Margaret thatcher

The idea that ‘loyalty is the Conservative party’s secret weapon’ was always dubious. Benjamin Disraeli, for instance, made his name attacking a sitting Conservative prime minister. This, though, did not stop him becoming arguably the party’s most celebrated leader. But in recent years, the ‘loyalty’ adage has become a joke — one that has taunted leader after leader as they struggled to deal with an increasingly rebellious party. The party changed leaders four times in the eight years between 1997 and 2005. In these opposition ‘wilderness’ years, changing a leader was the closest to power that Conservative MPs came. Leadership plotting gave an odd sense of purpose to their presence at Westminster.

The extracts in the Telegraph of Charles Moore’s biography of Margaret Thatcher have confirmed that this will be one of the most important political books of recent times. One of the intriguing things about Thatcher’s premiership is how, for the early years of it, she had to deal with a Cabinet that was not convinced of her policy prescription. This meant that, contrary to the latter image, she could not simply proceed as she wished. (Though, it should be noted that events vindicated Thatcher’s judgment.) Charles Moore reveals in his book that in 1979 Michael Heseltine flatly refused the job of energy secretary. He reports that when Thatcher offered it to him, he replied ‘“No… I’ve been rehearsing environment for three years.

Thatchermania has died down now, and I’ve personally stayed out of it. The quality of commentary from people around at the time has been outstanding, not least  The Spectator’s own Charles Moore. The Thatcher drama is one where I can’t even claim to have been a spectator. I was not into politics when I was young, not listening to Budget speeches on the school bus like the young George Osborne. Strife didn’t hit us much in the Highlands. I once crossed a picket line with my mum when teachers at my school, Nairn Academy, went on strike. She was a special needs teacher there and didn’t talk much about it, except to say she didn’t believe pupils should be made to suffer in disputes between adults.

Were Margaret Thatcher's relationships with foreign leaders as straightforward as they appeared to the public? In this week's Spectator cover feature, Pavel Stroilov provides a special insight into one particular relationship — Mikhail Gorbachev. Stroilov reveals the official Kremlin records of what Thatcher said to Gorbachev behind closed doors. On our View from 22 podcast, Thatcher biographer and advisor Robin Harris analyses her foreign policy legacy with Fraser Nelson, examining her relationship with world leaders, the personal and political differences that existed and the lessons the world today can take from her.

Today was a moment in our island story. The longest serving Prime Minister of the 2oth century was laid to rest with due ceremony. Watching the coffin move down to St Paul’s and the service itself, I was struck by how right it was that it was a ceremonial funeral. A private affair would not have done justice to the legacy of our first, and only, female Prime Minister. It was noticeable that the much talked-about protests along the route failed to materialise. But it should be stressed that today’s service was not a political affair. The eulogy was not about her policies but her faith and her understanding of it. Margaret Thatcher now passes into history. I suspect that her name will live on in the way that Gladstone and Disraeli have.

Further to my report yesterday, the Heritage Foundation, the giant conservative think-tank that has its own Margaret Thatcher Centre to study and promote the Special Relationship, has weighed in: ‘To refuse to honour a woman of such great historical and political significance, who was deeply loyal to the United States, is petty and shameful.  One truly has to wonder, what is it about Lady Thatcher that gives them pause? Her unfaltering commitment to freedom?  Or perhaps the way she fought for individual liberty and limited government?’ A fine point by the Heritage Foundation; but time is slipping away if the Senate is to pass a motion before the Lady is interred.

It is one of the paradoxes of modern British politics that in the post-war era the power and hold of political parties have declined and our system has become more presidential. But the two most electorally successful leaders of this era have both been deposed by their respective parties. This has created problems for both parties, as today’s Sunday Politics with Andrew Neil demonstrated. After John Reid had been on to discuss Tony Blair’s comments on Ed Miliband, Grant Shapps was up to be questioned on Margaret Thatcher’s legacy for the Tories. Shapps was reluctant to declare that the Tories are a Thatcherite party. Trying to suggest that it is but only to the extent that it is also a John Major party.

Reading Norman Fowler’s recollections of the Thatcher years in the Telegraph, whose coverage this week has been simply superb, is to be reminded of how much debate there was in her Cabinet. Take Fowler’s account of the pre-Budget Cabinet in 1981: “Jim Prior described the proposals as ‘disastrous’, adding that they would do nothing for growth and send unemployment figures above three million. He was supported by the so-called economic ‘wets’, such as Ian Gilmour and Peter Walker, who on this occasion were joined by Francis Pym and Christopher Soames. Even Keith Joseph had his doubts as he argued for more private investment in public industries.