British politics in the 21st century - Essay Example

British politics in the 21st century Despite the number of criticisms pointed at the administration of the conservative John Major, in his premiership for 7 straight years, and in spite of the fact that several scandals involving his Cabinet and Parliament ministers haunted the whole duration of his office, it still remains indisputable that in one way or another, the prime minister did his job seriously and had much impact on the lives of the Britons. To be sure, Sir Major served the English nation in his full capacity and left a legacy that is still enjoyed by the people even to this day.      Extremely opposite to his highly-confrontational and crusade-oriented predecessor, Margaret Thatcher, Major was considerably a consensus politician. He based his domestic and foreign policies on the general agreement of his cabinet and advisers, and his decisions were essentially grounded on diplomacy and compromise (Reitan 2003). Although Major’s leadership was unfairly marked as ‘boring’ and ‘weak,’ a great deal of events actually made a turn-around on this conception, of which tested his resolute boldness and robust fortitude.         Early on his succession as prime minister, Major was already beset by innumerable international dilemmas of which the United Kingdom government needed to respond to quickly and wisely. The 1990-1991 Persian Gulf War can be certainly dubbed as his ‘baptism of fire’ in the global stage. The event did not only unleash Major’s daring spirit, but also brought out a dormant political acumen by his participating openly in the fight against Saddam Hussein and by his deciding to topple the despotic regime. He was one of the prime movers of the so-called Operation Desert Storm, or its British equivalent, the Operation Granby. Among European nations, it was the UK who sent the largest military contingents in the combat operations of the war. The prime minister worked closely with the United Nations Security Council and the United States to free Kuwait from an Iraqi invasion and to protect thousands of Kurds from the deposed dictator’s persecution. UK then established its ‘Safe Haven’ policy to accommodate refugees and saved tens of thousands of lives (Jones & Kavanagh 2003). Major also sought solution to the long-time tensions in Northern Ireland and launched the government’s peace process initiative. He discussed pivotal agreements with the Taoiseachs of Ireland, and subsequently issued the 1993 Downing Street Declaration, which affirmed the right of the Irish people to self-determination and that Northern Ireland be transferred to the Republic of Ireland upon a referendum.   Aside from being a staunch advocate of public services and education, Major was also a key player in the economic recovery of UK. During his term, inflation rates were kept low and the unemployment incidence down (Buxton et al. 1998). This, he obtained through his strong convictions on UK’s role in the European Union and against the Social Chapter. He was also responsible for the creation of the Council Tax, which resulted in premium public services such as policing and garbage collection during the time. In addition, Major launched the National Lottery with the goal of raising supplemental budget for the arts, culture and sports.         Ultimately, Major can be considered a lucky politician because amid fierce faultfinding and disapproval both from his colleagues in the government and from the general public, propelled by media’s insinuation, he still emerged victorious in the General Election of 1992 and in 1995.   2- To what extent, if at all, did the SDP succeed in “breaking the mould of British politics” and the main impact of the creation of the SDP was to delay Labour’s recovery and keep the Conservative Party in office for longer than it would otherwise have been”. Discuss? Created in 1981, the Social Democratic Party came as a surprise to the political landscape of the United Kingdom during the period. As a break-away faction of the Parliamentary Labour Party, it generated much buzz and gained overwhelming attention on its early days. Its ‘founding fathers,’ members of the Manifesto Group within the parliamentary Labour Party, objected to what they deemed as a leftward proclivity of the party and its dependence and obligations to trade unions, alongside allegations of corruption and administrative faux pas at the local level (Surhone et al. 2010). Shortly afterwards, the new party grew in membership as its well-publicised policies obtained admiration and support. As ‘moderates,’ the party founders were able to convince other British politicians of their arguments for a middle ground in extreme Thatcherism and severe Labour Party ideologies. Its constitution that put forward for a stronger partnerships between the private sector and the public sector was welcomed warmly by both the members of the Conservative (though subtly) and the Labour parties. In fact, there were 28 members of the parliament from the Labour Party who eventually joined the new party, and few from the Conservative side (Dale 2000). Furthermore, the Social Democratic Party’s alliance with the Liberal Party provided greater clout for its leader, Roy Jenkins, who was later joined by David Steel (from the Liberal), and convinced the English that the recently-conceived party was already a force to reckon with. This merger gave rise to the present day Liberal Democrats. This unpredictable atmosphere of politics enveloped the Labour Party with doubt among its members and fear among its leaders. The disintegrated political institution became aware of its weaknesses and attempted to revisit its political doctrines and decisions. Nevertheless, it seemed to buy time for the Conservative Party and allowed it to maintain its position of power longer than expected (Peele, 2004). Irrefutably, the Social Democratic Party can be hailed as the driving force behind the political credibility of the Liberals, who turned out to be a source of shock via by-election poll results and earned the image of the party for the rural citizen (Tracy, 1983).         3- “The collapse of the post war consensus posed significant challenges to both the Conservative and Labour Parties”. Evaluate these challenges, and discuss how each party responded to them and to what extent did Thatcherism offer a coherent alternative? Change was the slogan waved by the Britons immediately after the Second World War. When the country was still experiencing the ill-effects of war, a massive clamor for social reconstruction and national rejuvenation was witnessed. Clearly, issues centred on the military capacities of UK, and the nation’s educational quality. The popular mood was that people were no longer in awe of their government, and desperately wanted relief from poverty. The economy declined, and the trend would continue go down during these times.   In response to this unquestionable social regression, the government during the period, headed by the leaders of the Labour Party, endeavoured heroically to deal with the many a social problem that plagued the nation. Its primary aim was to improve the standards of living of the people and to propel a stagnant economy and transform it into a dynamic one. Likewise, the need to fortify the nation’s armed forces was also seriously considered as looming threats from Communist Russia surfaced. Although slight progress was felt, still there seemed to be no ‘miracle cure’ for all predicaments that the government was confronted with. Hence, the rise to power of the members of the Conservative Party was considerably a sigh of relief, a breath of fresh air, and a paradigm shift to the Britons. Taking some of her inspiration from former Prime Minister Winston Churchill (also a Conservative), Margaret Thatcher took on the challenge to bring the nation to its former greatness. For her, Great Britain should always be Great Britain (Lewis 1984).         During her first few years in power, Thatcher focused her national recovery initiatives to fortifying social services such as in housing education and healthcare. Her economic polices were deemed pragmatic and based on laissez-faire (Geelhoed & Hobbs 1992). Fundamentally, Thatcher advocated for low inflation rates, the fortification of the national budget, the small-to-medium free markets through tighter control of the money supply, and the privatization and supervision of the labour groups. During her early years, Thatcher acquired the attention of the international eye due to her so-called ‘conviction politics’ and massive social transformational endeavours. Her strong opinions on international issues, primarily on the Soviets and the European Community, earned her the reputation the Iron Lady (Blundell 2008). Thatcher’s government launched painful and forceful measures to get the nation back on shape. Taxation reformulations were introduced: direct taxes were cut in favour of bigger indirect taxes. Fiscal crisis approached but the interest rates had to be heightened in order to control inflation. The issue of rampant unemployment in the country bugged Thatcher’s administration so severely that the lady prime minister wanted to solve it all at once (Foster 1990). The re-election of Thatcher for a second term validated that the Britons believed in her determination to enliven the dying economy of the former world superpower and to eradicate the myriad social predicaments that beset her constituents. This can also be attributed to the British success in the Falklands War in 1982 and the divided opposition. During this period of her government, she started a national policy of selling government-owned assets and properties as the economy continued to grow and recover. Privatisation was the core of her economic agenda where shares were offered both to the public and small investors. Hence, direct and foreign investments in the country increased at an unprecedented rate since the Second World War. In another vein, the national policy also directed business entities to purchase real estate and property in exchange for incentives on their part granted by the government. In diplomatic affairs, Thatcher instilled a close political and personal affiliation with the US president Ronald Reagan, based on a shared mistrust of communism combined with like-minded free-market economic ideology (Thompson & Thompson 1994). In the 1987 general election, Thatcher won an unprecedented third term in office. This had given her another chance to prove her worth as the first woman prime minister of the United Kingdom: one who brought about substantial positive change in the nation. Hence, her government embarked on one of the most ambitious legislative propositions in British politics, primarily on domestic polices. Radical changes in education were made. The introduction of the Community Charge, also called by critics as the ‘poll tax,’ was witnessed by the country and the world. While the universal healthcare system, named the National Health Service, was also launched and received warmly by people, and in fact served as the role model for other countries’ health care system (Berlinski 2008). Despite the criticisms thrown against the Thatcher government sacrificed Britain’s social well-being in the pursuit of economic rejuvenation, the tight economic policies instituted by Thatcher proved effective when economic dynamism and expansion resumed in Britain gradually in 1991. As a form of conviction politics and a public service that would sacrifice present-day convenience for the greater good of the majority and the assurance of a brighter future, Thatcherism proved to be a better, if not the only alternative solution, to the enduring problems of the post-War United Kingdom. References Berlinski, C 2008, There is no alternative: Why Margaret Thatcher matters. New York, Basic Books. Blundell, J 2008, Margaret Thatcher: A portrait of the Iron Lady, New York, Algora. Buxton, T, Chapman, PG & Temple, P 1998, Britain’s economic performance, Routledge, London. Dale, I 2000. Liberal Party general election manifestos, 1990-1997, Routledge, London. Foster, LM 1990, Margaret Thatcher: First Woman Prime Minister of Great Britain, San Francisco, CA, Children’s Press. Geelhoed, EB & Hobbs, JF 1992, Margaret Thatcher: In victory and downfall, 1987-1990, Santa Barbara, CA, Praeger. Jones, B & Kavanagh, D 2003, British politics today, Manchester UP, Manchester. Lewis, R 1984, Margaret Thatcher: A personal and political biography, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul. Peele, G 2004, Governing the UK: British politics in the 21st century, Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ.   Reitan, EA 2003, The Thatcher revolution: Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair, and the transformation of modern Britain, 1979-2001, Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD.   Surhone, LM, Tennoe, MT & Henssonow, SF 2010, Social Democratic Party, Verlag, Saarbrücken. Thompson, JS & Thompson, WC 1994, Margaret Thatcher: Prime Minister Indomitable, Boulder, CO, Westview. Tracy, N 1983, The origins of the Social Democratic Party, Taylor & Francis, Oxford.   Read More