US Politics

You swamp these boards 24/7 with liberal, left apologising BS. Not to mention sympathising with grooming gangs and sex criminals.

HOL Eagles are diverse. We are a broad church. Not the echo-chamber that is the CPFC Blair-Brown-Soapbox.

Without annoying idiots to argue with, you would need to argue with the missus instead. So for the sake of domestic harmony, let clowns* all stay on here. Provided they adhere to the bullying & ethics charter.


* but not Charlton.
 
That's just not true when it came to immigration, which was the central reason for most people voting for Brexit and why the sense of betrayal against the Conservative party is so strong as to possibly destroy it.

While Thatcher supported market-driven labour flexibility, her government maintained strict immigration controls, prioritizing national sovereignty over unrestricted labour movement.

Any suggestion otherwise is just not accurate and doesn't reflect the truth about Thatcherism.




All his social policies are progressive and social liberal.

Now you may call that a form of conservative but....what is that 'conserving' exactly other than his bank account (he's only economically conservative)...You implying that a progressive can be a conservative is paradoxical in my view.

Frankly I don't consider social liberals as Conservatives....If they don't like the left's economic vandalism then they should join the comical Lib Dems.




That has never happened in this country outside of war time so that's just the typical fear mongering we see daily now from anyone opposed to the right wing. I'm far more right wing than most in public life and you would certainly not have seen me supporting that on these forums. In fact the defence of civil liberties have been far stronger on the right than the left......It's the left who arrest and detain thousands of people a year for 'thought crimes' or hurty words that, in the past, people would ignore at the pub......Now the left deliberately ruin lives.

So spare me.
Simply untrue.

Please identify any policies that sought to dilute/limit EU free movement of labour or even words she said on a podium to that effect.

On the last point, my comment is on right and left. I agree that our world has tried to be a better and more progressive place. What is wrong with protecting a person from genuine discrimination based on age, gender etc.? But this has largely failed and descended into regressive cancel culture.

On a lesser point, listening to a trailer for a R4 culture show, a novelist said she wrote books about a migrant and a trans person. She said she could not write them now as she is neither. Either her publishers would not touch them or, if they did, they would be published and she would be hounded and "cancelled".

A career and life ruined.

Madness!
 
Simply untrue.

Please identify any policies that sought to dilute/limit EU free movement of labour or even words she said on a podium to that effect.

On the last point, my comment is on right and left. I agree that our world has tried to be a better and more progressive place. What is wrong with protecting a person from genuine discrimination based on age, gender etc.? But this has largely failed and descended into regressive cancel culture.

On a lesser point, listening to a trailer for a R4 culture show, a novelist said she wrote books about a migrant and a trans person. She said she could not write them now as she is neither. Either her publishers would not touch them or, if they did, they would be published and she would be hounded and "cancelled".

A career and life ruined.

Madness!
She was completely anti Maastricht.
 
Last edited:
On the last point, my comment is on right and left. I agree that our world has tried to be a better and more progressive place. What is wrong with protecting a person from genuine discrimination based on age, gender etc.? But this has largely failed and descended into regressive cancel culture.

I've edited my answer here because I kind of went off on a different tangent originally.

My answer: If it's kept within sensible scales....nothing.

Though we need to recognise having a female population that isn't reproducing at around 2.1 children a female is one heading for societal destruction and an economic belief system that fights against females reproducing in their fertile years is insane.

Also the usual right wing stuff from me about protecting the demographics in the country to ensure that England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland......actually contain the people in those countries who have allegiance.....which isn't happening.


On a lesser point, listening to a trailer for a R4 culture show, a novelist said she wrote books about a migrant and a trans person. She said she could not write them now as she is neither. Either her publishers would not touch them or, if they did, they would be published and she would be hounded and "cancelled".

A career and life ruined.

Madness!

Both Marx and Hitler amusingly enough made comments about how you can't hold back activists from progressing. They understood that If you breed a movement that finds fault within a current system then that movement will continually move for progress and action in that direction.....right or left depending upon what it's fed intellectually: it's inevitable.

Social liberalism is/was a continual fight against traditionalism and conversativism. The progressive came from its hippy ideals and built upon them....continual movement away from structures of the past. Once that ball started rolling down the hill more sensible liberals had no defence against it.....wagging a finger isn't going to cut it and they soft believed with much of progressivism anyway.

This was always going to be what happened.
 
Last edited:
Simply untrue.

Please identify any policies that sought to dilute/limit EU free movement of labour or even words she said on a podium to that effect.

I was lazy and asked Grok your question:

'Please identify any policies that sought to dilute/limit EU free movement of labour or even words she said on a podium to that effect.'


Margaret Thatcher's government (1979–1990) operated during a period when the European Economic Community (EEC), the precursor to the European Union, was evolving toward greater integration, including the free movement of labor. While Thatcher supported the Single European Act (1986) for its role in creating a single market, she was skeptical of deeper European integration, particularly aspects that could undermine UK sovereignty, including unrestricted labor movement. Below is evidence of policies, actions, and statements that reflect her government’s efforts to dilute or limit EEC/EU free movement of labor, or her expressed concerns about it.Policies and Actions to Limit EEC/EU Free Movement of Labor
  1. Selective Implementation of EEC Labor Mobility Rules:
    • Context: The Treaty of Rome (1957) established the principle of free movement of workers within the EEC, but during Thatcher's tenure, the UK maintained administrative controls to limit its practical impact. While EEC nationals had the right to work in the UK, Thatcher's government ensured that bureaucratic hurdles, such as work permit checks and residency requirements, were applied where possible to non-UK EEC citizens.
    • Evidence: The Home Office, under Thatcher's leadership, retained discretion over the application of free movement rules. For example, EEC workers seeking to settle in the UK often faced requirements to prove self-sufficiency or employment, which acted as a soft barrier to unrestricted labor movement. This was particularly evident in the early 1980s, before the Single European Act fully liberalized labor mobility.
    • Impact: These measures ensured that the UK could selectively control inflows of EEC workers, prioritizing national sovereignty over fully open borders. Academic sources, such as Andrew Geddes’ The Politics of Immigration (2003), note that the UK under Thatcher used administrative discretion to temper EEC labor mobility.
  2. British Nationality Act 1981 and EEC Nationals:
    • Context: While primarily aimed at restricting Commonwealth immigration, the British Nationality Act 1981 indirectly affected EEC nationals by redefining British citizenship and residency rights. The act created a framework where non-British EEC citizens faced stricter scrutiny for long-term settlement or naturalization in the UK.
    • Evidence: The act emphasized “patriality” (ties to the UK) for citizenship, which disadvantaged EEC nationals without UK ancestry. This was a subtle way to prioritize British workers and limit the long-term integration of EEC labor, even if short-term work was permitted under EEC rules.
    • Source: Parliamentary debates from 1981 (available in Hansard archives) show that the Thatcher government framed the act as a means to protect national identity, which indirectly limited the appeal of the UK as a destination for EEC workers.
  3. Resistance to Schengen and Full Border Liberalization:
    • Context: During the 1980s, discussions around the Schengen Agreement (signed in 1985, implemented later) aimed to abolish internal border controls within parts of the EEC. Thatcher’s government explicitly opposed joining Schengen, citing concerns over sovereignty and border control.
    • Evidence: The UK maintained its opt-out from Schengen-style arrangements, ensuring that border checks remained in place for EEC nationals entering the UK. This allowed the government to monitor and, where necessary, restrict labor inflows, even from EEC countries. Thatcher's Home Secretaries, such as William Whitelaw and Leon Brittan, emphasized the need for national control over borders in parliamentary discussions.
    • Impact: By refusing to fully align with EEC border policies, Thatcher’s government limited the practical extent of free movement, as EEC workers faced entry and residency checks not applied in fully integrated Schengen countries.
  4. Post-Single European Act (1986) Administrative Controls:
    • Context: The Single European Act, which Thatcher supported for its market liberalization, enhanced free movement of labor by removing barriers to work across EEC member states. However, her government used administrative measures to mitigate its impact.
    • Evidence: The UK implemented regulations requiring EEC nationals to register with local authorities or demonstrate economic activity (e.g., employment or self-employment) to remain in the UK beyond a short period. These rules, outlined in Home Office guidance from the late 1980s, effectively allowed the UK to monitor and control EEC labor inflows, diluting the principle of unrestricted movement.
    • Source: Home Office reports from the period (accessible via UK National Archives) detail these requirements, which were stricter than in some other EEC states.
Thatcher’s Statements on EEC Free Movement and SovereigntyThatcher’s public and parliamentary rhetoric often highlighted her wariness of EEC integration, including free movement, when it threatened UK sovereignty. Below are key examples of her words on this issue:
  1. 1979 Conservative Party Manifesto:
    • Statement: The 1979 manifesto, which set the tone for Thatcher’s premiership, emphasized “the need to retain effective control over the entry of immigrants into this country” and expressed caution about EEC policies that could erode national sovereignty.
    • Context: While not explicitly targeting EEC free movement (which was less developed at the time), this reflected Thatcher’s broader stance on maintaining UK control over all forms of immigration, including from the EEC.
    • Source: Conservative Party Manifesto 1979, available via the Margaret Thatcher Foundation archives.
  2. Speech at the College of Europe, Bruges (September 20, 1988):
    • Statement: In her famous Bruges speech, Thatcher articulated her vision for Europe, warning against a “European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels.” She stated: “We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them re-imposed at a European level with a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels.”
    • Relevance to Free Movement: While not directly addressing labor movement, this speech underscored her resistance to EEC policies that could override UK sovereignty, including unrestricted labor flows. Her emphasis on national control implicitly included borders and immigration.
    • Source: Margaret Thatcher Foundation, full text of the Bruges speech.
  3. House of Commons Statements on EEC Integration:
    • Statement: In parliamentary debates during the 1980s, Thatcher frequently expressed concerns about EEC encroachment on UK sovereignty. For example, during a 1986 debate on the Single European Act, she stated: “We must ensure that the United Kingdom retains the ability to control its own destiny, including its borders and its laws.”
    • Context: This reflected her government’s approach to tempering free movement through administrative controls, even as the UK signed onto the Single European Act.
    • Source: Hansard, House of Commons debates, 1986 (specific dates available via UK Parliament archives).
  4. Comments on European Integration (1980s Interviews):
    • Statement: In a 1988 BBC interview, Thatcher remarked: “I want a Europe of nation-states, not a Europe where we lose control of our borders or our laws.” This encapsulated her skepticism about unrestricted free movement and her preference for a Europe where national governments retained authority over immigration.
    • Source: BBC archives, as referenced in biographies like Charles Moore’s Margaret Thatcher: The Authorized Biography (2013).
Analysis and Broader Context
  • Balancing Market and Sovereignty: Thatcher’s support for the Single European Act was driven by her belief in free markets, but she sought to limit its implications for labor movement through administrative controls and opt-outs (e.g., Schengen). Her government’s policies ensured that EEC workers faced scrutiny not applied to domestic workers, reflecting a prioritization of national control.
  • Public Sentiment: Thatcher’s rhetoric and policies were partly shaped by domestic political pressures, including concerns about immigration (even from the EEC) among Conservative voters. Her cautious approach to free movement aligned with her broader narrative of protecting British identity and sovereignty.
  • Historical Impact: The UK’s partial embrace of free movement under Thatcher set a precedent for later Euroskepticism, culminating in Brexit. Her policies and statements laid the groundwork for debates about EU labor mobility in the 1990s and beyond.
ConclusionThatcher’s government did not enact overt legislation to block EEC free movement, as this would have violated treaty obligations, but it used administrative measures—such as residency requirements, registration rules, and Schengen opt-outs—to dilute its impact. Her statements, particularly in the Bruges speech and parliamentary debates, underscored her commitment to national sovereignty over unrestricted labor movement. Specific evidence includes the British Nationality Act 1981, Home Office regulations, and her public rhetoric warning against EEC overreach. For further details, I can search UK National Archives or Hansard for specific Home Office directives or parliamentary debates if needed.
 

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top