Thatcher's Legacy

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:19 pm

Remember the warnings as thatcher privatised the gas and electricity companies and destroyed our coal industry about the over reliance on gas and that twenty - thirty years from now we would be at the mercy of foreign gas suppliers?

Well it's almost thirty years on and we are now dependent on foreign gas imports and we even import the coal for or remaining coal fired stations.

Gas shortage: who got us into this mess? | News | The Week UK

In the early 1980s, coal generation provided around 80 per cent of the UK's electricity. But the so-called 'Dash for Gas' by the short-term profit-obsessed, newly-privatised power companies from the early 1990s onwards - encouraged by the Conservative government - led to Britain's North Sea gas supplies being used up far quicker than should have been the case.

Labour criticised the 'Dash for Gas' while in opposition, but just three years into office they changed tack and in 2000 lifted their moratorium on gas-fired power stations.

Thirty years on, the enormous folly of these dogmatic 'free market' policies is clear for all to see.

Actually it was there to see at the time.

So when you look at your next fuel bill and wonder how you are going to pay it just think of thatcher and the smug bastards that got us to this point.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:42 pm

Of course as an alternative, she could have allowed the miners and the rest of the unions to hold us to ransom resulting In the UK being uninvestable by oversea's Investment as well as the laughing stock of the world.

Then we could go back to 3 day working weeks, sewerage and rats in the streets, the dead unburied and no Investment with minimal production and the lowest GDP in history.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:13 pm

oscar;1423150 wrote: Of course as an alternative, she could have allowed the miners and the rest of the unions to hold us to ransom resulting In the UK being uninvestable by oversea's Investment as well as the laughing stock of the world.

Then we could go back to 3 day working weeks, sewerage and rats in the streets, the dead unburied and no Investment with minimal production and the lowest GDP in history.

Those were the days eh! another tory government getting things wrong. Not forgetting of course the oil crisis as well. Yes dear oscar it was Heath that brought in the three day working week.

Actually they are all pathetic, we just elect the one we think the least useless.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:22 pm

gmc;1423154 wrote: Those were the days eh! another tory government getting things wrong. Not forgetting of course the oil crisis as well. Yes dear oscar it was Heath that brought in the three day working week.

Actually they are all pathetic, we just elect the one we think the least useless. She did what she had to do...

The country was on the brink of economic meltdown. We had no oversea's Investment because the unions held us to ransom and we ran out of electricity...

Most people who find they can't pay their bills sell their jewellry ... that's what she did... what do you Imagine the outlook would have been had she have not ?

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:33 pm

oscar;1423150 wrote: Of course as an alternative, she could have allowed the miners and the rest of the unions to hold us to ransom resulting In the UK being uninvestable by oversea's Investment as well as the laughing stock of the world.

Then we could go back to 3 day working weeks, sewerage and rats in the streets, the dead unburied and no Investment with minimal production and the lowest GDP in history.

From both sides, that a Prime Minister and a Union Leader allowed their personal animosity to wreck a major industry is absurd.

As the senior figure in the dispute it shows Maggie in a worse light for failing to deal with the situation. It was incumbent upon her to look to Britain's best interest which she singularly failed to do - she was so determined to destroy Arthur Scargill that she was prepared to destroy the coal industry along with him.

Not good government and not good management of the country.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:37 pm

Bryn Mawr;1423158 wrote: From both sides, that a Prime Minister and a Union Leader allowed their personal animosity to wreck a major industry is absurd.

As the senior figure in the dispute it shows Maggie in a worse light for failing to deal with the situation. It was incumbent upon her to look to Britain's best interest which she singularly failed to do - she was so determined to destroy Arthur Scargill that she was prepared to destroy the coal industry along with him.

Not good government and not good management of the country. I'm not saying for a minute that she did the right thing all of the time but given what she Inherited In 1979 and the turn around to the rising prosperity of the 80's, she has much to be credited with.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 4:42 am

oscar;1423150 wrote: Of course as an alternative, she could have allowed the miners and the rest of the unions to hold us to ransom.................................. minimal production and the lowest GDP in history.

We just swapped the Unions for the Bankers..............and what was that about production?

oscar;1423159 wrote: I'm not saying for a minute that she did the right thing all of the time............. she has much to be credited with.

A hand in the present financial crisis perhaps ?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:43 am

Bruv;1423166 wrote: We just swapped the Unions for the Bankers..............and what was that about production?

A hand in the present financial crisis perhaps ? You can not possibly equate today's finances with the economic meltdown of 1979 and that of which she Inherited.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 9:26 am

oscar;1423159 wrote: I'm not saying for a minute that she did the right thing all of the time but given what she Inherited In 1979 and the turn around to the rising prosperity of the 80's, she has much to be credited with.

Much of that rising prosperity was due to the north sea oil revenues - which were used to pay people on the dole and give tax breaks to people who didn't need them rather than being used to invest in our economy. Also a property and credit boom which she started by deregulating the banks, allowed building societies to become banks (how well that turned out) easing the deposit requirements for mortgages and also removing the need for 20% deposits for things for things like car finance. Big car dealerships stopped selling only cars and started making much of their profit from selling the finance. Remember the yuppie - greed is good and maggie thatcher there is no such thing as civil society

You can not possibly equate today's finances with the economic meltdown of 1979 and that of which she Inherited.

You can blame her for starting it - doesn't excuse major, blair et al from not trying to undo the damage. Just keep paying your privatised gas and electricity bills and rejoice all the profit goes to the french. You know if the argentinians decide to attack the falklands again there is nothing we can do about it - no carriers, never mind we can scare them with trident.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 9:35 am

Then given what she Inherited In 1979, how eactly would you suggest she got the country moving and Investable ?

Don't say by Investing In Industry... she couldn't... the Unions had made us a world laughing stock and completely uninvestable.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 12:30 pm

oscar;1423179 wrote: Then given what she Inherited In 1979, how eactly would you suggest she got the country moving and Investable ?

Don't say by Investing In Industry... she couldn't... the Unions had made us a world laughing stock and completely uninvestable.

Whilst Maggie destroyed out manufacturing industry and, by dismantling the apprentice system, ensured that we had an untrained workforce that would never be able to restart it.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:16 pm

Bryn Mawr;1423192 wrote: Whilst Maggie destroyed out manufacturing industry and, by dismantling the apprentice system, ensured that we had an untrained workforce that would never be able to restart it. So given what she Inherited In 1979, how do you suggest she got the country moving and attract over-sea's Investment ?

She was actually the first PM to put Inner City youth on the agenda...

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:48 pm

oscar;1423194 wrote: So given what she Inherited In 1979, how do you suggest she got the country moving and attract over-sea's Investment ?

She was actually the first PM to put Inner City youth on the agenda...

I saw what she did and I can guarantee that it was wrong.

At this remove trying to think what she should have done would require more thought and research than I have the time or inclination for.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 4:36 pm

Bryn Mawr;1423201 wrote: I saw what she did and I can guarantee that it was wrong.

At this remove trying to think what she should have done would require more thought and research than I have the time or inclination for.

She turned the country from virtual meltdown In 1979 to economic boom In the 80's....

When ever this question Is put to anyone.... the answers are reluctant to come...

Some say she could have Invested In jobs.... Invested what ? the country was virtually bankrupt and In debt... Then, If she created jobs, they would have been held to further ransom by the unions and 3 day working weeks to preserve fuel from unproductive coal mines.

She did what she had to do.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 4:57 pm

oscar;1423210 wrote: She turned the country from virtual meltdown In 1979 to economic boom In the 80's....

When ever this question Is put to anyone.... the answers are reluctant to come...

Some say she could have Invested In jobs.... Invested what ? the country was virtually bankrupt and In debt... Then, If she created jobs, they would have been held to further ransom by the unions and 3 day working weeks to preserve fuel from unproductive coal mines.

She did what she had to do.

No! She chose to fight a personal battle rather that address the wider issues.

As a result the "outside issues" that should have been central were given insufficient thought and mishandled.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:21 pm

Bryn Mawr;1423213 wrote: No! She chose to fight a personal battle rather that address the wider issues.

As a result the "outside issues" that should have been central were given insufficient thought and mishandled. Are you forgetting that In 1976 the government had to be bailed out by the IMF ? The country was Insolvent and worse, unable to pay our debts.

Callaghan begged the unions for concessions .... Thatcher had little choice in breaking them up especially the miners and British Leyland who were holding the country to ransom.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:34 pm

oscar;1423217 wrote: Are you forgetting that In 1976 the government had to be bailed out by the IMF ? The country was Insolvent and worse, unable to pay our debts.

Callaghan begged the unions for concessions .... Thatcher had little choice in breaking them up especially the miners and British Leyland who were holding the country to ransom.

The country was bancrupt throughout the fifties and sixties as well and were begging for handouts from whoever would provide one.

That didn't lead to out and out confronation and the deliberate distruction of an entire industry until Maggie took umbrage at Arthur.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:19 pm

Bryn Mawr;1423218 wrote: The country was bancrupt throughout the fifties and sixties as well and were begging for handouts from whoever would provide one.

That didn't lead to out and out confronation and the deliberate distruction of an entire industry until Maggie took umbrage at Arthur.

Callaghan's concessions with Scargill failed.... what else was there to do?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:28 am

I included this just because I think gmc might like it................

Banker on the spot