2orangey4crows Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Well I hope The Iron Lady gets well !!! And just for the hell of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted December 9, 2005 Author Share Posted December 9, 2005 Well I hope The Iron Lady gets well !!! And just for the hell of it Ah, but is the Iron Lady rust proof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Politically, I was never a great supporter of Maggie, her policies were very painful for a lot of people, whether they were in the final analysis good for Britain who knows as we don't know what would have happened otherwise. But, I wouldn't wish her ill health. One of her worst policies was the sale of council housing at vast discounts. I have no problem with private ownership, but the policy was not thought through. It created huge opportunities for profiteering and effectively took social housing out of the public sector (where I think it should be) and put it in the private sector. The money generated by the sale of council homes was not used to build more as it should have been. It also was, IMHO, a major factor in fuelling the property boom of the mid-eighties and the subsequent bust. Her policies also decimated communities and, although doubtless something had to be done to turn the tide of extreme unionisation and bankrolling inefficient industries, she displayed very little humanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R_ReaVeR Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 @ cheese seconded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallybug Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 I personally hate Thatcher for two reasons. Firstly her stupid policies indicated that the UK was giving up the Falklands which led the Argentinians to invade. She then took all the glory from the success of the military to stay in power. An amazing PR exercise. She causes the invasion and then revels in getting the islands back. She even ordered the unneccessary storming and subsequent deaths at Goose Green for political reasons. At the end of it instead of giving the islands up as was the original intention they now cost a fortune and will continue to do so! "Giving up" the islands? They're a British Overseas Territory whose inhabitants are proud of being British, and as such their laws are the same as in the UK - other OTs are Bermuda, Anguilla, BVI, Caymans, Gibraltar etc. I dont' see how she could have just "given them up" no matter if she had wanted to or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted December 11, 2005 Author Share Posted December 11, 2005 "Giving up" the islands? They're a British Overseas Territory whose inhabitants are proud of being British, and as such their laws are the same as in the UK - other OTs are Bermuda, Anguilla, BVI, Caymans, Gibraltar etc. I dont' see how she could have just "given them up" no matter if she had wanted to or not. Thatcher's cuts in the defence budget in 1980-1981 ensured that less support was offered for defence of overseas colonies. Argentina took this as a sign that the Falkland Islands were up for grabs and chose to invade. I also agree that self-determination is the number one criteria for deciding who is governed by who - if the Falkland islanders want to be run by a government 6,000 miles away rather than one 500 miles away then that's their choice. It should be pointed out that in the distant past Argentina had people living in the islands but they chose to leave - voluntarily or otherwise I don't know. Maggie was opposed to devolution for parts of the UK which I believe to be totally undemocratic. If Scotland wish to be self-governing or independent then they should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollag Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 Some maintain that the changing of the citizenship of the Islanders from Brit Cit to Cit of Islands and dependancies was the spur to invasion. I was in favour of giving the Islands to Argie cos, lets be honest, looking ot the map, they seem to want to be Argie. Then i heard an explanation from a diplomat on TV, he said HMG would like to have handed over the Islands but with the regime in Argie, arrests without trial, torture, assasinations, people disappearing, well they couldnt hand over our citezens to such a repressive regime---i agreed. Seems like deja vu all over again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted December 11, 2005 Share Posted December 11, 2005 Maggie was opposed to devolution for parts of the UK which I believe to be totally undemocratic. Didn't Scotland take part in the democratic election process that brought the Conservative government into power then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 But a majority voted in favour of devolution in 1979. But it was scrapped on a technicality. Source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Which predated Thatcher.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Yes. But the problem was left over until her term to be sorted out and she ignored it. Her view was that she had a mandate from the whole of the UK to govern and opposition was in her manifesto so the fact that 60% of Scots (who in the main didn't vote Tory anyway) voted for devolution didn't matter. Whether you think she is right or not really depends on your stance devolution now. This was really the debate in England when Labour started the Scottish Parliament after the 1997 election, and subsequent reformendum. I think she was wrong, but it was a long time ago and far from being her worst crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 But a majority voted in favour of devolution in 1979. But it was scrapped on a technicality. A technicality? I can't get wikipedia ... its a banned site in China, just like the BBC news ... so I can't read what the article you have linked says; SO please correct me if I am wrong ... BUT the referendum required at least 40% of the electorate to vote and only 32.9% did. All participants of the referendum were fully aware of the rules and hence the need to get their vote out. The results were 52% in favour and 48% against. So a discredited previous administration holds an referendum with clear guidelines on what is required for devolution to pass. Those who want devolution are able to get 17.1% of the electorate to vote in favour while 82.9% are either against or do not express an opinion ... and you are saying it is one of Maggie's "crimes" was to say enough was enough and to take devolution off the table while she had a democratic mandate to rule? Choosing not to vote is also a political act and I am very unsympathetic to any group claiming they were thwarted by not been able to get their vote out when they are holding a referendum in an open and free society with full media coverage etc I think there are problems with the UK's democratic system, but at the same time say change will only come when there is a suffiecient mandate to change it and presently there isn't ... for all of the lib dem (and nowadays even some Tory) whinging. A vote in Scotland is much more valuable than a vote in England ... due to the Mid Lothian question etc and hence Scottish MP's wield considerably more influence in Parliament than MP's than elsewhere. The fact that those in favour of Scottish devolution were unable to gain enough democratic support either in Westminster or directly via the referendum is their own fault and I find you blaming Maggie for it just plain nuts! Now her handling of the Poll Tax in Scotland etc etc ... there I'd say you were making reasonable points ... but devolution was a non-issue after the referendum failed and I really don't think you can blame Maggie for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Ultimately, just as her supporters lionise her for everything she did or didn't do, her detractors demonise her on the same basis. No matter how much her achievements were lauded by the support she received from the press at the time, she always managed to divide the country - and continues to divide opinion equally effectively with hindsight. Whilst I will always maintain that she was one of the worst prime ministers the country ever had, I have to accept that there will always be many who hold an diametrically opposed view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 All that said, I doubt you'd actually be as immature as to wish ill health and death on her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Of course not. But I might wish that, when her time does come, she spends all eternity facing the young men sent to early, icy graves in the Southern Atlantic by her actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.