• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

What exactly did Thatcher do?

Sad Sprinter

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2017
Messages
1,829
Location
Way on down South London town
90s baby here so go easy on me. Not for or against Thatcher in any way, but I want to know exactly what Thatcher did to the social fabric of this country that causes people to mourn the past Britain so much. When people do look at the past in the UK, they almost always look back at an era no later than 1985, which is when Thatcherism I think really got into full swing. My best guess as a Millennial is that the pre-Thatcher economy, which was less dynamic, at least gave a perception of stability to the average person because, whilst there wasn't a huge amount of wealth in the country, there was just about enough for most people and the economic model was openly challenged by the political orthodoxy. My understanding is that neoliberal leaders (Thatcher/Blair etc) not only openly challenged and decried the pre-Thatcher Britain, but actively dismantled a system that Brought some meaning and understanding to post-war Britain with a focus of dynamism and wealth creation over stability and community.

If anyone can explain it better I would appreciate it, just HOW the country changed which was so lamentable. And how after all these years there's such a vocal backlash to her time in government yet she somehow still won 3 elections with handsome majorities, and a fourth was won by her successor. It seems paradoxical that she and her party seemed to get four endorsements from the public to continue what was a package of unwanted reforms.

Also interesting how there seems to be less of a lament in the US of the loss of pre-Reagan America.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

jfollows

Established Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
5,847
Location
Wilmslow
The 1960s and 1970s saw "consensus politics" in a way because although we had Labour and Conservative governments, they weren't all that different in the end.
Thatcher went against this and stood against Heath for leader, and presented an alternative view for which people voted in 1979, then stuck to her convictions against the consensus politics after that.
So more significant changes came about as a result than had been the case previously. I came to support her objectives in time, and it was around the time I was able to vote.
You could say that today's older supporters of the Conservatives were once younger supporters of Thatcher, but I think in the most part they're deluded by rose-tinted memories.

The reforms weren't unwanted. Some think they were necessary. Some sort of change was necessary, I think, but the changes were hard on some people. Whether or not we were a better society at the end of it is a question for others to answer I guess.
 

TheSmiths82

Member
Joined
29 Jun 2023
Messages
233
Location
Manchester
The worst thing she did was allow social housing to be sold off. While people (including my own family) benefited in the short term, we now have a legacy of the lack of cheap affordable housing. Too many peoples incomes are now spent on rent or mortgages which effects the wider economy as there is less money to go round.

She also closed a lot of mines, which I think was probably necessary in the long term but there wasn't enough support for those people who have lost their jobs and entire towns were ruined. I think it was too much too soon. She privatised British Leyland which I think was necessary as the tax payer could not continue to support a failing car company. In the end the company lasted less than 20 years from the date it was privatised. I think she also privatised a lot of the utility companies but I think most of that happened under John Major's government.

I grew up in the 80's but was too young to understand politics or even know who the prime minister was. The first prime minister I remember properly was John Major. In many ways New Labour would continue the privatisation that started under Thatcher but they did a lot of good things too. I admit I am biased though as I consider myself left wing and if I was 15 years older I probably would have been one of those going to marches against her ideas.
 

Mcv378

Member
Joined
31 Dec 2023
Messages
36
Location
London
Selling off council houses, which is why we have a massive housing shortage now.

The despicable Section 28, which ruined many lives.

Squandering North Sea Oil money, look how well Norway did in comparison to the UK.....


A song from Alexei Sayle also makes some points too:

 

joebassman

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2020
Messages
166
Location
Stowupland
She closed a lot of psychiatric hospitals for the care in the community scheme. In theory perhaps a great idea, in reality it meant a large amount of severely mentally unwell and unstable people being left to fend for themselves and left in the care of their family.

The promsied help never matarlised.

One of the psychiatric hospitals that was closed was Claybury. Claybury helped quite a few people by creating a community atmosphere and encouraging many of the residents to work in the gardens.

I know of one lady who had suffered severe psychosis who feels her life was saved by the programmes in Claybury.

The hospital is now expensive housing.

There was the stopping of free milk in schools as well.
 

TheSmiths82

Member
Joined
29 Jun 2023
Messages
233
Location
Manchester
I also forgot to mention one her biggest ideas which was one of the reasons that lead to her downfall. She introduced a poll tax which every adult in the UK would have to pay regardless of their income or where they lived. It was grossly unfair as poorer adults living in a shared house would have to pay the same amount as a rich person living alone in a mansion - I might be wrong about the details so please correct me.

This was so unpopular that there were riots about it. It was replaced with the council tax we know today which is a much fairer system.
 

joebassman

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2020
Messages
166
Location
Stowupland
I also forgot to mention one her biggest ideas which was one of the reasons that lead to her downfall. She introduced a poll tax which every adult in the UK would have to pay regardless of their income or where they lived. It was grossly unfair as poorer adults living in a shared house would have to pay the same amount as a rich person living alone in a mansion - I might be wrong about the details so please correct me.

This was so unpopular that there were riots about it. It was replaced with the council tax we know today which is a much fairer system.
Also led to the jailing of several pensioners who refused or couldn't pay.
 

jfollows

Established Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
5,847
Location
Wilmslow
I also forgot to mention one her biggest ideas which was one of the reasons that lead to her downfall. She introduced a poll tax which every adult in the UK would have to pay regardless of their income or where they lived. It was grossly unfair as poorer adults living in a shared house would have to pay the same amount as a rich person living alone in a mansion - I might be wrong about the details so please correct me.

This was so unpopular that there were riots about it. It was replaced with the council tax we know today which is a much fairer system.
It was completely fair - "community charge" - if you took the view that you should get what you paid for for services from your local council.
Of course, all taxes are about the richer paying more in line with what they can afford and not in line with what they receive for their payments.
The problem it has left us with - today - is that the subsequent council tax system is still unfair and needs radical overhaul, but nobody is prepared to undertake the necessary changes because the people who lose will complain vociferously whereas those who gain will keep quiet.
 

joebassman

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2020
Messages
166
Location
Stowupland
She did a secret deal with Rupert Murdoch to allow him to aquire the Times newspaper, one of the few that actually cared about the truth and exposing government corruption, in return for Murdoch supporting Thatcher's election campaign.

For 30 years this meeting was denied as ever happening until the tapes of the meeting and conversations were released.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,932
Location
Nottingham
I'd say Thatcher accelerated many things that would have happened anyway, but that made it more painful for the people directly affected.

Up until around WW2, the Empire provided a captive source of raw materials and market for finished goods, collectively being the oldest and still one of the largest industrial powers. That gradually changed as the former colonies went their own way, America rose as a superpower and other countries became more competitive. Much of Britain was "company towns" where most people (or rather most men) worked in the local mine or factory and lived around it. There was a post-war boom in the 50s but it later became clear that many of those industries were dying. With more women having jobs and cars allowing more mobility to work elsewhere, those sorts of communities, and the sense of community that went with them, was gradually being eroded.

As I say, Thatcher accelerated that and was not afraid to be brutal in confronting the problems. One of the main reasons she came to power was the perception that the trade unions had become over-powerful in the 70s culminating in the 1978-79 "winter of discontent" when many people were personally affected by strikes. The Thatcher government faced up to the miners in particular, their previous government having lost power in 1974 partly because of miners strikes that led to power cuts and a three-day working week. They ensured coal stocks were built up prior to another long strike in the mid-80s when the miners were predicting wide scale pit closures (they were right, though coal mining was still significant until the 90s).

Many communities in former industrial areas were devastated by this quick transition, and at the same time financial services were deregulated and the south-east was enjoying something of a boom. Into the 70s many of the larger industries were state-owned, but most were privatised and deregulated in the Thatcher years (railways being the main exception), and many of these made a lot of money for financiers at the expense of the workers. Having been brought up in the north and studying in the south at the time, I could see how many of the Tory-supporting students gave every impression of neither knowing nor caring about the plight of most of the country. These were contemporaries of Cameron, Osborne and Johnson and I believe many of them think the same way today.

Someone has mentioned Norway while I was typing this, and I do agree the government squandered the oil money at that time. It could have been used to build new service industries to replace the jobs that had gone, and also to improve the economy as a whole. Ironically the railways actually did rather well in the later Thatcher years, with investment in electrification and renewal of most of the passenger fleet, but there could have been much more electrification. Bus deregulation was in my view a disaster for local transport outside London.

I categorically disagree with any suggestion that the Blair government was anything like this. Iraq was a huge mistake, much more should have been invested and electoral reform would have gone a long way to addressing some of the fundamental social divides that have only deepened. But the government's attitude and actions were very different from the Thatcher years.
 

deltic

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2010
Messages
3,225
The Falklands War changed everything for Thatcher - pre-the Argentine invasion she was the least popular prime minister in polling history and would either have had to reverse some of her policies or would have lost the next general election. In 1981 the Tories were up to 10 percentage points behind Labour, then came the SDP split from Labour and at one time they were trailing in third in the polls in the mid 20s. After the war the Tories consistently polled in the low 40s, Labour had imploded and were just 2 percentage points ahead of the Alliance in the 1983 election.

In many ways she changed people's perception of the UK from a country seemingly in terminal decline to one that could stand on its own. We now seem to have gone full circle and the perception is once again a country in decline.
 

Gloster

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
8,446
Location
Up the creek
There was the stopping of free milk in schools as well.

‘Maggie Thatcher, milk snatcher‘ was in 1971 when she was Education Secretary. She wasn’t the only one to reduce the provision of free milk in schools, but there is an argument that it was her reduction that moved the system into being just too uneconomically justifiable.

I won’t go into what Thatcher did as my blood-pressure won’t stand it, but remember that a lot of the nostalgia is from those who did well out of her changes, some of which were, at least partially, justifiable. The many people who became worse off and saw their opportunities disappear: well, who asks their opinion? History is made by the winners.

There was also a change of attitude: the ‘I’m all right, Jack’ Loadsamoney, which had only been an undercurrent and largely kept in check, suddenly became fine, even aspirational. You now wanted more money and lower taxes, and if services had to be cut, all to the good if it is only others that suffer.
 

urbophile

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2015
Messages
2,089
Location
Liverpool
This was so unpopular that there were riots about it. It was replaced with the council tax we know today which is a much fairer system.
Fairer than Thatcher's probably. But the council tax system is deeply flawed. It's based on well-outdated property values, and the top rate is capped. So that someone in a two-bedroom terrace house in Hartlepool can pay more than a millionaire in Chelsea. Local government is in such disarray largely because it depends on government grants which have been progressively (or rather regressively) cut back, and a smaller local tax revenue which in poorer areas is inevitably going to be at the same time inadequate, and unfair to those on low incomes.

Thatcher and her fellow Tory robber barons pretended to champion the rights of individuals, and be against powerful central government, but their policies made for increasingly enfeebled local government and even more centralisation of one of the most centralised states in Europe.

Her bigotry blighted the lives of over a generation of LGBT+ people thanks to Section 28.

Her prejudice against public transport (especially bus users over 30) has led to the criminal lack of investment in buses and the rail network. At least she had the excuse that climate change was hardly being talked about; the present PM shares the same prejudice while being completely aware of the damage his policies are causing.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,096
She did a secret deal with Rupert Murdoch to allow him to aquire the Times newspaper, one of the few that actually cared about the truth and exposing government corruption, in return for Murdoch supporting Thatcher's election campaign.

For 30 years this meeting was denied as ever happening until the tapes of the meeting and conversations were released.
Two years ago today Nadine Dorries, the Culture Secretary (the emoji to truly reflect that doesn't exist), ended the ban on Rupert Murdoch interfering in the editorial independence of the Times and Sunday Times, a decision which has led me as a vintage reader of both to believe for the first time that the decision has more recently begun to see changes for the worse in those papers' handling of some political stories.
 

75A

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2021
Messages
1,426
Location
Ireland (ex Brighton 75A)
Have to say I did well as result of her actions. I was working for B.T when they were privatised and for every share we bought @ £1.30 we got two more free there was a limit, but when I sold them @ £10 each it was a very healthy profit.
My Wife was a Police Officer during the Miners strike. In her Force only the men went, leaving the ladies to cover in their absence, meaning they all could afford new cars/houses and have great holidays on the overtime.
So you see not evrryone was unhappy with her leadership.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,096
Have to say I did well as result of her actions. I was working for B.T when they were privatised and for every share we bought @ £1.30 we got two more free there was a limit, but when I sold them @ £10 each it was a very healthy profit.
My Wife was a Police Officer during the Miners strike. In her Force only the men went, leaving the ladies to cover in their absence, meaning they all could afford new cars/houses and have great holidays on the overtime.
So you see not evrryone was unhappy with her leadership.
Getting the police on their side, for whatever reason, is the hallmark of any government bent on sowing division in society.
 

deltic

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2010
Messages
3,225
Her prejudice against public transport (especially bus users over 30) has led to the criminal lack of investment in buses and the rail network. At least she had the excuse that climate change was hardly being talked about; the present PM shares the same prejudice while being completely aware of the damage his policies are causing.

I seem to recall more miles of rail were electrified under Thatcher than any PM since -- not sure she was prejudiced against under 30 year old bus users
 

azOOOOOma

Member
Joined
16 Mar 2023
Messages
114
Location
Durham
Selling off council houses, which is why we have a massive housing shortage now.

The despicable Section 28, which ruined many lives.

Squandering North Sea Oil money, look how well Norway did in comparison to the UK.....


A song from Alexei Sayle also makes some points too:


Section 28 was awful but one wonders why it took Labour until their second term to repeal it.

We have ten times the population of Norway so I’m not sure about the sovereign oil fund they have.


It never ceases to amaze me how many people still yearn for the mines up here in the NE most of whom wouldn’t survive five minutes working in one. There wouldn’t be 4G down there for a start.
 

Mcv378

Member
Joined
31 Dec 2023
Messages
36
Location
London
Section 28 was awful but one wonders why it took Labour until their second term to repeal it.

We have ten times the population of Norway so I’m not sure about the sovereign oil fund they have.


It never ceases to amaze me how many people still yearn for the mines up here in the NE most of whom wouldn’t survive five minutes working in one. There wouldn’t be 4G down there for a start.
 

azOOOOOma

Member
Joined
16 Mar 2023
Messages
114
Location
Durham

They have 3.5 times the reserves we have and have 1/10th the population…
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,053
Location
Taunton or Kent
"There's no such thing as a society." - Apparently attributed to her but I do think the fact that there are folk who say people are more respectful and/or certain ways our society functioned in the 70s, or sometime between the 50s and 70s, than it is now, is not a coincidence. I think her and Reagan created a society where individualism was promoted, which has degraded social cohesion. She also followed Reagan in deregulation that laid the groundwork for the 2008 crash.
 

Shaw S Hunter

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2016
Messages
2,953
Location
Sunny South Lancs
I typed out what turned into a horribly long reply to this question. It's a big subject! So as an alternative I would simply suggest that Thatcher's worst legacy, which causes so many to become angry just at mention of her name, is the idea that it is no longer necessary for people in authority, whether in government or business, to have any real compassion for those who find themselves disadvantaged in some way. While not exactly universal nevertheless it's a general lack of empathy and it totally sucks.
 

azOOOOOma

Member
Joined
16 Mar 2023
Messages
114
Location
Durham
As a fellow woman I’d say the issue with Mrs T is that she had bigger b*lls than any other man in parliament and despite the hate and rampant misogyny she took difficult decisions that nobody else had the courage to do.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,179
Location
SE London
I think to understand the main things Thatcher was trying to (and did) do, you need to understand the situation when she came to power. Life and the economy was very different to today: Vast swathes of industry were nationalized: Steel production, almost all public transport, even some car making, coal mining (which was our main source of electricity at the time) as well as electricity generation, etc. Much of this was perceived (IMO, correctly) as being very inefficient, in part because there was no competition: For example the Post Office (who controlled telephones at the time) could make phones as expensive as they wished and be as slow as they wished to deliver them because on the whole you simply weren't able (allowed?) to use any other company to get your phone connected. The highest effective income tax rate was 98%, which meant that if you earned more than a certain income, you invariably either stopped working or moved abroad if you wanted to carry on earning - because any more that you earned in the UK would be almost completely taken away by the Government. Trade Union law gave the Unions immense power - and they used it. Strikes were commonplace, often over the most trivial reasons. It was considered perfectly normal for striking workers to seek to physically prevent or intimidate into not working anyone at their workplace who didn't want to strike - or even to travel to unrelated workplaces to try to prevent from working people at other companies who had no dispute with their employers! (So-called secondary picketing). Restrictive practices in many industries abounded - whereby the trade unions agreed with employers that only certain workers were allowed to do certain tasks - often nothing to do with safety, it was simply a way of 'protecting' jobs - in effect ensuring that more people were working on a task than would have been necessary. One result of all this is that many industries which today are very profitable only survived at the time via massive Government subsidies, and there was a strong sense of the UK typically producing shoddy, overpriced goods.

That situation had slowly built up since WWII, under a political consensus across both Labour and Conservatives, and I would guess motivated by the desire to protect jobs and give people security - which it did, but arguably at a huge cost in overall standard of living and economic freedom. That started to come to a head over the 1970s oil crisis and the 1978-79 winter of discontent - leading to a growing sense amongst many people that Britain just wasn't working. In a way that's similar to the sense that many people have today, but in those days, the public perception tended to lay the blame (correctly IMO) at too much Government control, too much nationalization, and too much union power.

Mrs. Thatcher came to power with a political philosophy that private enterprise and economic freedom would serve people far better than the status quo, and that's basically what she did: She denationalized everything she could, removed Government subsidies wherever she could on the basis that industries should learn to make a profit by providing decent goods that people actually want to buy, and introduced laws that heavily restricted trade unions' right to strike, and outlawed things like secondary picketing. This shattered the political consensus since at the time Labour was - if anything - moving to the left and advocating more state control and more union power - it was very different from the Labour Party of today!

That was the overall picture. Of course lots of mistakes were made along the way, and I see some posters have already highlighted some of them, but the gist was that Thatcher largely turned the UK from a largely state-controlled economy into a private-enterprise-focused economy.

I think there were a couple of reasons why people remember her so badly - and why she was so unpopular in some communities at the time. The biggest reason was that the transition involved a big economic shock, and Thatcher's political philosophy made her very reluctant to provide much Government support to communities that were affected - the classic example being villages and towns that lost their main source of employment when uneconomic coal mines closed down. There were also a couple of specific political mistakes - the 'poll tax' being the most obvious one. And that notorious Section 28, which prevented schools from teaching about homosexuality as a normal lifestyle - which today looks like an awful anachronism and totally wrong, but at the time was little more than a reflection of how society was.
 
Last edited:

Senex

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Messages
2,754
Location
York
I also forgot to mention one her biggest ideas which was one of the reasons that lead to her downfall. She introduced a poll tax which every adult in the UK would have to pay regardless of their income or where they lived. It was grossly unfair as poorer adults living in a shared house would have to pay the same amount as a rich person living alone in a mansion - I might be wrong about the details so please correct me.

This was so unpopular that there were riots about it. It was replaced with the council tax we know today which is a much fairer system.
Far better than the iniquitous council tax that replaced it and that has grown worse as the years have gone by without any adjustments.
 

Mr. SW

Member
Joined
13 Sep 2023
Messages
94
Location
Armchair
Mrs Thatcher brought in the politics of bile and spite.
Prime example sine qua non of provincial middle-class snobbery and prejudice in sensible shoes. A venal, vicious harridan who pandered to and hugely supported by the blue-rinse brigade of the beat 'em, starve 'em and flog 'em back to work politics.
A nasty, vindictive woman who poured scorn and hatred on the poor, low paid, sick and elderly.
Whilst I agree that some businesses should not, and should never been in public ownership (Coal, Car-building, Oil), she went out of her way, quite deliberately, to destroy many industries. Indeed, I remember even the CBI (the unholy bastion of pop-eyed, flat-headed capitalism) complaining that she had gone too far. Her reign then became increasingly autocratic, signs of which were being detected by prominent members of her own party (Howe, Heseltine) who eventually forced a leadership contest.
She doted on her visibly and utterly unintelligent son whilst neglecting her daughter.
And she got into bed (figuatively) with Ronald Reagan, the double-minus epsilon semi-moron of a US president of whom when asked of the Late Robin Williams when he was diagnosed with dementia: 'How can they tell?'

I'm going to stop now lest I throw my laptop across the room.

Watch the programme on Channel 4 about the miner's strike and you will kick your TV in.

And breathe.
 

joebassman

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2020
Messages
166
Location
Stowupland
‘Maggie Thatcher, milk snatcher‘ was in 1971 when she was Education Secretary. She wasn’t the only one to reduce the provision of free milk in schools, but there is an argument that it was her reduction that moved the system into being just too uneconomically justifiable.
I remember there still being free milk for the first 2 or 3 years at the school I attended and I was born in 1980.
 

Top