The release of the 1981 Cabinet papers under the 30 year rule have yielded some truly historic revelations. Perhaps the most fascinating relate to Margaret Thatcher’s direct interventions and communications with the IRA. At a time of acute tension in Northern Ireland, mainly the result of hunger strikes by Republican convicts, who demanded they be treated as political prisoners rather than common criminals. This was no posturing - they began to die and one, Bobby Sands, was by then an MP. The official stance of the government was that they would not deal with 'terrorists' - they were murderers and bombers. To countenance any change in their status would be to acknowledge that such acts could be justified as part of a legitimate struggle against the British occupiers.
The assassinaions and bombings on the mainland had ben in full swing for eight years and Republicans had audaciously murdered Thacher's Northern spokesman, close aide and Colditz PoW escapee Airey Neive as the election campaign that brought her to power got underway, by blowing him up as he started his car in the House of Commons underground car park. It was now personal.
Of course, 'everyone' knew there were negotiations using 'back channels', but the revelation that Thatcher herself was involved in the communiques with the IRA leadership and was leaving all options on the table - including one for Britain to withdraw from Northern Ireland, would certainly have caused -to put it mildly - ructions in N Ireland. The Unionists were, in any case,rightly terrified that the English were not too fussed about hanging onto N Ireland and would- as I suspect they will soon over Scotland - to conclude that, you know, we've been good together, but if you feel that way, thanks and by bye. Don’t let us stand in your way!
Britan as in a pretty demoralised state in 1981. When Thatcher came to power two years earlier, the brutal but accurate verdict was that Britain was not only no longer a world power, but wasn't even in the first rank in Europe. The view of the Foreign Office was that the UK's decline from being undisputed number one in the world, with an Empire that covered a third of the globe and where the sun never set, etc., to one beleaguered and neutered by over-ambitious and unrealistic defence commitments and a failing economy, should be managed gently. Only a third of Thacher’s Cabinet supported upgrading Britain's nuclear defence to new Trident submarines - it was pushed through in secret using the Royal Prerogative. Many right across the political spectrum reckoned that Britain’s economic decline - just five years after the previous Labour government had felt compelled to agree to IMF terms to slash public spending in order to secure a 'standby' loan and avoid the possibility of the country going bankrupt - was equally inevitable. The country was too set in its ways, too complacent, the unions too powerful, the political class too weak and it could no longer compete on the world stage. Best to go gently into that long good night.
Thatcher of course was having none of this but some in her Cabinet - even those who were, at that stage anyway, 'true believers' - believed that some parts of the country were unlikely to respond to the harsh medicine which was thought necessary to cure the 'patient'. In Liverpool's case, her Chancellor of the Exchequer, Geoffrey Howe argued to her, public money would be wasted. Like paramedics at the scene of a catastrophe where there are many severely injured and dying casualties, brutal assessments were needed to choose between those who were doomed and those who might survive and to concentrate limited resources on the latter.
In interviews given to coincide with the release of the papers, Howe has denied that he meant that his view that the city should be subjected to a "managed decline" Liverpool should be simply abandoned and left to its fate. But, frankly, I don't believe him.
The fact is Liverpool represented everything Thatcher loathed and were the awkward squad who she feared could block her goal of changing Britain. It, and many of the former great industrial cities, had become barren for Conservatives and they and their populations were expendable. In many constituencies, the Labour party was being taken over by Militant; the true nasty party, demonstrating a political version of Newton's third law of Physics.
And the poilitical parties weren't the only nasty ones. My favourite quote in these papers is from Michael Heseltine, sent to Merseyside for what many in Thacher's government regarded as a 'fool's errand', was so shocked by the police ( ready to be used as a political force in the great industrial battles to come, whose pay had doubled under Thatcher and were better equipped than ever) and declared they were not racist- they were thuggish and brutal to everyone! So some sort of equality was achieved.
Visiting Liverpool yesterday though, on the fourth day of sales, we found the car parks at (UNESCO heritage) waterfront - pictured! -and multi-million private investment-led shopping centre were showing 'full' signs. Queues to get into Pandora's, where cheapest item is about £60. And of course, queues past Anfield for the visit by Newcastle United. It has top-rated car plant(s), Biotech and Gaming industries, to name just a few of its employment highlights, a world-class Philharmonic orchestra, superb theatre, the rich cultural and architectural heritage and superb museums and art galleries.
In the case of Liverpool's citizens and Thatcher - unlike another law of physics - opposites repelled. Yet both refused to accept the accepted wisdom of inevitable decline. Both were proved right. By the end of the '80s, Britain was no longer "the sick man of Europe", it was rushing up the league tables of economic power and productivity - indeed one car plant in the depressed north-east was rated as the most productive in the world. The country still had a seat at the top table - still a nuclear power, still a permanent member of the UN Security Council, still a leading light in NATO, the Queen was still Head of State in more than a dozen countries and of a Commonwealth of a third of the nation's peoples and, after giving them a good hand-bagging, Thatcher had secured a significant rebate of the UK's contributions to the EU.
Could all of this had been achieved without the destruction of so many people's futures, so many communities, so much wasted talent? In 1981, much needed to change in Britain, not least on trade unions who often blocked sensible and necessary changes in working practices, etc.. But couldn’t the North Sea oil revenues been put into a sovereign fund, as Norway has done, to secure the country’s economic future and provide excellent pensions, public services, transport infrastructure, etc., rather than on unemployment benefits to a 'lost generation' and tax cuts for the already fortunate?
One thing is for sure – 1981 was the year of fateful decisions and long-lasting consequences. The Cabinet papers make for fascinating reading aboout the realities, dilemmas, conflicts and uncertainities of governance. And in their different ways, with the benefit of hindsight and as we are facing very uncertain, perilous times once again, both Britain’s and Liverpool’s post-1981 history can give us some grounds for optimism. Happy new year!
Comments