This Week in the United Kingdom - Election of Margaret Thatcher

This Week's Historical Theme: The United Kingdom

 

3 May 1979

A significant event throughout the history of the United Kingdom that occurred in May was the election of Margaret Thatcher. Her rise to power started in 1959 when she was elected to Parliament as Conservative MP for Finchley. During the 60s she rose rapidly through the party ranks and in 1970, under Conservative PM Edward Heath, she became Secretary of State for Education and Science. After the Labour Party returned to power in 1974, she replaced Edward Heath as leader of the Conservative Party. The May 3 1979 general election gave Thatcher a majority in Parliament and she became Britain's first female Prime Minister.

She served as Prime Minster from 1979 to 1990, with her 11-year tenure characterised by the privatisation of national industries; cutbacks to government expenditure; and reducing the rights of trade unions. A landmark of her career was the decisive British victory in the 1982 Falkland War with Argentina. This contributed to her image as the "Iron Lady" as she cultivated a reputation for her hard-line politics. Coming to the end of her tenure in 1990, she failed to receive a majority in the Conservative Party's annual vote to select a leader. She subsequently resigned and was made a baroness in 1993. Her three consecutive terms in office marked the longest continuous tenure of a British PM since 1870.

Want to find out more about Margaret Thatcher's political career? Click here for more information, or here for more about the Falkland War.

Theresa May and Grammar Schools

On 11th July 2016 Theresa May took over as Prime minister, due to David Cameron’s resignation. Having been educated at a grammar school herself, May has expressed her desire to reintroduce grammar schools in the UK.

On 9th September, May announced her plans to reintroduce grammar schools and her view that schools should have the right to choose pupils based on ability. The prime minister suggested in her plan schools becoming much more selective and she thinks the ban has been in place far too long, causing a lot of controversy amongst the public. There would be £50m of new funding put towards this plan.

The chief inspector of Ofsted thinks May’s plans will `undo years of progress’ and the labour party thinks the changes will `entrench inequality’. One of the biggest worries is that poorer pupils are under-represented in grammar schools so May declared that new and expanding grammar schools will take quotas of poor pupils or grammar schools will help run other schools to help poorer students get the same opportunities.

The prime minster stated that we are `sacrificing children's potential because of dogma and ideology’ and argues that schools are already selected on house price and wealth. Additionally specialist disciplines such as music and sport can be the basis of selection so the same approach should be taken for those who are academically gifted. The plans will also include the ability for bright children to join grammar schools, not just at 11, but at 14 and 16 as well, so all age groups receive the same opportunities.

Most people assumed an Act of Parliament would be needed to end the current ban introduced by Labour in 1998, however, this is not necessary. To ensure the system is fair, a meeting will take place on how to make the tests more inclusive so it is not limited to families who can pay for tutoring in order to pass the test. Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party, said his party would block these proposals to end the ban and they believe it is ` dividing children on the basis of their perceived ability at the age of 11’.

GC

Meeting Nicky Morgan

At Bridge Club this morning, Nicky Morgan and Rebekah Brooks joined a bright array of knowledgeable women to discuss the ever-present issue of gender equality, principally in politics, and the devastating effect open sexism in the media has on it.

Nicky, who joined the conservative party at the age of 16 and has since become the Secretary of State for education and Minister for Women and Equalities in 2014, began by declaring how politics is about people, how they live and what makes them tick. Women can be just as successful, if not better, at sussing these things out- naturally we have great empathy and therefore flourish in building up relationships within constituencies.  Yet inequality is still unmistakable in the majority of professions nowadays, although Nicky wishes to change this.

Unsurprisingly, juggling motherhood and a significant role in politics means Nicky and her family face frequent difficulties in everyday life. Nevertheless, this doesn’t prevent her from prospering in her career, despite the fact she’s a woman working in a cabinet of 75% males. In saying this, women can’t always assume the role of the victims; we must help ourselves by pushing our limits rather than accepting second best. It’s not solely up to men to eradicate sexism- we can’t simply wait for it to fade; we must be the devices used to rub it out.  Nicky then explained how, when asked to apply for a chief position, it’s part of women’s nature to presume they don’t acquire the desired qualities to fulfil that role. Whilst men would view having 3 out of 10 characteristics in an ‘at least I have 3’ manner, women would steer in the opposite direction, fretting about the 7 they lack. Women need to be more poised and assertive in themselves and their abilities, highlighting the importance of inspirational women role models, such as Nicky Morgan, in today’s society.

Moreover, Parliament needs to reflect the country they are trying to represent, hence why David Cameron is adamant in aiming for both one third of the cabinet to be female by the end of his office, and to completely eliminate the general pay gap in the next generation. The question is how do women rise to, and remain on an equal level to men? Understandably, women can’t run the country without men, but Nicky expressed the solution as involving knitting more women into the agenda. Gone are the days when men would only help men and women only helped women; integration is key when it comes to boosting equality in politics and ultimately boosting equality in aspects of life.

Rebekah Brooks, CEO of News International, then raised the debate is the media sexist, to which Nicky modestly replied with ‘inevitably’, summing it all up. This needs to change. After being editor of The News of The World when illegal phone hacking was carried out, Rebekah’s bore a very turbulent past with the media, and voiced her belief that elements of what she’s undergone has been due to her gender. As a result, a lot of media coverage puts women off going into politics, especially as we’re more conscious of our appearance and intelligence than men, thus sexist media undoubtedly disheartens many budding women politicians. Sadly, sexism is deep-rooted in all forms of media, including online and broadcasting- there seems to be no escaping it. For this reason, Nicky cited the need for a much more systematic approach to spotting young talent and creating pathways to guide the youth, so skill isn’t clouded by fear of bigotry.

From Nicky’s point of view, the lack of women in the hierarchy of politics is not down to the public. In fact, local women really love to see women in their area taking charge in politics- there’s clearly no issue with public appetite. Conversely, the Tories admittedly need to work on parties that select infrequently. This may contribute to the end goal of increasing the number of able women with authority in politics as soon as possible.

NT

London Mayoral Hustings

As the London mayoral election approaches it is time for each of the parties to choose who their candidate will be. I recently went along to one of these hustings to see the Conservative candidates that could become mayor. Each of the candidates were surprisingly different despite the obvious crossovers in policies. The four candidates that had been shortlisted for the mayoral candidate were Zac Goldsmith, Syed Kamall, Andrew Boff and Stephen Greenhalgh. Each of them was different with Andrew Boff towards the right of the Conservative spectrum and Zac Goldsmith the clear favourite amongst the supporters. It was interesting to look at how each of them prepared themselves as this was not a normal hustings. Each of the four candidates had a 3 minute opening then a 15 minute interview with the same questions asked to each one. Although it did not supply as much excitement as the usual kind of hustings it allowed the audience to come up with their own conclusion on the performance of each candidate.

Stephen Greenhalgh was the first of the four candidates to speak and his track record put him forward as a likely successor to Boris Johnson. He has previously worked as deputy mayor so his experience in the sector is well justified. However, his nerves were clear to see and the least competent speaker of them all. He may be a very good politician but not necessarily the best at being the front man for the Conservatives in London. Despite this he did make some excellent points on the current housing crisis with a suggestion towards using GLA and TfL land for a “right to build” scheme. This was much like the plans of the other three candidates. Each of them recognised that housing is a big issue to Londoners and that at least 40,000 homes need to be built every year with great success than previous years.

Andrew Boff was the next candidate out of the green room and gave an impression much like the new labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Andrew went for a more casual look with a non-matching suit without tie in order to appear more relaxed. To myself and a few around me it just seemed scruffy. However his message was opposite to Corbyn and a very right wing candidate. In looking at terrorism and how to combat it in London Boff wishes to knock down unused administrative buildings and reinvest in the policing system. He believes that if the police are asking for more resources such as guns then they should be given it automatically. I understand that he means if the police need something for their jobs then they should get it but his point seemed quite controversial. Each candidate seemed to suggest an increase in policemen on the beat but failed to give statistics and goals. Zac Goldsmith and Syed Kamall suggested that London was a target for terrorists and that we need to start from the grassroots to prevent citizens of London from going abroad to support terrorist groups.

Zac Goldsmith was the obvious favourite for those in the room as the introduction showed. His policy against another runway at Heathrow has made him popular with the green party as well as those in the local area who have to live with the noise of the planes from Heathrow. Goldsmith has a clear popularity with those in his constituency as well with his majority increasing in the last election as well as a majority in a referendum that allowed him to become a candidate for mayor. Air pollution was one of the main topics that appeared and his statement was that the congestion charge does not help the situation with air pollution as it just simply reduces congestion, so an increase in price would not help those around. It would instead lead to more people becoming frustrated with the current Government.

Finally Syed Kamall enthused with energy appeared on stage to round off the night. He was the candidate that surprised me the most, his passion was sincere and his points unique and valid. He suggested that crowdfunding could help to expand cross rail so that those who would potentially use it can invest to help to make it happen faster. Furthermore he would introduce a referendum on a Thames Estuary airport to make flying easy for London businessmen and residents. What struck me most was his plans on the environment. He courteously complimented Boris Johnsons’ work on an ultra-green zone as the other candidates did throughout their interviews. However, he mentioned the use of Zip Cars to reduce emissions as well as the improvement of electric car facilities. This consisted of an introduction of standard car batteries which could be swapped at charging points so that an empty battery could be placed in and a full one taken away.

Each of the candidates clearly want to be the next mayor of London and their desire for that comes through. One aspect that I did not expect was the criticism of the Labour candidate Sadiq Khan whom they each called a machine politician and I certainly did not expect this towards all Conservative voters. All Conservative party members now have the opportunity to vote for their favourite candidate and hopefully the results will be appearing in the coming weeks. I don’t usually look into the short list for each party but it was quite interesting to see the different choices for each party and I very much look forward to the debates between parties once all the candidates are chosen.

SB

This article was written before Zack Goldsmith's selection as the Conservative candidate.

Well isn't that strange...

    I think I probably should begin ‘Lib-Dem’ style, with an apology. I have been woefully absent from your computer screens, and honestly I struggle to imagine how you have all survived. But if some of you have made it through those bitter days free of nonsensical drivel, I am back. You don't need to resort to dramatic measures to hear nonsense. So put down that copy of Twilight, turn off Jeremy Kyle and welcome to the world again.
      Now really this article is something that, strangely, hasn't got a lot of press recently, though the BBC has got an article on their website. But then again, what do you say about something that disappears? Do we speak in hushed voices of the fond memories that we had, before laying down a rose and moving on, one tear rolling dramatically down our cheeks? Maybe there should be an international day of mourning, for The Lost Speeches of the Conservatives. Because, as the more clued-up of you may know (or just those who watch Have I Got News for You) several of the Conservatives speeches outlining policies and promises have vanished in an Orwellian-style purge. I mean, when I heard this I was genuinely shocked. Deleting speeches and hiding them in a little corner of the internet unknown to anyone? Sounds more '1984' than Cameron’s England. And if we're totally honest (which I always try to be), this is all a little Men in Black.
       The technology people, which we will now call them for the sake of my brain, have done some technology stuff (this is not a technology blog, so go with it) and found out some technological things. And as far as I can understand them, they are as follows: the records have been removed from the 'Internet Archive', which aims to keep a record of all documentation on the internet in order to preserve Free Speech (take note, Mr Cameron), and hidden the speeches in a little corner of the internet, the size of the 'Things Joey Essex knows' list. There's also some techy stuff about a 'robots.txt.' file which the more intelligent of you can try to decipher, but there’s the basics as I understand them.
       'So', I hear you say,' these Conservatives can’t have just left this issue, they must have had a response!'. Right you are, public, right you are. They did, and that was to tell the public, quite convincingly that ''changes [to the website] allow people to quickly and easily access the most important information we provide - how we are clearing up Labour's economic mess, taking the difficult decisions and standing up for hardworking people'', although I assume that if you check for that it will have gone in a few years...
    So there we are. Things They Don't Want You To Know. But hey, unfortunately for you, you know me. And I'm a little obsessed with free speech. Because its important. Anyway, hoped this little bit of drivel brightened this winter day for you, and I won't be away for long!

E.C

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24924185
Heres the link, by the way, in case you want to hear how this is written by someone who knows what they're doing!

Is Obama a Tory?

Is Obama a Tory? This article debates that question.

Zac Goldsmith - An Insider's View

One of Nonsuch HP's correspondents recently attended a meeting between Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith and his local constituents. The meeting raised some fascinating issues, with his attitude towards referendums and the use of Parliament being of particular interest to AS Politics students. Many thanks for BM for providing this - here is her report...

Zac Goldsmith, Tory MP for Richmond Park & North Kingston, speaks about flaws in the UK’s democratic system.
On Thursday 3rd February, Zac Goldsmith came to talk to his constituents at a local church. I along with around 30 others attended to pose questions and hear the MP discuss with us important issues that affected our lives. Much of the hour long meeting was taken up discussing local issues such as the Kingston bingo hall being turned into a night club, and the new crime map system which shows levels of crime around the constituency. However as well as this, several important national issues were brought up. The privatisation of forests is a very conscientious issue, which many conservatives and liberal democrats in general discussion seemed opposed to. However when the time came for the vote, only 6 LibDem/Tory MPs voted against, Zac Goldsmith being one of them.
This led onto the point which he admirably raised about the dysfunctional nature of parliament, where MPs have lost the ability to think for themselves, being voted in and then being ‘lobotomised’ to follow the orders of those above them. As well as this, amendments offered by backbenchers are seen as being an act of hostility, leading to them generally being ignored. Zac considers Labour under Ed Miliband as being an ineffective opposition as they do not appear to be making relevant points that may actually achieve something and as a result the government is not being held to account. The fact that parliament is no longer effectively doing this has caused it in many ways to be ‘broken’.
Zac Goldsmith also discussed with us the referendum on AV, deeming it to be a waste of time, and a distraction from what the government should really be focussing on. He claims that AV would just cause a reshuffle of seats here and there, but nothing major would come from it. And what the government should instead be pushing is the idea of recalling MPs, which at the beginning seemed to be a key policy, but has appeared to have lost some vigour. This, in Zac’s view would be much more beneficial to the people, as some of the power would be given back to them. Zac also agrees that more people need to participate in elections, and this could be done through the use of referendums, creating a more direct democracy. Countries such as Switzerland are criticised for using them too much, but at least the people are having their say. This would engage people in politics as they would feel involved, as just having one vote every five or so years is not substantial.
The talk then moved to finances, with bankers and the richest of the countries being criticized for their cunning methods of paying as little tax as possible. In Goldsmith’s view, the figures that are being thrown around in the media are largely guesses and wild assumptions, and there is no real way of knowing how big the issue is. As well as this he raises the important issue that if the taxes are raised too high for the rich, it would encourage this behaviour of using offshore banks to store money, or alternatively, the rich person in question could just up and leave to another country where the tax is far lower. There is a fine line, and the government have to be very careful not to cross this line, the lower the tax, the more likely that the more elite of society are to pay it.

PS: For further Goldsmith updates, here is a link to his blog.

The ‘Brokeback Coalition’, is it for real?

When the Conservative party formed a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats after the May 2010 election failed to supply Tories with their much desired majority, I don’t think any of us quite expected the public ‘bromance’ between David Cameron and Nick Clegg which blossomed almost immediately afterwards. Despite casually insulting each other and their party’s policies throughout the election campaign, with Cameron once calling Clegg his ‘favourite joke’, especially on the three live television debates, Cameron and Clegg appeared to immediately put the past behind them and get stuck in on the small matter of running the country.

Although in the public interest this may be, some, including myself may perceive this as a desperate move by the power starved Lib Dem’s, to seize what may be their first and last opportunity to be in power and influence UK government policy. Is the friendship between our Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister built to last, or is it just a ‘friends with benefits’ deal, which is liable to break down when either party’s main principles are significantly compromised? So far, there is no sign of this happening, as the recent bill for the rise in the university tuition fee cap to £9000 has shown that the Lib Dem’s are more than willing to sacrifice their dignity and public support to stay on amicable terms with their coalition partners.

We will never know the exact words exchanged back in May 2010, when Cameron and Clegg sealed the deal and decided to commit to forming first coalition government in 70 years, but one can guess that Cameron’s suggestions were more than likely compromising to the majority of Lib Dem policies. Despite this, it is apparent that the Lib Dem’s are managing to ‘water down’ some of the more right wing policies of the original Conservative manifesto, such as raising the inheritance tax threshold to £1m, which has now been put back, and they will likely hold a referendum on switching to the AV voting system, which was previously opposed by the Tories.

Shunning the criticisms from former shadow home secretary David Davis that this ‘Brokeback Coalition’ is not in the public interest, Cameron and Clegg insist that the phrase does not capture the true spirit of the coalition which is “two separate parties led by two separate leaders, recognising that this country is facing some very difficult short-term challenges”. Only time will tell if this so called ‘sprit’ and enthusiasm for reigniting our economy and bettering our country as a whole can last a full parliamentary term, but so far things are certainly looking promising. There is no doubt in mind my however, that come the next election, whenever that may be, that the popularity of the Liberal Democrats will not compare to that seen in the run up to the 2010 election.

Many thanks to AW for this post.

By-election

A victory for Labour? Relief for the Lib Dems? Concern for the Conservatives? What do you think the Oldham East & Saddleworth by-election last night shows and what do you think it will mean for the May elections?
Have a look at the reporting of the result on the BBC, Guardian and Telegraph (also a nice feature on most influential politicians), and make up your own mind.

The Economist this week

A definite must-read this week as there are a number of excellent articles which will help with the exams. First of all, there is analysis of the new coalition government with comparisons of the new leaders in the British section. Also, there is a good comparison of the parties' promises on political reform as well as thoughts on the Labour Party's leadership contest. On the USA, there are articles on Elena Kagan, the climate-change bill and Utah's primary which has resulted in another moderate Republican being dropped by the party.

The Deal

Here is the full text of the deal made between the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives, plus a guide to the main policies of the coalition. Let us know your thoughts on this, and Clegg and Cameron's conference in the Downing Street garden yesterday.

Philippa Stroud and Iain Duncan Smith Visit TODAY

Philippa Stroud, the Conservative Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Sutton & Cheam is coming in to school today. She will be answering any questions you may have about Conservative party policy, local issues or her personally, in the Library at 1.15pm. All welcome, bring your lunch and lots of questions!

Iain Duncan Smith MP - the ex-Conservative party leader (2001-3) - is accompanying her. He is Chairman of the Centre for Social Justice where Philippa is Executive Director and MP for Chingford and Wood Green in Essex. Please welcome him and ask him any questions as well. Here is his website and a recent article about his interest in social justice here.

UPDATE: Sadly Ian Duncan-Smith was too busy in his constituency to come - we hope that he will be able to visit Nonsuch in the future and share his views. Here is a review of Mrs Stroud's visit from Nonsuch HP's reporter CM:

On Tuesday 20th March Philippa Stroud, the Conservative Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Sutton and Cheam, visited Nonsuch again. Philippa answered questions on a wide range of issues, from economic policies to the prospect of a hung parliament to gay rights. Of course, Nonsuch’s favourite question (‘what’s your opinion on grammar schools?’) was answered very tactfully, joking that we might ‘mob’ her if she answered unfavourably. We’re not that bad!
Overall it was a very interesting hour, with a fantastic turnout. We look forward to listening to what Kathy Allen, the Labour Candidate, and Paul Burstow, current Lib Dem MP, have to say on similar issues when they visit on Tuesday 27th and Thursday 29th respectively.

Philippa Stroud Visit

Philippa Stroud, the Conservative Prospective Parliamentary Candidate (PPC) for Sutton & Cheam, is coming to Nonsuch on Tuesday.
She is currently the Executive Director for Social Justice, a right wing think tank and lives close by in Sutton. She has had a fascinating career so far, working with drug addicts in Hong Kong and developing policy on social issues. She has three teenage children and her husband is a Church leader. See her website here and an article today about her in The Times here as the 'new face' in Tory politics.
Come along to hear her speak and ask her questions on Tuesday 26 January at 1.20pm in the library.

Are the Tories wobbling?

This article from the Guardian suggests that the Tories electoral campaign may have hit trouble. Criticisms of David Cameron's background and political inconsistency appear to have hit home with some voters, and a recent opinion poll cut the Conservative lead to six points. If voting behaviour remained like this on election day it could quite likely lead to a hung parliament. What's your opinion of the current state of play between the main parties?

All-women shortlists for the Conservatives?

David Cameron has suggested that he might be prepared now to countenance all-women shortlists for Conservative candidates from January, using it as a threat to recalcitrant Conservative associations. But is this a good idea? Does it help or hinder women? Read Nick Robinson's take here and a debate on the Daily Politics here.

25th anniversary of conference bomb

Party Conferences were transformed 25 years ago when the Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, was nearly killed by an IRA bomb. Five people were killed, including one MP, and security was from then on not taken for granted. Read more about this event here.

Conservatives and History Teaching

As we hope you've noticed, the blogs we feature on the right hand side of this page are an excellent source of information and content on what is happening in the world of history and politics. Politics Etc (Sutton Grammar School's Blog) has discovered that grassroots Conservatives consider the "proper teaching of British history" to be their 2nd highest priority. The author has a good grumble about this as the vast majority of Key Stage 3 teaching is already devoted to British history, but it does suggest that core Tory values may not have moved as far as David Cameron may have hoped. Here is a direct link to the report and more from the Conservative Home Page on their views on history teaching (by the MP for Bognor Regis).

PS: The Conservatives are keen to promote the new History section of their website, so here it is.