---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 06:46:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: MichaelP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mark Lakota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Strange bedfellow department
Sudden discovery by brit. right wing (center ?)opposition
that some public services like HEALTH, WELFARE, EDUCATION can't be left to
private sector.
Of course, somebody has to mount an opposition to the neo-lib NEW LABOUR
party.
Cheers
MichaelP
=========
London TIMES April 24 1999
'Ballistic' Thatcher zeroes in on Hague
BY ANDREW PIERCE
THE Tory revolt over William Hague's attempt to downgrade the party's
principles was reignited by Baroness Thatcher last night when she told
close supporters of her dismay.
Lady Thatcher, feted by the Tory leadership at a dinner to celebrate the
forthcoming 20th anniversary of her election as Prime Minister, "went
ballistic" when Peter Lilley chose the same night to signal the end of her
cherished ideology.
A confidante of the former Prime Minister said: "She is livid. Simply
livid."
A Thatcherite MP said: "She went ballistic. She doesn't mind who knows
it."
Yesterday the split in the Conservative Party widened when it emerged that
Mr Lilley, its deputy leader, was forced to tone down his original speech
in the wake of complaints from Shadow Cabinet colleagues
The first draft, obtained by The Times, underlines the scale of Mr
Lilley's intended break with the Thatcherite past in his denunciation of
freemarket solutions to cure the problems of health and education.
The former Secretary of State for Social Security had originally included
a passage that will astound many Thatcherites. He said: "Most
Conservatives have always accepted that the public services are
intrinsically unsuited to delivery via the market." In another passage, he
argued that in providing health, welfare and education services "market
processes have at best an auxiliary role to play".
Equally baffling to Tory MPs was Mr Lilley's failure to include any praise
for Conservative reforms. He also omitted any mention of his pension-plus
reform package, which was unveiled shortly before the 1997 general
election. It was attacked by Labour as a blueprint for privatisation of
the state pension.
Instead, after interventions from several astonished Shadow Cabinet
colleagues, Mr Lilley agreed to water down his text. In the speech he
delivered, Mr Lilley said that the public services were unsuited to
replacement by "universal delivery" through the free market - something
that even the most trenchant Thatcherites have not demanded.
The section on the private sector being limited to an auxiliary role was
changed to: "In some public services there may be some scope for
introducing diversity and choice among providers of the service and for
encouraging public-private partnership." Mr Lilley also lavished praise on
Tory reforms such as fundholding for doctors in general practice and for
grant maintained schools.
Reference was also made as to why he had brought forward the pension
reform proposals. But last night a Tory party spokesman said: "We
emphatically reject the suggestion that Peter Lilley toned down the
speech.
"We believe that there is strong support within the Shadow Cabinet and the
parliamentary party for Peter Lilley and William Hague's contention that
the public services must be predominately funded out of taxpayers money."
Mr Hague backed the controversial speech after focus group findings said
that the people did not trust the Tories to deliver good public services.
His policy strategy group of senior MPs argued that the speech would
create an informed public debate. They hoped that it would reassure voters
that the comprehensive- school-educated Tory leader supported the public
sector.
John Redwood, the Shadow Secretary of State for Trade, said that Mr Hague
had made the position clear in his article in The Times yesterday.
"We have two messages. We have no intention of charging people to go into
hospital or selling off doctors' practices.
"We also have imaginative ideas recognising that there will be private
healthcare on top of the NHS."
But many Tories believe the Lilley speech was a disaster. "They hope it
will get the Tories talked about and project Hague in a more caring light
to put him a notch closer to Saint Tony. It's garbage," said one Tory
grandee.
"It has convulsed the parliamentary party and projected us as split on
another issue. We have to restore our reputation, lost under the Major
Government, for economic competence and efficiency, and stop ripping up
things we were good at."
*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. ***
--
For MAI-not (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other MAI sites please see http://mai.flora.org/
