Chapter 32 Chapter 6 Retribution

Somber mood prevailed in the Cabinet on Tuesday, November 13, as the crisis intensified on every front.Tony Barber tells us that the day's October trade numbers will show another big deficit.There is talk of cutting public spending and raising tax rates (the minimum borrowing rate has actually been raised to a record 13 percent).It appears that another state of emergency will have to be declared and orders will be issued to limit the use of electricity for lighting and heating in commercial buildings.There is even talk of issuing petrol tickets.What I didn't know at the time was that these measures also included plans to shut down heating and electricity for schools; in fact, I only heard about it on the radio news the next day.I am extremely angry, partly because this is a politically stupid move.On the other hand, because it was not discussed with me beforehand.I went in to Tom Boardman, the industry secretary, and after what diplomats called a frank exchange, the measure was dropped.

However, dissent over school heating was part of a wider debate that continued well into the day after the election was declared.When it comes to making decisions about energy conservation measures, should we be stricter or looser?This is not just a technical issue; as we don't know how long the miners' order banning overtime will last, when or if it will escalate into a strike, or to what extent the industry will be able to overcome power shortages.In this case, it is natural to look at least closely at the political implications.But here, too, there are plenty of uncertainties.The adoption of the most stringent energy-saving measures will certainly help to convince the general public that, at a time of serious economic problems internationally, this is a real emergency caused by the militancy of the trade unions.But there is also the risk that people will be angered by restrictions, especially small ones that seem unnecessary, such as the decision to turn off television broadcasts after 10.30pm.And then any easing after that will, of course, be criticized as showing that we made a fuss in the past, and no doubt the Conservatives did it for political reasons in the first place.

In early December, Ted made a shrewd move.He brought back Willie Whitelaw from Northern Ireland to replace Maurice Macmillan as Employment Secretary. Willie was both easy-going and sophisticated, both qualities needed if he were to find a way out in the fight against the miners. Bonding is especially necessary.The government's position has also strengthened because, perhaps unexpectedly, with the public outraged by the miners' actions, the polls showed us with a clear lead over Labour.In this case, all but the most combative unionists fear that confrontation will prompt a general election.Before long, speculation in the press began to mount in this regard.

On Thursday, December 13, Ted announced a three-day workweek to save energy.He also made a radio address that evening.This creates a sense of crisis and polarizes opinion across the country.Initially, industrial output remained more or less at the same level, which in itself speaks of inefficiency and overstaffing in many branches of British industry.But we didn't understand that at the time.It is also impossible to know how long the 3-day work week will last.I have found strong support within the Conservative Party for the measures the government has taken.The need to cut public spending by £1.2 billion announced a few days later is also understood.

At this stage, we believe we can count on business leaders.Shortly before Christmas, Dennis and I went to Lamberhurst for a party at a friend's house.With power cuts, we made our way up the stairs with the aid of lights in jam jars.The whole atmosphere has the taste of war time.The businessmen there all agreed: "Resist them, fight to the end, send them away, we can't go on like this." These words were very inspiring at the time. There does not seem to be a decent or satisfactory solution to disputes.Negotiations with the National Union of Miners have yielded nothing.The government's proposal to conduct an immediate inquiry into the prospects for the mining industry and miners' wages should the NUMB resume work on the basis of these conditions, but this proposal was categorically rejected by the NUMW. On January 9, 1974, the British Trade Union Congress stated at the meeting of the National Economic Development Council that if more benefits were provided to the National Union of Miners, they would not use this as a basis for negotiation to resolve other issues.Tony Barber rejected the trade union's offer.Thus lost an opportunity to solve the problem.Tony explained to us the next day that he thought it was a publicity ploy, not a serious statement.Although the Cabinet later agreed to continue working on the TUC statement and invited TUC members to 10 Downing Street for several lengthy meetings, the damage was done: it seemed as though we were indifferent to the issue. interest.If we had accepted the position of the trade union conference, we would be in a better position and would make the British trade union conference difficult.The fact is that the statement of the British Trades Union Congress undoubtedly puts us in a passive position.The lesson of this incident is to neither accept nor reject any statement before its consequences have been fully weighed.

Dennis and I talked by candlelight in my family's apartment on Fulard Street about the predicament the government was in.It is clear that the government has made many mistakes.And, some fundamental questions must be asked about the direction of government if we are to find our way through the current crisis.Yet no matter how differently we have approached it, there is no doubt that we now face a struggle we must win.The miners, supported to varying degrees by other unions and the Labor Party, are breaking laws enacted by the protests.The aim of those fighters is clear, to bring down the government and show once and for all that Britain can only be governed the way the trade union movement wants it to be, which not only I, as a Conservative cabinet minister, cannot tolerate, but millions of others who see the country Nor will it be tolerated for those whose fundamental freedoms are threatened.Dennis and I, our friends and most of our party workers feel that we must accept the challenge now, and that the only way to do that is to hold a general election and win it.From this point forward, I have vigorously advocated this view whenever I have the opportunity.

However, Ted Heath's attitude surprised and confused me.He seems to be out of touch with reality "he is more concerned with the future of the third phase and the oil crisis than with the immediate question of the survival of the government. Cabinet discussions focus on tactics and details, never on fundamental strategies. Discussions of this kind also Permission to proceed on other occasions, but I can't say for sure. There is no doubt that they lacked an incredible sense of urgency. I think it was due to Ted's reluctance to seriously consider the possibility of a general election because he was desperately trying to avoid it. In the end, perhaps as some of us surmised, because his inner circle was divided on the subject, he summoned us in several batches to meet him in his study at 10 Downing Street on Monday, January 14th.

At this point, we are just days away from the February 7th - the best, earliest possible date - general election deadline.Of our group that went to Number 10, it was primarily John Davies and I who spoke.Both of us strongly urged Ted to face the facts and not allow the union to defy the law and the policies of a democratically elected government.We should call an early general election and fight with a clear conscience about who will rule Britain.Ted rarely spoke.It seemed like he wanted us here just for formality and not for any other purpose.I could see he didn't agree with us, although he didn't say so, and I left feeling frustrated.I still believe that if he had called an election sooner, we might have had a breakthrough, because we would have had the potential to focus our campaign on the issue of union power.

On Thursday, January 24, the Cabinet met twice.Peter Carrington, who was energy secretary and party chairman at the time, advocated for less restrictions on electricity.However, for the reasons I have stated above, many of us feel apprehensive about such advice.The second cabinet meeting that evening took place after the National Union of Mine Workers executive committee voted on the strike decision.This has more or less turned the tide in favor of a more cautious approach, albeit with a slight easing of restrictions.I feel that there may be a majority in favor of a strike, and in that case a general election campaign will follow.

The next Wednesday, January 30, the results of the miners' vote had not yet been announced, and the cabinet held an emergency meeting.Ted told us that Cabinet had received a report from the Wages Commission on the various pay scales.The question is whether we accept this report and create a new agency to investigate wage claims due to "comparison differentials".The miners had been threatening to increase their incremental pay - so they rejected Ted's offer of "overtime pay for social hours", which would apply to all shift workers.The Wages Commission's report may provide a basis for them to address issues in the context of income policy - not least because it supports in particular the view that relative changes in the importance of an industry due to "external events" also Can be used as a factor to consider when determining wages.The rapidly increasing oil price is just such an "external event".

We feel that the Government has no other choice but to establish a mechanism to deal with the "comparative wage gap".Failure to do so would make it appear as if we were trying to prevent the miners' problem from being solved, especially since we've already accepted reports of the "compared wage gap" problem.And there is likely to be a general election at that time, and we have to consider public opinion in every step we take. But there are also important strategic questions about how to do this.We could make it a condition that the TUC accept the principles of the wages policy.We can stipulate that, while the wages board investigates, the miners return to work and accept the conditions now imposed by the National Coal Board.Under the circumstances, these conditions were not unreasonable, but the British Trades Congress and the National Union of Miners would probably not accept them. Ted and several ministers drafted a letter to the British Trade Union Congress and the Confederation of British Industry, which mentioned that the miners accepted the conditions of the then National Coal Bureau and resumed work as a condition.The letter invites the TUC and the Confederation of British Industry to negotiate.I guess Ted wasn't all that happy about the tough letter draft.Deep down he wanted to get it over with, and to the last moment he believed he would succeed.But by this time, even his closest friends in the cabinet wanted to meet the miners.Divisions within the government inner circle have come to light over the issue of early elections.I imagine that the same divide exists within the group that drafted the letter above. In the end, the Cabinet watered down the content of the letter, and no longer made it conditional on the miners' acceptance of the conditions put forward by the National Coal Board, nor did it attach a condition to the TUC's proposal to negotiate with ministers.The letter was published.When we met again the next day there was a general feeling that the news coverage had been good and we regained some of the initiative we had lost earlier in the month on the terms raised by the TUC.In fact, however, we are hereby committed to accepting the proposal for a "comparison wage scale" agency and any comments it may make with it.Clearly, miners are likely to win substantial increases in wages.If we go ahead and have a general election.The prospect will be: We face another Wilberforce court investigation immediately after the election.It made strategic sense at the time.But, looking back, I have to believe that someone was preparing the conditions for buying the miners. When we learned on Tuesday, February 5, that 81 percent of the votes cast by the National Union of Mine Workers supported the strike, a general election was certain.Speculation about holding a general election has reached fever pitch, and it is imperative.I don't think any of us were surprised when Ted told us in the cabinet two days later that he was determined to call an election.The general election will be held on Thursday, February 28, which means as soon as possible.Wiley formally suggested that the miners' demands should be referred to the wages committee for a study of wage differentials.He tactfully stated his reasons for doing so solely so that we would have something to say when people inevitably ask at the election, "If you win, how are you going to fix the miners problem."Cabinet then made the big decision to agree to Willie's proposal. Due to the urgent nature of the election, I wasn't even involved in drafting the first draft of the education section of the manifesto, which was published within a few days.Despite the stated achievements, little is new.In any event, the manifesto's overarching theme is clear and distinct; times of crisis require a firm and fair government.The main new promise is to revise the social security system to pay social security benefits for the families of strikers.Besides the problems of inflation and union power, the 11% mortgage rate creates political difficulties for us.Naturally, the questions people ask me are mostly about education.Willie Whitelaw and I were on Robin Day's "Election Interview" TV show during the campaign and asked these kinds of questions.However, in response to a question, I strongly expressed my views on coalition government: if you imagine your government is composed of all the smartest people, these smartest people will have a unified view of the work to be done .I think this is a wrong assumption.You can have two experts on any problem and they will not actually agree on a solution... In a coalition you have to give up a lot of your beliefs. Unexpectedly, this passage of mine has links to the Conservative Party in the late general election.The Conservative leaders at the time were trying to regain their strength while looking for a way to return to power, so they were drawn to the idea of ​​a "government of national unity".I would also add that if you have no convictions, or if you have given up your convictions, the "Government of National Unity" has more appeal to you. For most of the campaign, I was reasonably confident that we were going to win.Supporters who had alienated the Conservative Party because of the U-turn in policy turned to us.In fact, they were frustrated when they saw our shortcomings because, now that they saw that we had decided to challenge the union's aggressiveness, they were determined to support us.Harold Wilson set out Labor's approach in his "social contract" with trade unions.Those who long for a quiet life can hopefully be seduced by this approach.But I feel that if we can insist on "who rules"?The central question summed up in this sentence, we will win this debate, and thus win the election. In the last week, I actually felt the victory slipping from our hands.The radio station broadcast leaked Wages Commission testimony claiming that miners’ wages could have been raised in Phase 3, meaning that the entire general election was unnecessary.I couldn't believe it when I heard the news.The government tried to deny this, but because it did make mistakes, the government's denial was hesitant and unconvincing.We got caught up in the labyrinth of wage policy and ended up being strangled by it.From this point on we were on a relentless downhill road. Two days later, Enoch Powell was urging people to vote Labour in order to win a referendum on the common market. I could understand his logic in taking this position: joining the common market abolished British sovereignty, and therefore, first and foremost The political issue is the restoration of sovereignty.But the way he did it blew me away.He announced he was no longer running for the Volvo Mumpton seat on the day the general election was called, and then dropped the bomb at the end of the campaign - urging people to vote Labour.I think it is heartless to betray local supporters and constituency workers in this way.I think Enoch's decision in February 1974 was as influential as his interventionist speech in 1970. Then, three days later, there was another blow.Campbell Adamson, director-general of the Confederation of British Industry, has publicly called for the repeal of industrial relations laws.This is a very typical example of British industrial leaders who bluff before going to war but lack the guts to fight.I must admit, however, that our own interventionist policies hardly encourage British businessmen and managers to take risks and responsibilities for freedom. Partly because of these developments, but no doubt also partly because of focusing on one issue in a three-week election campaign, this approach is certainly not going to work.Our campaign lost momentum.I'm still thinking that maybe we might win, but I realize we're campaigning less enthusiastically and our goals are muddled.I also know from the polls and the reaction in my constituency that the Liberals pose a serious threat to us.So, by Election Day, my optimism has turned to unease. My emotions were all the more disturbed when I heard from Finchley and elsewhere across the country that an astonishing number of voters turned out that morning.I hope these are angry Tories who come out and say they reject the blackmail of union power.But these voters appear to be more likely to be from Labor-controlled public housing communities who turned out to vote to teach the Conservatives a lesson.I'm happy to wear a blue flower in my buttonhole instead of the usual paper rose.This flower was given to me by Mark and it stays fresh all day and it helps lift my spirits. The election results quickly showed that we had nothing to be happy about.We lost 33 seats.It will be a volatile parliament in which no party has an absolute majority.With 301 seats, the Labor Party is the largest party in parliament, 17 seats short of a majority.We were down to 296 seats, although we got a slightly higher percentage of the vote than Labour; the Liberals got almost 20% of the vote and 14 seats.The smaller parties, including Fine Gael in Northern Ireland, hold 23 seats.My majority in Finchley fell from 11,000 to 6,000, although the drop was partly due to gerrymandering changes. I am troubled by the election result.We finally took an offensive position against the trade unions, and the people did not support us.Then again, I loved my days as Education Secretary, or most of my time as Education Secretary.I will miss my job and my decision-making, and of course the many conveniences that have brought me, such as the minister's private car.From now on, I'll be driving my own old Warhol-Viva out again.Still, at least I don't have to go through the painful process of clearing out tables and cabinets full of personal items.Anyway, I never took much of my personal mess to the MOE, and, out of caution, I took most of it home at the start of the campaign, only occasionally when I was operating in central London Go to the office to sign urgent letters.I can say that I left the office cleanly. We have a meeting on Friday afternoon.It was a weary, dejected cabinet meeting to pick up the pieces.Ted Heath asks what we should do now, and there are several options to consider.Ted could suggest that the Queen summon Harold Wilson, leader of the largest party in Parliament; The party made deals to try to formulate a program to overcome the country's immediate difficulties.Because our Northern Ireland policy has alienated Fine Gael from us, that effectively means making deals with the Liberals, although that doesn't give us a majority either.There is no doubt that the latter is the way Ted advocates, as can be seen from the way he talks.We debated these possibilities in turn. My hunch is that the party with the most seats in the House of Commons can reasonably expect to be asked to try to form a government.But Ted argued that it was his duty to pursue the possibility of forming a coalition government because the Conservatives had the most votes.He therefore offered Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe a place in the coalition government and promised the Speaker to call a meeting to discuss electoral reform.Thorpe went back to confer with his party.While I would love to stay on as Education Secretary, I would not want to do so in a situation where the Conservatives can never again form a majority government.And that's exactly what the proportional representation that the Liberals demanded would create the situation.I also realize that this trade-off also makes us look ridiculous.What the British hate most are underperforming losers.It's time for us to step down. When we met again on Monday, Ted told us in detail about his discussions with the Liberals.In any case, they were unwilling to do what Jeremy Thorpe asked them to do.We are still awaiting his official reply.But now Ted seems certain to tender his resignation.The last cabinet meeting was held at 4:45 that afternoon.By this time Jeremy Thorpe's reply had been received.It was felt from Ted's speech that his opinion had turned to the idea of ​​an all-party national government, which increasingly attracted him.Of course, the idea didn't appeal to me at all.In any case, the Liberals don't want to form a coalition government with us.There is nothing more to say. I left Downing Street sadly but with some relief.I rarely think about the future.But I knew in my heart that it was time not only for a change of government, but also for a change in the Conservative Party.