She served out this apprenticeship until 1965, in and out of government. She took away from it two enduring lessons. Civil servants, she felt, were by and large uncreative people. Their advice would change, depending on their understanding of what view the minister would take. Secondly, the complicated system of welfare benefits, in the main, contributed to a dependency culture rather than a way of meeting need. This view was not shaken by her attention to detail and to those areas where she felt need was not met sufficiently. For instance, she argued to increase the widowed mothers’ allowance, fuelled by the memory of women eking out the household budget by buying bruised fruit in her fathers’ shop.
Perhaps her finest hour in the post came in 1962, the day after Macmillan’s drastic cull of his Cabinet. The first business of the day was questions to the Minister of Pensions but Boyd Carpenter had been promoted to the Cabinet, and his successor had not been named. The junior ministers faced 15 questions, 14 of which Margaret Thatcher could and did answer clearly and concisely. She displayed a light touch, even humour that lifted Tory spirits. One onlooker commented: ‘Amid the gloom and depression of the parliamentary benches she alone radiated confidence, cheerfulness and charm.’11 In a demoralised Tory party, this was a small bright moment.
Ted has a passion to get Britain right and of course, so did Keith, and so did I.
--THATCHER
But the Macmillan era was coming to an end. Margaret Thatcher had little say in the leadership question, Douglas-Home succeeded an ailing Prime Minister and led the party into the 1964 election. She liked Douglas-Home: he had come to speak when she was President of the Oxford University Conservative Association, and she found him easy to talk to. Her feelings on the great issues of the government were well known, and likely to be in line with the new leader: she believed in co-operation and rapport with the United States, and where possible with Russia; she supported entry into the European Common Market as a trade treaty. At the Conservative Party AGM in March 1962 she put a questionnaire on each seat, asking how members would solve the problems of the day. Her speech started by praising the development of Britain. We have what Americans have described as an affluent society. We have had a tremendous increase in material benefits over the last few years. If Karl Marx were to come back here, he would surely not be able to say ‘Workers you have nothing to lose but your lives’, but instead ‘you have nothing to lose but your refrigerator, your car, your TV, and all your other luxuries’.12 And she went on to show, with figures and statistics, that British workers could not continue to pay themselves more than they earned and that Britain must not be out of step with overseas competitors. She defended Selwyn Lloyd’s pay pause, while identifying herself with mounting backbench pressure to curb industrial action. She campaigned valiantly for Finchley during the election, and was rewarded by being returned with a majority reduced only to 9,000. The young, energetic Labour leader Harold Wilson formed a government with a parliamentary majority of four, and for Margaret Thatcher the shadow backbench years began. Alec Douglas-Home resigned shortly after the election. His lasting legacy was the system of election that brought a very different leader to the party. The candidates, Reginald Maudling, Enoch Powell and Edward Heath, were all important characters in the life of Margaret Thatcher. She voted for Edward Heath, with whom she had shared platforms during the Dartford campaigns. She says it was Keith Joseph who influenced her choice. As far as he was concerned; Ted has a passion to get Britain right and of course, so did Keith, and so did I.13 When Wilson called a snap election in March 1966 Margaret Thatcher campaigned wholeheartedly for Heath. I stand for a Conservative Government because I believe that the State was made for Man and not Man for the State. That ability and hard work should be encouraged by taxation incentives. That freedom of choice in schools, goods and services should continue and increase. That we should take the initiative in foreign affairs and not merely follow our American friends. That in Edward Heath we have a man of ACTION, INTEGRITY and PURPOSE – a fitting leader for a great nation.14 She held Finchley, even increasing her majority to 9,464, but Wilson was returned as Prime Minister with a majority of 98.
After the election, Margaret Thatcher had been moved from Pensions. First, she went to Housing and Land, to oppose Labour moves to establish the Land Commission, a means of nationalising the gains made by redevelopment. Here she became aware of anomalies in the rating system – her first conference speech was about reform of household rates. From there, she became Treasury spokesperson on Tax under Iain Macleod. But this was not a good time for her. Denis, so long the mainstay of her parliamentary career, was facing business problems. The family firm was becoming less profitable. The obvious choice was to sell to a bigger multinational firm, but he was reluctant to take that step. Tired and concerned, he went to South Africa immediately after the election for some time to think and regroup. When he returned, he sold the family firm. His money enabled Margaret Thatcher’s career, but that meant Denis had to continue earning the money: not only Margaret Thatcher, but the twins with their expensive school fees, his mother, and other relatives relied on his finances. In practice, the sale of the family business safeguarded the family income and made Denis a millionaire, but that was not foreseeable in 1964. Also Margaret Thatcher herself was tired and depressed by the election defeat. At the end of the year she became ill, for almost the first time in her adult life.
Yet promotion came quickly in the small parliamentary party. Between 1964 and 1970 she held six different portfolios – three as a junior spokeswoman (Pensions, Housing, Economic Policy) and three as a member of the shadow cabinet, shadowing power, transport and education. Her approach to economic policy was indicative of her approach to all roles: In preparing herself for her first Commons speech opposing Callaghan’s Budget she took from the House of Commons library every Budget speech and Finance Bill since the war and read them. I was thus able to demonstrate to a somewhat bemused Jim Callaghan... that this was the only budget which had failed to make even a minor concession in the social services area.15
She threw herself into her home life, as well. With both children at boarding school, the Thatcher’s rented a small flat a stone’s-throw from the Houses of Parliament. For family weekends and holidays they bought a mock-Tudor house near Tunbridge Wells. One of Margaret Thatcher’s hobbies was interior decorating – she renovated and designed each room over their time in the house. She painted and papered the eight bedrooms herself, but called in professional help to do the staircase and hall. She had collected good mahogany furniture and silverware – perhaps reminiscent of the dark wood of her father’s shops. She had space to make a garden – her efforts in previous homes had been small-scale. Here she could make the sort of garden she loved. Oh yes, I love gardening but not the sort of formal display gardening so much but really creating a garden of shrubs and with if possible just a little bit of woodland at the bottom of the garden with bluebells and primroses and things in. But then you do need to use some annuals to get some colour for the time of year when you can’t otherwise and I’ve been lucky to have gardens with acid soil and I love creating the rhododendrons, azalea, heather garden.16 The house was not used as much as she hoped, however. The twins preferred to spend time in London, and both Margaret and Denis Thatcher worked long hours. The flat was much more convenient.
Behind the official propaganda, the grey streets, all but empty shops and badly maintained workers’ housing blocks, Russian humanity peeped out.
--THATCHER
By 1972 Margaret Thatcher’s fortunes had changed again. The 1970 election saw the Conservative Party again in power with a majority of 31. More important, it saw Margaret Thatcher returned to become Secretary of State for Education and Science. Alfred Roberts was not there to see it – he had died in February. This was a different, more cosmopolitan Margaret Thatcher. In 1967 she visited the United States, was taken into American hearts and homes and shown the benefits of that free trade democracy, including the space centre where in
the future men would leave to stand on the moon. Two years later, she visited Russia, and saw how behind the official propaganda, the grey streets, all but empty shops and badly maintained workers’ housing blocks, Russian humanity peeped out.17
She bought a porcelain tea service, the pride of her growing china collection. In her memoirs, she said it always reminded her with pain of the sight of working mothers taking their children to nursery at 6.30 in the morning, to leave them all day. Her children were still at boarding schools, allowing her time for travel and her career.
In 1965, Rhodesia had declared unilateral independence from Britain, which had imposed sanctions. The British army was now deployed in Belfast, and in 1968 the Soviet army had invaded Czechoslovakia. Business was still growing, but immigration figures had been rising steadily and sterling had been devalued. Nearer home, this government had been elected on a manifesto finally polished at a Shadow Cabinet conference in Selsdon, at which Margaret Thatcher took a full part. The manifesto was neither new nor the absolute swing to the right it was portrayed as being. It was a set of coherent policies, forged over the years in opposition. It allowed the new government to enter office with clear direction.
For Margaret Thatcher, hitting the ground running meant entering her ministry with a list scribbled in an exercise book of things to be addressed that day. Some were small administrative matters, but the big issue addressed equality in education and comprehensive schools, a constant issue in educational policy since 1945. There is common agreement that compulsory education is an enormous force for social change, and that force can be used to ensure equality among children, but there is no political agreement about how equality should be reached, or even what equality is. The poles of the argument are on one hand that children should all be educated together, with no distinction of money, parentage, or ability. This will encourage children to find their own level, and ensure that structural inequalities become a thing of the past. This way of thinking about education lead to big comprehensive secondary schools, the end of school selection by ability, and moves to end the 11-Plus. On the other hand, the argument is that children should be given the opportunity and the incentive to succeed, therefore selection at 11 should be retained. This will allow successful, hard-working children or children of successful parents to benefit and to develop their academic ability, while other children benefit from smaller groups and more vocational teaching. Margaret Thatcher’s position was clear. She had already told the press that she would withdraw Tony Crosland’s Circular 10/65 under which local authorities were required to submit plans for re-organising secondary education on comprehensive lines, and Circular 10/66, which withheld capital funding from local education authorities that refused to go comprehensive. This was her first battle with her officials. In order to withdraw a circular, another command paper had to be written. Should this new command paper not include a detailed outline of potential educational systems to replace comprehensive schooling? Margaret Thatcher thought not. Not only could that take a lot of time, it was also not the role of government to dictate education policy to local authorities. Circular 10/70 was issued on Tuesday 30 June 1970. This was an absolute coup for the party and its supporters, but less successful as policy. All local education plans for comprehensive schools had to be signed by the Secretary of State for Education. Margaret Thatcher, during her time in that role, signed more plans for comprehensive schools and the subsequent closure of grammar schools than any Education Secretary before or since.
The 11-Plus was an examination based on intelligence testing, designed to channel children at the age of 11 into appropriate schooling – grammar schools for academically-able children, secondary modern schools for more vocational training. Although success in the exam could be the route out of poverty, failure could see a child condemned to a second-class education. The system has been widely criticised as being culturally and class biased, and for perpetuating inequality. The debate about selective versus comprehensive schools continues unabated to this day.
The dislike that the Department felt for her was deep-rooted, and she felt that she was not among friends. She saw the Department and the teaching unions as closely linked, and committed to comprehensive education. She was not a philosophical heavyweight, and preferred musicals to opera. She saw the process of education not as entry into a world of learning, but as the learning of a body of knowledge. She had taught for six weeks in her first Oxford summer vacation – maths and science at Grantham boys’ school – and prized herself on having ‘gone on’ until the boys got it and not having let them go until they’d got it. This approach did not sit well with idealistic images of developing a new society through education. But she was very soon personally popular with the staff. She would always make someone coffee, or find time to talk or sign a ‘get well’ card. And she was a heavyweight fighter when it came to protecting the Department’s budget. She also showed herself able to step outside budget restraints and set her own priorities. For example, as she entered office, the Open University had been doomed to closure by Iain Macleod. He had been firm about ending the ‘great socialist opportunity for the part-time student to graduate’.18 Margaret Thatcher, however, driven by her strong belief in giving opportunities to those who worked hard, was equally firm about keeping it open.
Margaret Thatcher was Secretary of State for Education for three years and eight months. She had made seven points during the election campaign:
• A shift of emphasis onto primary schools – carried out with the help of a comprehensive programme of building.
• Expansion of nursery education.
• The right of local education authorities to decide what secondary scheme was best for their area, while defending and retaining the best of traditional schools.
• Raising the age of school leaving to 16.
• Encouraging direct-grant schools and retaining private schools.
• Expanding further and higher education.
• Holding an inquiry into teacher training.
Well, you call it stockpiling, I call it being a prudent housewife and the kind of life I’ve led you have to buy things when food was comparatively cheap.
--THATCHER
And these were her priorities in office. It was these priorities, and increasing pressure to make budget cuts, that led to her becoming ‘Maggie Thatcher the Milk Snatcher’ in November 1971 – a demon to the press and public. She implemented another of Iain Macleod’s decisions – to remove free milk from primary school children. The resulting outcry is, in retrospect, surprising. The previous Labour government had already cut free milk to secondary-school children, and Margaret Thatcher’s saving promised £8 million to build primary schools. Perhaps it was the increasing austerity of the Conservative government, dogged by inflation. Free milk had been one of the reasons that poor children grew up in better health in the 1970s than they did in the 1930s and 1940s, but other changes in housing and welfare had also improved health. Taking away free milk was a direct attack on the prevailing ideas of the time, that the government was responsible for welfare, but the publicity did not stress this. It is hard not to see some of the outcry as being aimed at a woman in Parliament, and a well-heeled, well-dressed Tory woman to boot. Later, during the leadership campaign, she sparked a similar storm about hoarding food by saying, Well, you call it stockpiling, I call it being a prudent housewife and the kind of life I’ve led you have to buy things when food was comparatively cheap – you know you bought the fruit in summer, you made it into jam, you packed it into kilner jars, you put it on your shelves. Most country women or people brought up in small towns did this as a matter of prudent housewifery... . Of course housewives are in fact doing this. How do you think that... it is that the deep freeze sales are going so well, that frozen food centres have sprung up all over the country? This is what people are doing, they are prudently putting aside money to put things into deep freezes. My point is a perfectly simple one: if you buy it in tins you don’t have t
o pay or use electricity in which to store things.19 This led to a series of headlines and adverse comments. On both occasions her innocence and ignorance about life as it was lived in industrial Britain led her to appear as the consummate Tory lady. Her life as Denis Thatcher’s wife contributed to the image, but the decisions were pure Alfred Roberts’ economics, and the priorities of the Grantham middle classes.
While Margaret Thatcher was working towards her priorities in education, the Heath government was in increasing trouble. Their mandate had been based on a programme to regenerate the economy. They wanted to reduce government support for industry, but in 1971 they nationalised Rolls Royce. Margaret Thatcher was broadly in favour despite her antipathy towards nationalisation: here, defence needs took priority. By 1972 though, the government had passed a statute taking legal powers to control all increases in pay, prices and dividends. This U-turn, in Margaret Thatcher’s eyes, was unforgivable, although none of her public statements in 1972 would have given that impression. In her memoirs she identifies three events which together tried the Government’s resolve and found it wanting:20 the miners’ strike, the financial problems of Upper Clyde Shipbuilders and the unemployment total reaching one million. The miners’ strike ended when Heath conceded to the miners’ demands, but the price was increasing wage control. To Margaret Thatcher this was ‘Danegeld’, a ransom forced on the country because the government had not been well enough prepared to withstand industrial unrest. The Clyde shipbuilders had their subsidy restored. Unemployment, in Margaret Thatcher’s view, was a direct result of Roy Jenkins’ tight fiscal policies of 1969–70, and would soon peak and begin to fall. But the Heath government was a collective. When the full story of this cabinet is released it will be clearer to what extent Margaret Thatcher argued. What is known is that Edward Heath called a snap general election in February 1974. The Yom Kippur War the previous October had raised oil prices. The coal miners were on strike, and without oil or coal Britain was working on power for only three days a week. People were cold, the days were dark. Shops were lighted by candles and gas lights, industry was shutting down. Heath called the election to get a public mandate to deal firmly with the miners, but with only three weeks for campaigning this election was disastrous for the Conservatives.
Thatcher Page 4
