Mrs Thatcher Dead

[Red-Robbo]

Margaret Thatcher did advocate a type of socialism with her ideas of universal share ownership i.e. citizen ownership of equity. There was a socialist side to Margaret Thatcher if you look at her policies closely enough. Our membership of the hopelessly corrupt, undemocratic and criminal led European Union project - i.e. a centrally planned European economy - is another example of socialism that the Conservative Party supports.

There is nothing socialist in taking something that was owned by all of us - like BT, flog it to those who have spare cash - and then use the proceeds to bail-out her sinking monetarist experiment. Ownership of her big sell-offs of course is now largely concentrated in a few, often non-British hands.

The privatisation of Britain's natural monopoly utilities is the very worst legacy of Mrs T IMO. It is why we pay more for gas, electricity, water, internet connection etc than most other Europeans do.

[Red-Robbo]

You obviously missed the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation's decision to give air time to Gerry Adams the day she died.

Why not? He represents a strain of opinion within the UK whether we agree with him or not.

Presumably you'd have all TV channels lay on a North Korean style parade of gushing eulogies for our fallen 'great leader'?

[havanatopia]

Thatcher v Blair (Conservatives v Labour) = 3-3

But who will be remembered in a more positive light?

History will never absolve Blair.

UK plc was handed over to Labour with the largest peacetime gov't surplus which Blair and Brown handed back with the complete opposite and so the cycle begins yet again, it was and will always be thus.

Getting one's house in order by balancing one's books can be and was extremely painful for many and is why Mrs Thatcher will be more than disliked by a lot of people. She made mistakes that all political spectrums would agree on, as every politician does, but the medicine probably could not have been administered without someone like her and it was essential. Had the UK not gone through that pain we would not, for one, have 'enjoyed' the largesse of a casino spend mentality of the Labour years.

Her passing was rather expected but her place in history is assured whether people spout nonsense on here or moronically throw a few stones at the boys in blue; Blair was responsible for a war nobody wanted on a falsity and which killed hundreds of our troops and thousands of innocents. He should have taken the rap. When he passes on will there be riots against him? Will people mouth nonsense in disrespect? I doubt it. Says a lot about the mentality of both sides of the political coin even if it is the thoughtless few.

[Red-Robbo]

; Blair was responsible for a war nobody wanted on a falsity and which killed hundreds of our troops and thousands of innocents. He should have taken the rap. When he passes on will there be riots against him?

Although not on the same scale, could you argue that by adopting an inflexible attitude in Northern Ireland, Thatcher prolonged the troubles there and that by ignoring intelligence about the Falklands* (and sending out signals to the Argies that she wasn't concerned about the islans) she inadvertently encouraged the invasion.

I should point out that 179 Brits died in Iraq, whereas 258 died in the Falklands and more than 1,000 in Northern Ireland in the 1980s. The vast majority of Iraqi civillian deaths were and are caused by other Iraqis.

Just playing Devils advocate here, not defending an indefensible war.

* The Argentinian invasion date was an open secret in Buenos Aires and had even been published in a newspaper gossip column there. Intelligence reports sent to Mrs T about this were apparently "missed".

[marshy]

Why not? He represents a strain of opinion within the UK whether we agree with him or not.

Presumably you'd have all TV channels lay on a North Korean style parade of gushing eulogies for our fallen 'great leader'?

a). Time and a place Robbo.

b). That would be more amusing than a lot of the drivel that passes for entertainment these days.

c). As I'm sure you're aware 'Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation' was Thatcher's own description of them following the coverage of the sinking of the Belgrano. I don't think they're quite that bad.

[chipdawg]

Inevitably many of you will disagree with this piece, but it's in line with many of the opinions expressed on here the last few days

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/mark-steel-you-cant-just-shut-us-up-now-that-margaret-thatchers-dead-8568785.html

[lifelong]

Inevitably many of you will disagree with this piece, but it's in line with many of the opinions expressed on here the last few days

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/mark-steel-you-cant-just-shut-us-up-now-that-margaret-thatchers-dead-8568785.html

One of the most articulate accurate pieces I have read on this subject. Thanks for posting it.

[exiledinwatford]

There is nothing socialist in taking something that was owned by all of us - like BT, flog it to those who have spare cash - and then use the proceeds to bail-out her sinking monetarist experiment. Ownership of her big sell-offs of course is now largely concentrated in a few, often non-British hands.

The privatisation of Britain's natural monopoly utilities is the very worst legacy of Mrs T IMO. It is why we pay more for gas, electricity, water, internet connection etc than most other Europeans do.

There is an alternative view Robbo. When I left school in the early 70s (1970s) if you had a bit of something about you and ambition you found a job in the private sector because it paid more and if you worked hard you could get promoted and get a better job. Those with zero ambition got a job with the Gas Board, Electricity Board, The GPO or the Railways because it was cushy and you had a job for life. Big generalisation I know but that was how me and most of my schoolchums felt.

Having seen BT at close quarters the waste was criminal all because it didn't have to compete. As a consumer you had nowhere else to go, if your phone line took two months hard luck.

By privatising and opening up competition allowing international and British companies like Plessey and STC to sell direct to the end user it gave me and a whole generation the chance to work for these companies and many new ones and make a good living. This forced BT (as it is now) to start behaving like a proper company instead of a protected fossil and stop throwing money down the pan.

In the mid seventies I spent some time in communist Czekoslovakia where everything was state run - it was like turning the clock back 50 years.

As for energy, I don't know but we pay more for everything now and at least you can jump on some swich website to see if a better deal can be had. I worry that going back to the days where we had British Gas and the Electricity Board would recreate the grossly over-staffed holiday camp companies with the "if you don't like it tough luck" attitudes.

[chipdawg]

There is an alternative view Robbo. When I left school in the early 70s (1970s) if you had a bit of something about you and ambition you found a job in the private sector because it paid more and if you worked hard you could get promoted and get a better job. Those with zero ambition got a job with the Gas Board, Electricity Board, The GPO or the Railways because it was cushy and you had a job for life. Big generalisation I know but that was how me and most of my schoolchums felt.

Having seen BT at close quarters the waste was criminal all because it didn't have to compete. As a consumer you had nowhere else to go, if your phone line took two months hard luck.

By privatising and opening up competition allowing international and British companies like Plessey and STC to sell direct to the end user it gave me and a whole generation the chance to work for these companies and many new ones and make a good living. This forced BT (as it is now) to start behaving like a proper company instead of a protected fossil and stop throwing money down the pan.

In the mid seventies I spent some time in communist Czekoslovakia where everything was state run - it was like turning the clock back 50 years.

As for energy, I don't know but we pay more for everything now and at least you can jump on some swich website to see if a better deal can be had. I worry that going back to the days where we had British Gas and the Electricity Board would recreate the grossly over-staffed holiday camp companies with the "if you don't like it tough luck" attitudes.

I don't necessarily have an issue with privatisation of public utilities; this has happened all over Europe, but where it was in the public interest not where it suited a political doctrine. Gas, electric, public transport and water were thrown to the open market for a pittance and while the theory tells us this competition should lead to a better deal for consumers, the practice shows almost constant investigation and prosecution by regulatory bodies for miss-selling and price fixing. In fact, very similar to the way one of her other 'successes' has gone- the deregulation of the financial sector. Someone else has pointed out on here that Labour inherited the biggest budget surplus since World War 2; hardly suprising when the previous government spent their whole tenure selling things off. While the selling off of utilities and telecoms could perhaps be justified (with proper consumer safeguards which weren't put in place), for me the privatisation of our transport networks and the demolition of heavy industry are at best terrible mistakes and at worst wilfully damaged the economy in ways that are still rlevant now

Your post is actually a microcosm of the debate on here; some people saw the benefit of Thatcherite policies, others see the great harm. While for me and many others, the harm she did vastly outweighs the good (which if I'm totally honest I don't really see any of in retrospect), others see it differently. The rich tapestry of life and all that

[Mr Mosquito]

There is nothing socialist in taking something that was owned by all of us - like BT, flog it to those who have spare cash - and then use the proceeds to bail-out her sinking monetarist experiment. Ownership of her big sell-offs of course is now largely concentrated in a few, often non-British hands.

The privatisation of Britain's natural monopoly utilities is the very worst legacy of Mrs T IMO. It is why we pay more for gas, electricity, water, internet connection etc than most other Europeans do.

Thinking back, 'champagne socialists' Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were also successful at creating a divided nation. E.g. they divided the country over whether the country should go to war in Iraq, and they created the divide between public and private sector pensions by removing the ability of the private sector pension funds to claim back the dividend tax.

[exiledinwatford]

While for me and many others, the harm she did vastly outweighs the good (which if I'm totally honest I don't really see any of in retrospect), others see it differently.

Did not my post provide an example of a little bit of good? When companies don't have to compete they switch off - there's no incentive to go that extra mile. Even our Government has competition - there are quite a few Governments around the world that don't and I wouldn't want to live in any of 'em!

[Monkeh]

You obviously missed the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation's decision to give air time to Gerry Adams the day she died.

I don't suppose you've had time to go back and check your ridiculous assertion that the Belgrano was sunk 200 miles outside the Exclusion Zone?

It was 36 miles out side performing a pincer movement getting ready to attack british forces with their aircraft carrier, her two destroyer escorts left here behind while dropping depth charges (about 20 miles away) hunting for our hunter killer sub,

The fact that the argintine navy admitted that it was a ligitimate target to british forces says all that needs to be said about her sinking,

[exiledinwatford]

Plus the fact that present day politicians are astutely aware of the human greed gene (which Thatcher instigated).

Once more unto the... ...centralised political treadmill...

Thatcher invents greed! She did many things but I would wager that greed was around long before she came along!

For me her legacy was about ambition. When I started work I wanted to do as well as I could and the measure (for me) was about how much I could earn, what standard I could provide for my family, big house, big cars, holidays and I don't think any of that was greedy. I worked hard was paid well but I like to think I provided a good service and certainly contributed to the exchequer.

Thatcher didn't see (or chose not to) that deregulation of certain industries (banking being the biggest culprit) led to downright immoral and sometimes illegal practices. Rewards were given to people who didn't actually create anything. It was the Citigroup boss John Reid who first shook the banking world in the 80s by realising that if banks lend money to people /organisations/Governments who can't pay them back then they aren't going to have a sustainable business. It's fair to blame Thatcher for starting this but how many useless politicians of all persuasions have just stood by and let it develop into the mess we have today.

[marshy]

I don't necessarily have an issue with privatisation of public utilities; this has happened all over Europe, but where it was in the public interest not where it suited a political doctrine. Gas, electric, public transport and water were thrown to the open market for a pittance and while the theory tells us this competition should lead to a better deal for consumers, the practice shows almost constant investigation and prosecution by regulatory bodies for miss-selling and price fixing. In fact, very similar to the way one of her other 'successes' has gone- the deregulation of the financial sector. Someone else has pointed out on here that Labour inherited the biggest budget surplus since World War 2; hardly suprising when the previous government spent their whole tenure selling things off. While the selling off of utilities and telecoms could perhaps be justified (with proper consumer safeguards which weren't put in place), for me the privatisation of our transport networks and the demolition of heavy industry are at best terrible mistakes and at worst wilfully damaged the economy in ways that are still rlevant now

Your post is actually a microcosm of the debate on here; some people saw the benefit of Thatcherite policies, others see the great harm. While for me and many others, the harm she did vastly outweighs the good (which if I'm totally honest I don't really see any of in retrospect), others see it differently. The rich tapestry of life and all that

The deregulation of the financial system was necessary to attack the old boy network and cronyism that existed in the city at the time. The sector now makes a massive contribution in taxes towards the maintenance of worthwhile enterprises such as the NHS. Contrary to popular belief it was not excessive investment banking that caused the crisis but an unchecked credit boom towards which Labour and the so-called regulators turned a blind eye.

Given the history of her attitude towards failing enterprises I think it highly likely that, principled as she was, she would, at the outset of the crisis, have let banks such as Northern Rock go to the wall.

[One Team In Keynsham]

Inevitably many of you will disagree with this piece, but it's in line with many of the opinions expressed on here the last few days

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/mark-steel-you-cant-just-shut-us-up-now-that-margaret-thatchers-dead-8568785.html

Very good article..

I saw a pic of a banner Liverpool fans are supposedly taking to Reading: simply reads "You didn't care that you lied. We don't care that you died."

[Monkeh]

The deregulation of the financial system was necessary to attack the old boy network and cronyism that existed in the city at the time. The sector now makes a massive contribution in taxes towards the maintenance of worthwhile enterprises such as the NHS. Contrary to popular belief it was not excessive investment banking that caused the crisis but an unchecked credit boom towards which Labour and the so-called regulators turned a blind eye.

Given the history of her attitude towards failing enterprises I think it highly likely that, principled as she was, she would, at the outset of the crisis, have let banks such as Northern Rock go to the wall.

also the tories when in opp, never questioned it

[marshy]

It was 36 miles out side performing a pincer movement getting ready to attack british forces with their aircraft carrier, her two destroyer escorts left here behind while dropping depth charges (about 20 miles away) hunting for our hunter killer sub,

The fact that the argintine navy admitted that it was a ligitimate target to british forces says all that needs to be said about her sinking,

Yep I was aware of all that Monkeh. Couldn't agree more. I don't think we'll ever convince the guy I was replying to though.

[The Bard]

Interestingly, Arthur Scargill and George Galloway have become very rich men due to 'Thatcherism'. They're very far removed in terms of wealth and living standards from the people they purport to represent.

Arthur Scargill was the perfect enemy. He did everything Thatcher and MacGregor could have hoped for in an opponent. Played straight into the Government's hands in so many ways. He looked like a p***k, sounded like a p***k and acted like a p***k. He led the miner's to devastating defeat - just what Maggie wanted.

Wouldn't surprise me if either he was MI5 (unlikely) or more likely he was heavily influenced by someone who was MI5 and placed within the NUM.

The man was a prize tool.

[chipdawg]

While for me and many others, the harm she did vastly outweighs the good (which if I'm totally honest I don't really see any of in retrospect), others see it differently.

Did not my post provide an example of a little bit of good? When companies don't have to compete they switch off - there's no incentive to go that extra mile. Even our Government has competition - there are quite a few Governments around the world that don't and I wouldn't want to live in any of 'em!

That is a good point; in a Europe with no borders, countries are competing for population. Or, in this country at the minute, trying to discourage people from coming here!

I did accept that the theory of privatised, competitive utilities was a good idea, but also gave reasons for why it hasn't worked. Part of that was down to poor execution of the privatisation process. And in te case of railways, it has been terrible imo. In terms of your job prospects, I can't blame you for your 'pro' stance, but I guess that's just a good demonstration of how her policies worked; some people benefited from it, while the majority, i.e. Bill payers, rail passengers, etc, suffered (if of course you accept that bill payers have suffered). The only privatisation I feel is an unequivocal success is telecoms

[Monkeh]

Yep I was aware of all that Monkeh. Couldn't agree more. I don't think we'll ever convince the guy I was replying to though.

aye but I thought I would enlighten the people who thought it was a war crime,

She was a heavly armed war ship which left un-checked would of cause thousends of british casulities not just the 268 we did suffer,

We all must remember, although it wasn;t a war the agintines invaded british soil and as teh united kingdom of great briton and northern Ireland we had a right to defend ourselfs,

The sinking happened in 1982 and its been thrown out by the UN on more then once when protested about from various groups,

The captain of the ship has stated more then once that it was a ligitmate target and he bare the UK forces no ill will,

The guys were solders and sailors and as harsh as it sounds that sort of thing is part of their job,

[chipdawg]

The deregulation of the financial system was necessary to attack the old boy network and cronyism that existed in the city at the time. The sector now makes a massive contribution in taxes towards the maintenance of worthwhile enterprises such as the NHS. Contrary to popular belief it was not excessive investment banking that caused the crisis but an unchecked credit boom towards which Labour and the so-called regulators turned a blind eye.

Given the history of her attitude towards failing enterprises I think it highly likely that, principled as she was, she would, at the outset of the crisis, have let banks such as Northern Rock go to the wall.

It may well have been that there was a 'cronyistic', old-boy culture that needed removing. Firstly, I know a few people who work in the city and she failed in that one. Secondly, I'm not sure that justifies the 2 major financial crashes that have occurred since she left office. All the tax revenue the city has brought (though far more will have been scurried away off-shore than has entered the nations coffers) is well and good, but our economy has been horribly unbalanced since her reforms

The banking crisis was caused by individual bankers (and realistically, whole organisations) realising that money could be made very quickly by speculating on 'bad debt'. There is an argument that the debt culture in the UK is a direct result of the materialistic, aspirational attitude she instilled in the British people (though it's impossible to prove empirically) but it is certain that she created a shift towards a credit-based economy. While Blair and Brown's fiscal irresponsibility must take a fair share of the blame for the most recent economic crash, Maggie's economic policies directly contributed

[redeye]

Thatcher invents greed! She did many things but I would wager that greed was around long before she came along!

For me her legacy was about ambition. When I

started work I wanted to do as well as I could

and the measure (for me) was about how much I

could earn, what standard I could provide for my family, big house, big cars, holidays and I

don't think any of that was greedy. I worked hard

was paid well but I like to think I provided a

good service and certainly contributed to the

exchequer.

Thatcher didn't see (or chose not to) that

deregulation of certain industries (banking being

the biggest culprit) led to downright immoral and

sometimes illegal practices. Rewards were

given to people who didn't actually create

anything. It was the Citigroup boss John Reid

who first shook the banking world in the 80s by

realising that if banks lend money to people /organisations/Governments who can't pay them

back then they aren't going to have a

sustainable business. It's fair to blame Thatcher

for starting this but how many useless politicians

of all persuasions have just stood by and let it

develop into the mess we have today.

A fair and pertinent response and I agree that 'inventing greed' was an overstatement - Thatcher encouraging greed would be more relevant. Further to this I would agree with your point that she failed to address consequences regarding regulation, which all governments since have perpetuated.

[exiledinwatford]

That is a good point; in a Europe with no borders, countries are competing for population. Or, in this country at the minute, trying to discourage people from coming here!

I did accept that the theory of privatised, competitive utilities was a good idea, but also gave reasons for why it hasn't worked. Part of that was down to poor execution of the privatisation process. And in te case of railways, it has been terrible imo. In terms of your job prospects, I can't blame you for your 'pro' stance, but I guess that's just a good demonstration of how her policies worked; some people benefited from it, while the majority, i.e. Bill payers, rail passengers, etc, suffered (if of course you accept that bill payers have suffered). The only privatisation I feel is an unequivocal success is telecoms

I'm still to be convinced about railways - not much competition there for the consumer.

The pendulum swings back and forth depending on the stance of the government in power I suppose. I do see the the other side of the coin though and I'm very glad and feel very lucky not to have been brought up in a mining community or a town which depended on heavy industry for job prospects.

[Eco]

Arthur Scargill was the perfect enemy. He did everything Thatcher and MacGregor could have hoped for in an opponent. Played straight into the Government's hands in so many ways. He looked like a p***k, sounded like a p***k and acted like a p***k. He led the miner's to devastating defeat - just what Maggie wanted.

Wouldn't surprise me if either he was MI5 (unlikely) or more likely he was heavily influenced by someone who was MI5 and placed within the NUM.

The man was a prize tool.

Such a tool it's surprising he was overwhelmingly voted in by the miners ! He actually talked a lot of sense and appealed to my lefty sympathies of the 80's, demonised by every Tory newspaper of course. Pretty well documented that MI5 infiltrated the NUM, the enemy within dontcha know.

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

I was of a similar opinion as you, but in the last 18 months I have lost three jobs (due to company closures).

Im currently applying for a average of 3 jobs a day (recruitment agencies are liars), I have a CPC, IOSH, COTC, ECDL, FLT Licences ETC ETC. I keep getting told Im over qualified for a manual job but no one will give me a chance as Ive been a "white collar worker" for 25 yrs.

I did have one offer last week, 15K pa 6-2 /2-10, only one week end off in four, 48hrs per week no enhanced payments for weekends or B/H and to rub salt in the wound they wanted me to be the named operator on their licence.

Its hard out there people

It sure is, I've been looking for the last 16 months for a job... probably apply for 3-4 jobs a week in the work I want to do (just basically admin/office) but when you get 100+ people going for the same job, its a victory just to get an interview. I've worked since I was 18 (now 31) and have a good education GCSEs and A-Levels but its increasingly difficult because employers come out with too over-qualified to do this/that etc. Agencies also dont help, they kind of swamped the job market but are absolutely useless.

[havanatopia]

Although not on the same scale, could you argue that by adopting an inflexible attitude in Northern Ireland, Thatcher prolonged the troubles there and that by ignoring intelligence about the Falklands* (and sending out signals to the Argies that she wasn't concerned about the islans) she inadvertently encouraged the invasion.

NORTHERN IRELAND is way too complicated an issue to discuss or compare here. Iraq was a war on a lie whereas N.Ire is a about as far removed for comparisons as you could get.

I should point out that 179 Brits died in Iraq, whereas 258 died in the Falklands and more than 1,000 in Northern Ireland in the 1980s. The vast majority of Iraqi civillian deaths were and are caused by other Iraqis.

Pretty poor comparison, putting it mildly, unless wars can only be judged on number of mortalities; if that were the case you cannot possible ignore the thousands of Iraqi's that died thanks to the invasion. The Falklands are a British dependant territory.

Just playing Devils advocate here, not defending an indefensible war.

* The Argentinian invasion date was an open secret in Buenos Aires and had even been published in a newspaper gossip column there. Intelligence reports sent to Mrs T about this were apparently "missed".

If it was an open secret then you would not need an intelligence report would you!! Further, there is quite some difference between a newspaper report and the actual act of invasion!

[Mr Mosquito]

Arthur Scargill was the perfect enemy. He did everything Thatcher and MacGregor could have hoped for in an opponent. Played straight into the Government's hands in so many ways. He looked like a p***k, sounded like a p***k and acted like a p***k. He led the miner's to devastating defeat - just what Maggie wanted.

Wouldn't surprise me if either he was MI5 (unlikely) or more likely he was heavily influenced by someone who was MI5 and placed within the NUM.

The man was a prize tool.

Joe Gormley was the better Miners' Union leader. The military analogy is that Gormley was a General whereas Scargill was a Sergeant.

From wikipedia......

In 1971, Joe Gormley was elected as leader of the NUM and presided over the national strike that began on 9th January 1972. The strike lasted for seven weeks and, after a month, caused widespread power cuts. Emergency measures were used to economize on electricity by reducing the working week to three days. After much negotiation the strike was resolved on 25th February 1972 with a 21% increase in pay and concessions won by the miners.

Only two years later, NUM members voted again to strike and stopped work on 4th February 1974. Tory Prime Minister Edward Heath called a snap election on this issue, asking the public, "Who governs Britain?" Gormley tried to persuade the National Executive Conference to postpone the strike until after any election, but the strike went ahead. After the election brought in a new Labour government, the union's demands were met. The new National Coal Board "Plan for Coal", launched that year, was extremely ambitious in its scope of expansion of the coal mining industry.

In 1981, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher threatened to break with the plan and close 23 pits. When a national strike was threatened, Thatcher backed down; many miners went on unofficial strike in the year, but Joe Gormley rejected calls for a national strike. He left his post in 1982 and was replaced by the more left-wing Arthur Scargill. In 1982, his last-minute appeal got miners to accept a Government offer of a 9.3% raise, rejecting Scargill's call for a strike authorization.

....indeed, Arthur Scargill was a prize tool that undid all the hard won gains by previous Mine Worker leaders.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Joe Gormley was the better Miners' Union leader. The military analogy is that Gormley was a General whereas Scargill was a Sergeant.

From wikipedia......

In 1971, Joe Gormley was elected as leader of the NUM and presided over the national strike that began on 9th January 1972. The strike lasted for seven weeks and, after a month, caused widespread power cuts. Emergency measures were used to economize on electricity by reducing the working week to three days. After much negotiation the strike was resolved on 25th February 1972 with a 21% increase in pay and concessions won by the miners.

Only two years later, NUM members voted again to strike and stopped work on 4th February 1974. Tory Prime Minister Edward Heath called a snap election on this issue, asking the public, "Who governs Britain?" Gormley tried to persuade the National Executive Conference to postpone the strike until after any election, but the strike went ahead. After the election brought in a new Labour government, the union's demands were met. The new National Coal Board "Plan for Coal", launched that year, was extremely ambitious in its scope of expansion of the coal mining industry.

In 1981, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher threatened to break with the plan and close 23 pits. When a national strike was threatened, Thatcher backed down; many miners went on unofficial strike in the year, but Joe Gormley rejected calls for a national strike. He left his post in 1982 and was replaced by the more left-wing Arthur Scargill. In 1982, his last-minute appeal got miners to accept a Government offer of a 9.3% raise, rejecting Scargill's call for a strike authorization.

....indeed, Arthur Scargill was a prize tool that undid all the hard won gains by previous Mine Worker leaders.

it was more like 35% on both occasions (72 and 74) and the miners unions had made the promise after the 1972 strike not come back for more, within less than a year they were back for more and eventually got another 35%.

[Mr Mosquito]

it was more like 35% on both occasions (72 and 74) and the miners unions had made the promise after the 1972 strike not come back for more, within less than a year they were back for more and eventually got another 35%.

Whatever the percentage figure those were stonking pay increases that the country had to find the money for somehow. The Government could pass the miners' wage increases onto the consumer or raise taxation to pay for it. Like the underperforming British car industry, I can see why the coal pits were attracting the attention of Thatcher. I'm just surprised that Thatcher didn't attack our membership fees for the EEC in the same way.

[Antman]

I don't think anyone is reveering her... Personally I have no Political positive or negative views on her. I just think respect should be shown. She was after all elected in, by a majority vote in this Country by 'the people'... the longest serving British Prime Minister.

Whether we agree with her deeds or views...she was no Hitler or Hussain. The very working class people who went to war during WW2 for our freedom would show respect... something this Country has lost. A person of her character and strength is missing big time in British Politics. We wouldn't be in the mess we are now for sure.

cannot, cannot agree - her legacy is EXACTLY what is crippling our country -we are now a misguided attempt to become a pale shadow of what was essentially a dictatorship, you mentioned she wasnt a Hussain or a Hitler, no, she was far worse, (they were unapologetic in their 'iron fist' approach - unlike Thatcher who warped our notions of democracy to fullfill her ambitions) a corrosive influence who has polluted the ground for everyone who followed - we have had Blair, and now Cameron preening and pursuing the popularity they mistakenly believed she had enjoyed. List the the events she had a direct hand in - utterly destroying communities in an attempt to break the unions - turning the police into a political tool, a violent interventionist tool - used to crush opposition, privatising everything she could possibly get her claws into - promoting the culture of 'get rich at any means' city boys - pursuing an military, expansionist policy over the Falklands - introducing a swinging, divisive 'Poll Tax' at any means - taking away school milk, for gods sake! - her promotion of News International - support for General Pinochet - anti gay legislation - its a horrific list that has scarred our society and we are still paying the price.

This talk of 'respect' is also muddying the waters, Mark Thomas put it very well in the Independant quoting Tony bloody Blair;

“Even if you disagree with someone very strongly, at the moment of their passing you should show some respect.” Presumably then, when Bin Laden was killed, Blair’s statement was: “Although I didn’t agree with Osama’s policies, he was a conviction terrorist, a colourful character whose short films were not only fun but educational as well. He will be sadly missed.”

I have no problem with the vitriol that has been poured out at her expense - I rail now at the mindless apathy that overwhelms so many people - battered into submission by the attritional, endless spoon feeding of 'we know whats best for you' aproach to goverment.

Class has been dissolved into an inderminate mush of frustration, but strangely, out of it all, the wealthy, the privelidged come out on top every time - our current government - the psuedo Thatchers - are happy to award millionaires and banker incentives to keep on milking the system - while everyone else pays, and how do they get away with it - because they dupe enough of us into believeing that thats our lot - that 'socialism' somehow brings with it something inherently 'un British' something that couldn't possibly be good for us - of course not, because it threatens the well off and wealthy - them.

You surely cannot, suddenley absolve her for the destruction and division she brought because she's dead, The miners who committed suicide because they couldn't feed their families, the soldiers who died pursuing her war, the bill for her deeds is immense - I for one will happily 'tramp the earth down' on her grave.

Maggie, Maggie, Maggie - out, out, OUT!

Never forgive, never forget.