Thatcherism saw a return to the liberal economics of the nineteenth century, what believed in the power of the market to provide social welfare. The city were left to regulate itself as the ‘Big Bang’ in 1986 saw the markets de-regulated, whilst direct taxation was reduced as part of Mrs Thatcher belief in supply-side economics. But in Jackson’s view Thatcherism failed, because it was based on a market ideology "...not generally accepted by the working class or by the educated who have different values". Furthermore, Jackson argues that Thatcherism ignored the need for education and training, and investment in essential research and development. Jackson maintains that governments have to take a lead in these spheres, as they have in countries such as Germany and Japan, and by not doing so Thatcherism failed to significantly change the economy. The most significant consequence of Thatcherism for government in the 1990’s will probably be to show that the government cannot leave it to the markets - some form of intervention is necessary. Major is showing signs of being more willing to embrace the nettle of intervention - thus Hesletine’s recent speech that he will ‘intervene before breakfast, before lunch etc’ to save British Industry - yet his unwillingness to help keep the coal mines open, or to intervene to help Leyland Daf show the lessons will be not be learnt easily. In an article on the Future of the Major Government, Andrew Marr cites a retired civil servant, Jim Ross, who recently argued that: "We are unlikely to have confident government between now and the end of the decade. The state of the economy is such that no British government is likely to be accounted successful during that period".
Thatcherism and its consequences
Missed the train once and already there is a red signal. What England went through in the seventies may still be on the agenda for other European countries. For a long time, the former world economic superpower did not deem it necessary to modernise old industries, to do away with subsidies or to do something about the ever-pervasive unemployment. In short, to revitalise the domestic economy by introducing structural changes. England partially maintained the status quo of its foreign trade statistics with oil alone, but was otherwise sliding downhill. Margaret Thatcher then tried the radical cure of a free market economy - and initially had superficial success: The gross domestic product increased sharply, unemployment seemed to fall - albeit right alongside wages.
For a long time, England was the land of the unions: The first workers’ associations were formed in the wake of the Industrial Revolution; they fought against the miserable working conditions. Right up to the seventies, England had developed one of the most powerful and aggressive trade union systems in the world. Traditionally, they had close ties with the Labour Party. The turnaround was brought about by Margaret Thatcher: After the coal miners’, steelworkers’ and dockyard workers’ strikes - which sometimes lasted for years - she declared war on the workers’ power with stringent laws - and won. Today, the trade unions are mere shadows of their former selves. There are now few strikes, even though working conditions have worsened, and Labour’s transformation to New Labour has meant the loss of their party in the House of Commons.
The present economy development
The English job wonder of previous years was not only the result of economic factors: thanks to a deft method of counting, almost half the English unemployed are statistically filtered out of the figures. All persons who have been unemployed for a long time are simply not included in the jobless statistics; instead, they are included in the poverty statistics. Thus, at the end of 1996, there were officially only 8.1 percent unemployed, but if all the unemployed job seekers were to be counted the figures for England would then be 16.1 percent. By comparison, if this method of counting were to be applied in Germany, just 10.3 percent would be jobless. The English job wonder is therefore the result of a wonderfully imaginative method of calculation.
England’s economy is in a boom-phase. Corporations are expanding, trade is blossoming, and in no other country in Europe is there so much investment from abroad as in the United Kingdom. Even the job market seems to be in order: After the decline in the influence of trade unions and the accompanying drop in average labour costs, more people once again became employed. The unemployment figures at the end of 1996 were stated as 8.1% (Germany: 9.0%), with a downward trend. Small wonder, one might think, considering that labour costs in England are not even half those in Germany. However, many of the new jobs are part-time and badly paid. In addition, the supposed job wonder was strongly assisted by the statisticians, who simply did not count certain classes of unemployed individual.
