?
Not that any of them have an easy root to election (one haa an easier selection but then it would depend on Labour overall performance)
I am not claiming knowledge just expressing opinion.
The foreign policy is safe (if the EU aspect is ignored) i.e Falklands, cold war etc. The domestic side will be very 50/50.
There's one Scottish candidate who I can' t find anything about...apart form a pic of him and others with La-Mont dressed in Asian traditional clothes!
The first general election which I personally remember - 1987 really summed up Thatcherism, with the extremely marked differences between Scotland and Wales on the one hand (less so the North of England) and the South (particularly London and the South East). Even a simple class based analysis of the time didn't fit - look how well Mrs Thatcher did on former working class council estates in the south, yet some very middle class seats in Scotland fell to Labour in that election eg Edinburgh South, Bearsden.
Even at that high tide, I can remember Mrs Thatcher emphasising that the 3rd term was going to be about regenerating the inner cities again something that is easily forgotten 25 years later.
Good night all.
In the scheme of things, yes, obviously it is not of that much consequence. Though if you had asked Sun editors who Thatcher did have close associations with and worked during her terms I'm fairly certain even they would have made a far better crack at it than that. They would consider this to be a moment to pay tribute in an iconic way and whatever else that headline is it most certainly does not do that.
I have no problem with you expressing your opinion Avery I'm merely bemused that you think this is not surprising or appeals to the core readership.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exWDguPklGg
1983:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf3NxCCSz3Y
1987:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTPxE8oC0bI
http://kimjongunlookingatthings.tumblr.com/
Martin Amis "She was a necessary Prime Minister"
Charles Moore "The clever people were wrong and the stupid people right"
http://content.yudu.com/Library/A1wqwn/AwazNewspaperMay2012/resources/4.htm
It's a Muslims Friends of Labour meeting. One of said friends has been shortlisted. But apart from that pic, I can't find anything else about him online.
But he's not the only one...there are 2-3 others out of 73 Euro candidates who seem not to have an online mention at all....but I will track them...before 2014! :-)
When is SNP holding the all members ballot to rank their candidates? Just to know when I have to check for results.
You may remember this guy, Al Qaeda big wig who has a habit of releasing videos with quite uncanny timing before some kind of Islamist inspired 'event' occurs.
He's been on about Syria and a new Caliphate. Will his run of well timed videos continue?
Its an interesting intervention.
http://www.thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/04/08/1832551/thatcher-dies/
I have read here and in other places that people have been talking about a pay-per-view thingy, whereby people have to pay to see more than 20 articles per month (or some such). But there is nothing on the Telegraph website to say so, and I haven't (yet) had anything popping up to demand that I pay for anything. What's going on?
Also, the same Matt cartoon has been visible (the one with a mouse) since 28th March. Is Matt on holiday?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/digital-media/9954534/The-Telegraph-subscribe-to-Britains-finest-journalism.html
i rarely read enough articles to reach it but it has happened once in a while. i have more than one browser installed. just using a different one appears to be sufficient to outfox it (perhaps clearing yr cache would also?)
Also, telegraph blogs are not included.
course the best thing , the crossword, has been inaccessible for ever (best thing for thickos like m'self who are not up to the times or guardian one)
This shroud waving seems excessive.
At the best of times coverage of international issues in the British press (with the honourable exception of the FT and The Economist) is very poor. Now the media overkill on this single story makes them look even more provincial and blinkered- almost laughably so.
The lack of proportion and moderation is actually rather creepy. The death of an 87 year old woman who has suffered poor health - however controversial her career has been- is not precisely a tragic surprise. The media has been long prepared for this event, which is probably why I find the coverage rather clunky and laboured. It certainly eliminates the need for coverage of more complicated or expensive stories.
Wow .....the longest one ever to appear in the newspaper's history and by a very considerable extent I would imagine.
I subscribe to the DT crossword though, and pay £1.80 over here for the paper version so they are definitely getting their money out of me regardless of the most ineffective firewall ever.
" At the best of times coverage of international issues in the British press (with the honourable exception of the FT and The Economist) is very poor. Now the media overkill on this single story makes them look even more provincial and blinkered- almost laughably so."
Maybe you should check out the foreign media coverage of the event - extensive to a degree suggesting her international reputation was rather bigger than you suggest.
Must say that I agree that the Sun's front page is distinctly odd, with the wrong tone and angle IMHO. It will have been a carefully judged action.
Then again, I'm not exactly their target market.
@TerryTory Thanks for the potted history of the mine closures in the NE.
If there was a referendum on Britain's
membership of the European Union, how would
you vote?
Stay 36(-2); Leave 43(+2); WNV 7(+2); DK 14(-2)
Imagine the British government under David Cameron renegotiated our relationship with Europe and said that Britain's interests were now protected, and David Cameron recommended that Britain remain a member of the European Union on the new terms.
How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue
Stay: 46(-6); Leave: 31(+3); WNV 6(+1); DK 17 (+3)
Thinking about the way the government is cutting spending to reduce the government's deficit, do you think this is...
Good or bad for the economy?
Good: 38(+5); Bad 45 (-5); DK 17(+1)
Fairly 30(+2); Unfairly 56(-1); DK 14(-1)
Necessary 59(+3); Unnecessary 29 (-1); DK 12 (-3)
Too Deep 38(-5); Too Shallow 16(+6); About Right 26(0); DK 20(0)
Too Quickly 40(-6); Too Slowly 16(+3); About Right 28(+3); DK 16(0)
Having an impact on your own life, or not having an impact on your own life?
Having: 55(-4); Not Having 34(+5) DK 11(-2)
And who do you think is most to blame for the current spending cuts?
Con/LD Coalition: 24(-5); Last Labour Gov 36(-1); Both 30(+7); Neither 4(0); DK 7(0)
What you can say about the Sun FP is that it reports the event as a news story. All the others seem to be roll-outs of long-prepared plans.
Although I've no evidence my problem with supporters is a suspicion that what mostly holds them together is a fear of the consequences of leaving. And too much of the pro-EU rhetoric seems to emphasise this rather than the positives. Unfortunately the actions of the EU too often simply feed the anti-EU campaign - e.g. the own goal on Cyprus.
I've been largely avoiding the media and Twitter since the news broke as I expected a predictable food-fight and pleasantly surprised to read that there's been some balanced reporting as well as nonsense.
It's a great shame that papers like the DT were compelled to switch off all their comments as they were infested with tasteless trolling about someone who was still warm.
That anyone feels the desire to do this is just beyond me - when Michael Foot died, I expressed admiration for his oratory even if I totally disagreed with what he stood for most of the time, when Edward Heath passed on - I made a point of noting his motivations/his war-time service.
Not speaking ill of the dead is a very good maxim - I hope those silly adolescents and bitter-minded adults in Glasgow and Brixton are suitably ashamed of themselves. What an unpleasant bunch to literally dance on the grave of an elderly long retired and very ill person.
When Arthur Scargill falls off his perch - I'll find something positive to say about him, and feel sorry for his family.
"The word "Thatcherite" has become so overused and misapplied that it bears only a partial resemblance to the programme of government she undertook. Indeed, the other day, before my recent Budget, I was told by someone that I needed to deliver a real Thatcherite budget, "like 1981" they said, and slash taxes. I politely pointed out that the famous 1981 Budget had actually increased taxes substantially, in a determined attempt to bring the deficit down and lower interest rates - and that I was trying to do something similar, principally by cutting spending."
The views of a regular R5 broadcaster...
RT @garbosj: Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead.
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wx73df9itw/YouGov-Survey-Sun-on-Sunday-Welfare-and-benefits-130404.pdf
People think those on low/middle incomes, those on benefits and themselves are being asked to bear greatest burden of "the cuts".
Among VI, Cable (40), ahead of Osborne (34) and Balls (28) on "who would make best chancellor"
The benefits system works (net) "well": -42 and is too generous (56) vs not generous enough (14) or about right (18) - with all VI saying "too generous", with "around half" (37) genuinely in need, vs "the majority" (32) or "a minority" (18).
Continued strong support for £26k cap (net) +67, and even among Labour VI : +50.
Opinion split on "bedroom tax" 49/44 in favour, while very strong support (net) +70 for market rents for above average earners in social housing.
Means testing pensioner benefits (+20) even a draw (48/50) among the 60+, while the 1% cap split 45/41.
On "who would handle welfare better" - Labour vs current:
Labour better: 28
Labour worse: 33
About same: 20
It shows how Maggie shifted debate that Scargill is irrelevant, and that her last visit to number 10 was as a guest of a Labour Prime Minister.
I thought this comment from a Labour Party member journalist was spot on.
RT @bencobley: In so many ways #Thatcher still defines our politics. Much of Left has defined itself against her since, thereby forgetting what it's for.
I'm sure we can all learn from your fine example.
The manner of Thatchers political downfall reiterated yesterday and over the next few days might concentrate a few minds on Europe again in the tory party, but not, I fear, in any way likely to promote harmony between the IN and OUT factions.
Thatch 1, Graun 0.
Don't be shy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-death-steve-bell-cartoon
"I think by far her greatest virtue, in retrospect, is how little she cared if people liked her. She wanted to win, but did not put much faith in the quick smile. She needed followers, as long as they went in her frequently unpopular directions. This is a political style, an aesthetic even, that has disappeared from view. The machinery of modern political management – polls, consulting, focus groups – is deployed mainly to discover what will make a party and politician better liked, or worse, disliked. Though the Thatcher years could also be called the Saatchi years, reaching a new level of presentational sophistication in the annals of British politics, they weren't about getting the leader liked. Respected, viewed with awe, a conviction politician, but if liking came into it, that was an accident."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-hugo-young
That's the irony - all those middle class leftists who claim solidarity with the miners (but who would sh1t their pants if they ever had to visit a pit village) supporting 'progressive' energy policies which would (and are) have shut down coal mining in any case.
If mining had continued at the same level then there would now be a mile high coal mountain stretching from Leeds to Leicester.
There was so much coal above ground in 1984 that Scargill's madness was always going to fail - the fact that he started the strike in Spring was really almost irrelevant.
(*not hilarious)
There's what she did and then there's the mythology of what she did.
There's what she did and there's what Major and Blair and Brown went on to do as a consequence.
She did take up the governance of a declining, troubled nation and change it.
Some of the things she did worked well, others less so.
That's inevitable whenever you try to change things.
But it was the act of change itself which was necessary in 1979 just as it is now.
Blair ?
Now he's saying she was pro EU.
Harmony in the tory party over Europe is assured.
"She was never much loved, though she would have liked to have been. She believed that she had a direct line to the British people, or at least the section of it from which she sprang: the hardworking, law-abiding, self-denying lower middle class. Although she dominated her party and the government machine, her self-image was of an outsider battling with an inert establishment. Evening visitors to the flat above Downing Street would sometimes find her and her husband, Denis, watching the news, and grumbling about the state of the nation, wanting something done.
This outsider's mentality made her admired - worshipped, almost - by members of the Conservative Party and its core supporters. Others felt grudging respect for her immense willpower. Even the satirists who thrived during the Thatcher years unwittingly enhanced the very reputation that they were mocking. One famous Spitting Image sketch showed Thatcher settling down to dinner with a collection of half-witted Cabinet ministers. Approached by the waiter, she ordered raw steak.
"And what about the vegetables?" she is asked, to which she replied: "They'll have the same." Jokes such as this only reinforced her image as a strong leader. She was also lucky in the choice of enemies that fate threw in her path - the Kremlin, Argentina's General Galtieri, and the miners' leader, Arthur Scargill, all unwittingly helped her from success to success... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/margaret-thatcher-obituary-the-most-divisive-political-leader-of-modern-times-8564559.html
I've had several bosses that loved a row because they wanted to test my arguments to breaking point and whether I'd stick to my guns. It does take a certain type to work well in such environments mind - and it can create a lot antipathy if it goes too far.
well you wouldn't expect them to come up with a new thought would you ?
However, there are a lot of similarities between 1979 and 2010. At both times the country's economy was in a mess and needed radical action to make improvements. MT did have the advantage of a majority. Also a lot of entrenched thinking and practices had to be changed for country to survive and grow - and it is very difficult to deconstruct and construct (growth) at the same time.
Of course MT did not have to deal with a booming Asia nor the consequences of a partial devolution, but she was more positive in her actions. For both her and DC, it was obvious that the time required to put HMS UK back on course would require more than two terms and probably three (as it did if you include JM). Will DC have that opportunity or has his lack of decisiveness and perhaps over-democratic decision-making cost him that time?
BTW is there any other PBer who had the privilege of working with MT on occasions?
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3193/the_left_hated_thatcher_because_she_thrashed_them
With Thatcher's passing I guess this is Livingstone's 'last hurrah' on the news - listening to him simply reinforces how irrelevant he now is.....
That so few have come through and can cope with a prog like ISIHAC speaks volumes. JAM with Julian Clary remains one of my favourites.
"Matthew Parrish once observed, she 'waded on, doing a great many other people's dirty work and not caring if she got the blame'.
I'd agree there - there is something about being hated that makes one impervious to stone-throwing. I've done jobs that required me to be very unpopular for short periods of time, and it does affect you in a strange way because being feared makes your position even stronger - provided you're winning.
Only when it goes on for too long do rebellions fester and get out of control. Mrs T became immune to it and was brought down as a result.
Margaret Thatcher is remembered by as the most capable prime minister of the last few decades, with more than a third of the public saying they consider her to be Britain's most capable leader, according to an IPSOS Mori poll for Reuters in 2011.
36% said Margaret Thatcher was Britain's most capable leader
27% said Tony Blair
11% said Gordon Brown
10% said David Cameron
7% said John Major
At the time of her resignation in November 1990, just over half thought her leadership had been good for the country:
52% said they thought her government had been good for the country
40% said her government had been bad for the country
At the time of her resignation, even though the public considered her government to have been good for the country, her popularity dipped considerably, according to the poll.
60% said they disliked her
39% said they liked her
"I never voted for Tony Blair. Couldn't stand the man. But there wasn't a lot of manufacturing base left by the time he took over."
Manufacturing was at an all time high when Blair became PM and manufacturing employment had increased for 5 straight years at that time.
As I said the mythology of Thatcher and Thatcherism is often very different to what the reality was.
As any Sunderland car worker would testify.
From YouGov:
In the coming days, YouGov will be revealing in detail the state of her reputation today in the United Kingdom. Meanwhile, the most recent YouGov poll on her legacy, conducted in November 2011, suggests a divided reputation in which her supporters are more numerous than her detractors.
When asked to consider her time as Prime Minister, 50% said she was a "good" or "great" Prime Minister, compared to 33% who said she was either "poor" or "terrible".
As to her impact on the country, 43% said her time as Prime Minister was good for Britain, whereas 38% said it was bad for Britain.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/arthur-scargill-ordered-to-pay-rent-as-he-loses-fight-to-have-union-pay-for-london-flat-for-life-8428774.html
"...The legal battle has raged for years, but finally the former National Union of Mineworkers leader Arthur Scargill, will have to start paying his own London rent.
At the High Court, Mr Justice Underhill said the NUM was no longer obliged to meet the £34,000 annual bill for the £1.5m three-bedroom flat in the Barbican. Mr Scargill has occupied the apartment, rented from the Corporation of London, since June 1982. He retired in 2002.
At the heart of the matter were the precise details agreed at a meeting of the union’s national executive committee in 1982..."
"What it has also done, however, is to highlight one of the Left’s most unpleasant characteristics: its insufferable sanctimony. Labour and its cheerleaders in the media have long displayed a proprietorial attitude towards the NHS and the welfare system, howling down anyone who has the temerity to suggest that, 70 years later, they might need fundamental reform.
Yet this emotional attachment to the achievements of the Attlee government has blinded successive Labour leaders, with the notable exception of Tony Blair, to the key lesson of the party’s landslide victory in 1945. In ousting Winston Churchill from office despite his wartime heroics, voters showed one thing above all: they were not to be swayed by sentiment, but by a hard-headed assessment of what was best for them. Attlee offered hope.
The late Philip Gould, one of the key strategists behind New Labour, once observed that parties could only win elections by persuading the electorate that they were planning for the future and not fixated on the past – Labour’s key task, in the words of Hugh Gaitskell, was “to avoid becoming small cliques of isolated doctrine-ridden fanatics, out of touch with the life of our time”. When he became leader, Mr Blair enthusiastically embraced this approach. The traditional support for the restrictive practices of trade unions, and for unreformed public services, was ditched. The constitutional commitment to nationalisation was abandoned; Labour turned its back on high taxes and excessive spending; and it recognised that reform of health and welfare was overdue.
The government of 1997-2010 failed to fulfil most of its promises largely because Mr Blair entrusted their delivery to Gordon Brown, who was ideologically locked into the party’s past. And so, too, is the current leadership..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/9974362/The-Labour-Party-is-trapped-in-the-past.html