Chapter 25 Section 6 try, try again

1971 was a difficult year for the government and for me personally.The mounting stress builds up and becomes more and more unbearable.By early 1972, as I describe below, the government finally lost confidence.Although I was under more pressure than ever before, my confidence remained the same. Yet some commentators, with a mixture of admiration and regret, think I'm done.When I returned from Christmas at Lamberhurst to work, I read in the papers that my fate was being publicly discussed.One newspaper called me "the lady no one likes".Another newspaper published a seemingly considerate article entitled "Why Mrs Thatcher Was So Unpopular".But I pushed the mess aside and got down to work.

In fact, it wasn't long before the wave of attacks turned against me personally (not yet against the government).Perhaps the time has come for the campaign against "milk snatching" to end. In 1972, far more serious problems—factors brought about by the miners' strike and the government's radical policy shift—began to hit us.These issues dwarf the movement against me personally.Of course, I obviously wouldn't -- at least not willingly -- give in or back down.But I owe Ted Heath a debt of gratitude. Ted sent me and some of my officers to a meeting at Checkers House on Wednesday, January 12, for a general discussion on education.I carry with me a memorandum summarizing and envisioning the state of education.Despite many difficulties, only one of the pre-election promises has yet to be implemented: expanding early childhood education.It takes a lot of money to complete some major projects.Another aspect that has frustrated our supporters is the organizational structure of secondary education.The problem here is that - in the exact words I put it - "many local committees in our own party are following the trend. The question is whether to defend existing grammar schools or allow local education authorities to make their own decisions What kind of balance?" We discussed these issues at Checkers House, along with other vexing issues such as school milk and student unions.Ted showed obvious interest.He cared about early childhood education; he kept calling for action against student unions; and he asked very legitimately why we couldn't justify our choice of student policies with an educational rationale, rather than just talking about local authority autonomy.

But from my point of view.Ted's invitation to discuss education with me and my officials was at least as important as the discussion itself, and it meant that he had no intention of removing me from the Department of Education for any foreseeable time.For me at the time, facing various problems, this was a strong support for my authority.A few days later Ted was again listing my achievements in the House of Commons.Why did he give me such strong support?Some believe this was because he needed two women in his cabinet, and credible replacements could not be found at the time.But I think it also captures Ted's most admirable character.He knew that the policies for which I had been so violently attacked were essentially policies which I had to settle for under pressure from the Treasury in view of the government's financial difficulties.He also knew I wasn't trying to pass the buck on to others.

While he cannot be expected to stick to certain policies, he is always supportive of those who do their best for him and his administration.This is an important reason why his cabinet members can unite in support of him. Ted's support for me only provided me with a brief respite.But that's enough.Beginning in the spring of 19-72, the cold political climate I experienced began to visibly thaw. My speech at the National Federation of Teachers' meeting in April was well received not only by most of the attendees (who cheered me at the end), but more importantly by the press as well.This time, unlike usual, the proposals I made in my speech were addressed to a variety of different political stripes.I'm announcing a budget increase to build elementary schools, now at record levels.I also announced the formation of a committee to look at the teaching of reading and the use of English in elementary schools, which has become a matter of widespread public concern.I hinted at further expansion of early childhood education, while reminding everyone that there is a funding problem.But it was my critique of large comprehensive schools that really captured the imagination of the reviewers. (I elaborated on this last issue at a press conference after this speech, emphasizing that I had recently rejected plans for a 2,700-pupil comprehensive school in Wiltshire.)

When I stood up to speak, some representatives of the left-wing teachers' union walked out rudely.But this instead yielded additional gains.Not only does the news media like to highlight the virtues of smaller schools, but it also criticizes these people for their exits, arguing that as teachers who are unwilling to even listen to different opinions, they are not setting a good example for their students. In May, the newspaper that used to call me "the lady no one likes" praised me publicly this time as "a mature Margaret".Somewhat ironically, this hit-and-miss topic - I advocate small schools - is one that I've stuck to since my days as a schoolboy in Grantham.

However, it was not until the publication of the White Paper on Education in December 1972 that luck returned to our education policy.The decision to publish the white paper was made after discussions within the Ministry following three Program Analysis and Inspection Reports.The title of the white paper was decided at the last minute after cabinet discussions.The original proposal for Education: A Platform Forward was later changed to Education: A Platform for Expansion.It now looks typical of those overly ambitious, high-spending years.The white paper proposes a ten-year plan for high expenditure and improvement of government supply, which has six main contents: including plans to improve or rebuild dilapidated secondary schools, adding special schools for mentally handicapped and disabled children, and appropriately improving the teachers and staff of primary and secondary schools to students. Proportion.In order to meet the funding needs in the above aspects, control the development speed of higher education.We also responded to the James Commission's recommendations on teacher training.But the most important point is to announce the vigorous development of early childhood education.The program will satisfy 90 percent of 4-year-olds and 50 percent of 3-year-olds, with an initial focus on areas lacking early childhood education facilities.It now appears that the white paper marks "the biggest effort yet by the government to fix the problems inherent in the UK education system, for which it is prepared to invest heavily.

The white paper received an unexpectedly warm reception. The Daily Telegraph, while criticizing the white paper for failing to make recommendations on student loans, saw it as showing that I was "one of the best reforming - and spending - education secretaries in our country". The Daily Mail called it a "quiet revolution" and commented that "it has not been done since the war".More disturbingly, the Guardian's report praised it as a "progressive programme" and commented - I hope this was insincere - "except that there was no mandatory end to With screening tests, Mrs Thatcher was not far from the aspirational goal of a socialist education policy."