A reader takes issue with Kwasi Kwarteng’s assessment of Margaret Thatcher’s time in opposition and her path to reform.
I would like to address Kwasi Kwarteng’s assertion (Cover Story, 15 September) that “the two great reforming governments were New Labour… and Margaret Thatcher’s. It’s no surprise that a lot of their thinking was done in the long years of opposition.” This comparison between Tony Blair’s prolonged time in opposition and Thatcher’s brief stint misrepresents the nature of Thatcher’s time before becoming Prime Minister. Yes, Blair was in opposition for over a decade, but Thatcher’s tenure as leader of the Conservative Party was much shorter, lasting only four years from 1975 to 1979. Kwarteng’s framing of her years in opposition as “long” overlooks the fact that the Labour government during much of that period did not command a majority and was dependent on tacit support from the Liberal Party, significantly weakening its authority.
Furthermore, Kwarteng’s comments fail to account for the complexities of Thatcher’s time in opposition. While Blair had the luxury of honing his ideas over many years, Thatcher’s position was different. After her initial years of being in government as education secretary, she was thrust into leading the party with little support from her own ranks. Her ideological stance, particularly her monetarist approach, was unpopular within the Conservative Party during her early years in opposition, and she had to fight for every inch of influence she gained.
Her economic policies were far from successful during her first term. Despite her strong beliefs in free-market principles and monetarism, Thatcher’s government struggled with growing unemployment, inflation, and industrial unrest. Her early policies led to a series of strikes, particularly from the engineering unions, and her first major challenge came in the form of the 1981 miners’ strike. This was a critical juncture in her political career, and her government’s inability to effectively deal with these economic problems left her leadership in doubt.
It wasn’t until the unexpected Falklands War in 1982 that Thatcher’s premiership was truly rescued. The war, which was triggered by Argentina’s invasion of the Falkland Islands, came at a time when Thatcher’s popularity was at a low ebb. Her government had already faced considerable domestic unrest, and her economic policies were being severely criticized. The successful recapture of the Falklands was a major victory, but it is worth noting that it was, in part, the result of cuts to Britain’s defense budget and the proposed withdrawal of key military assets like the Endurance vessel, which left the islands vulnerable to invasion.
While the Falklands War restored Thatcher’s political fortunes, it should be remembered that it was a crisis of her own government’s making. The war provided a unifying moment for the British public, who rallied behind her leadership. However, it was not an ideological or economic triumph but rather a fortuitous external event that gave her the political breathing room she needed.
In light of this, Kwarteng’s characterization of Thatcher’s opposition years as marked by a long period of ideational development and refinement of policy is misleading. Thatcher’s rise to power was anything but inevitable, and her early policies faced considerable setbacks. The major reforms she is known for were not the product of years of careful opposition planning, but rather the result of a confluence of factors, including political opportunity, economic necessity, and, notably, the Falklands conflict.
In conclusion, while Margaret Thatcher’s government did indeed enact significant reforms, it is important to recognize the complexities and challenges she faced in getting there. Her time in opposition was far shorter and less productive than Kwarteng’s portrayal suggests, and her early time as Prime Minister was marked by significant political and economic difficulties. Thatcher’s political legacy, while monumental, was shaped by both her successes and the crises that tested her leadership.