Tory leadership candidates should be banned from evoking Thatcher

Surely the Conservative Party has something better to offer than a rerun of 1979, asks Salma Shah

Liz Truss appeared to channel Margaret Thatcher’s style (Getty/Monty Fresco/ANL/Shutterstock)

New rule: anyone running in a Conservative leadership race should be banned from evoking the memory of Margaret Thatcher. No pussy-bow blouses, no mention of the Falklands or talk of free market economics and balancing the books. This type of behaviour must carry tough disincentives, like literal handbaggings for anyone who even tries to engage in these terrible impersonations.

We’ve had four Conservative prime ministers since her tenure at No 10 was brutally ended and, without wanting to sound insensitive, she died nearly a decade ago, in which time we’ve decapitated the party leader a further three times. We have also exited the EU, come through a global pandemic and are facing very high levels of inflation. Surely the Conservative Party has something better to offer than a rerun of 1979?

It feels like watching Some Mothers Do Have ’Em or the Good Life on repeat on BBC Two. We’ve already seen the best bits and we know what happens, so it matters little if it’s on TikTok or Twitter because we know how it ends.

Surely the Conservatives are not so shallow that we have run out of ideas... and are constantly turning to a caricature of “the great lady”, a pastiche that captures little of the original innovation and prevents us from appreciating the modern and the new.

Right-wing think tanks have never been more exciting. Robert Colvile, who runs the Centre for Policy Studies, a Thatcherite outfit, is bursting with new ideas, as is Ryan Shorthouse, on a different wing of the party, running Bright Blue, so why are we struggling?

I have previously advocated adopting “Thatcher 2.0”, so some might see this as contradictory, but developing the Conservative brand so they retain power means doing what Thatcher did, not what she was. It’s taking her courage and resilience and applying it to today. Evolving and looking forward instead of being wedded to nostalgia and the past.

Her true genius was her ability to diagnose the problem and take risks in order to find the solutions. She engaged in debate, she was willing to listen, in the early years, to change course to “start with the facts”. She would have relished the opportunity to put Putin back in his box, not for the kudos or machismo but because she had a principled belief in freedom and human dignity. It’s the long view we’re after but in the short term. She had a vision, one that we are yet to see articulated in this contest by anyone. A long list of unconnected policies and positions bonded by little other than ambition.

Thatcher was a product of her time. Those who claim her credentials are the beneficiaries of her policies in the 1980s, but the freedoms she sought were formed in the shadow of fascism in Europe in the 1930s. Rome was not built in a day and Mrs T took a long time to work out who she was too.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment, sign up to our free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here

Fundamentally, Thatcher was a radical. Our current candidates can’t possibly take her mantle because they have taken a relatively “safety first” approach. The world is literally on fire but the party faithful are being pandered to instead of convincing them on questions like the net zero target. Or a proper argument on why taxes can and should be lowered.

And there’s another Thatcher approach that modern politics in its already divided state cannot tolerate: aggression. She didn’t back down and try to reach a compromise with unions; she took assertive action and the Conservative Party has lived with the legacy of that for a long time, especially in mining towns and, thanks to the poll tax, in Scotland too. Will the Thatcherite tribute acts also lay claim to this part of the Lady’s legacy?

Ultimately, candidates who invoke Thatcher to play it safe are shying away from her radical zeal, knowing perhaps if you want to be the chief you’d better be prepared to be hated as well. But true Conservatism is an evolution, a recognition that in order to stand still you have to keep moving. Who is able to do that?