Mrs. Thatcher's legacy

Daniel Hannan yesterday spoke at the Oxford Union on the subject, and won narrowly.

He lists on his blog today her achievements, and asks why she is still demonised. His conclusion is that people forget how bad the 1970s were. (I add one further illustration - telephones, supplied by the Post Office in one design and colour virtually, could take up to a year to be installed, and privatisation caused a revolution there.

It suits some on the left to distort the report of history, and claim that somehow before 1979 we were one happy family which she then destroyed by making us all selfish. This is patent nonsense. If they will not accept the willingness of the NUM to plunge us into darkness to further their own ends, then they ought to note the cause of the winter of discontent which left patients in difficulties, the dead unburied and rubbish festering in our streets. You have to be an irrational supporter of Trade Union defeat of democracy.The self-interest was even earlier, going back to 1969 when unions noticed they had been deceived by bargaining for money increases. Thenceforth, aware of inflation, it was percentages and the percentages became so large by the mid 1970s, that inflation briefly touched nearly 30%. The relished their strength, and although they expressed concern about those on fixed income they did little to help them. It was a free for all!

Hannan is right to remind us that there was something called the British Disease in the 1970s - we were a basket case, lagging behind most countries, but by the late 1980s we were out-growing most other countries, and they looked to us for ideas on production and politics.

He is also right to point out that you can't blame her for the closure or rapid change in some old industries. It was subsidising them long after their sell-by-date, for example producing deep-mined coal at a cost far higher than we could purchase it elsewhere, that was dragging the economy down.

Those who choose to live with a mystical and emotional picture of the past may resent what she did and the manner in which she did it, they may resent that she was electorally victorious until her own party got rid of her, but it is a biased and misleading reading of history which prompts many of the criticisms of her.