The late Baroness Thatcher.

[Mo2013]

It is true that the Queen will have had to give permission for this ceremonial funeral.

I've also read the following:

"The official line from Buckingham Palace and Downing Street is that Margaret Thatcher is not being granted a state funeral. And it is true that the Baroness will not lie in state at Westminster Hall, as Sir Winston Churchill did almost 50 years ago. In almost every other respect, however, this is the real thing. Next Wednesday, her body will be taken by gun carriage from St Clement Danes in the Strand, down Fleet Street and into St Paul’s Cathedral. There will be a gun salute at the Tower of London. And the cost of the event will be borne in large part by the taxpayer. Most important of all, the Queen is to attend. If something looks, smells and tastes like a state funeral, then it is reasonable to conclude that it is one. The truth is that Lady Thatcher is getting very similar treatment to Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997 or the Queen Mother in 2002.

Many decent people will feel there is little question that Lady Thatcher was a great prime minister, and therefore that nothing could be more natural and fitting than next week’s splendid send-off. But the issue is not nearly as simple as that. The decision to advise the Queen to award Lady Thatcher what is officially being called a “ceremonial” funeral will create very serious problems. This is because the advice marks a betrayal of one of the most essential principles of the British state: the division between the executive and ceremonial functions.

Our constitution is defined by a rigorous separation between the head of state (the monarch) and the head of government (the prime minister). This marks us out from other countries, such as the United States of America, where the head of state and chief executive are merged in one person. As Anthony Sampson wrote in the Anatomy of Britain, the advantage of the British system is that “the head of state could represent the nation with all its traditional pomp and splendour, while the head of government appeared in a more workaday role”.

The monarchy’s symbolic position at the apex of the British state is much more than just a quaint survival. It is based on deep wisdom, as even a socialist such as George Orwell realised. “It is at any rate possible,” wrote Orwell in 1944, “that while this division of functions exists, a Hitler or a Stalin cannot come to power.” Orwell discerned the ease with which an unscrupulous populist leader would exploit the pomp of the state to project his or her personal power.

The decision to give Lady Thatcher what amounts to a state funeral will not lead to fascism. But it nevertheless badly damages the British system of representative democracy, and as such will lead to a series of debilitating practical problems. The most serious of them concerns damage to the reputation of the monarch for scrupulous impartiality. During her long reign, the Queen has avoided attending the funerals of all her prime ministers, apart from that of Churchill, who had led the national government of a united Britain in the great common struggle against Nazi Germany. This is why he was the sole exception to the rule that former prime ministers do not get state funerals.

So the question arises: what’s so special about Maggie Thatcher? Defenders of next week’s funeral arrangements say that she was a “transformational” prime minister. This is true. But so was Clement Attlee, who introduced the welfare system and the National Health Service, thus fundamentally changing the connection between state and individual. Yet the Queen did not attend Mr Attlee’s funeral, a quiet affair in Temple Church near Westminster. According to a 1967 report in Time magazine, “all the trappings of power were absent last week at the funeral of Earl Attlee … there were no honour guards or artillery caissons, no press or television, no crush of spectators. Only 150 friends and relatives gathered for a brief Anglican ceremony in honour of the man who had shaped the political destiny of post-war Britain.”

The decision to acknowledge Lady Thatcher, but not Attlee, makes the Queen appear partisan and is totally out of kilter with the traditional impartiality of the modern British monarchy.

The insensitive handling of the arrangements has made matters worse. When preparations for the funeral started five years ago, the operation was codenamed “Iron Bridge” (a play on the Queen Mother’s funeral plans, which were called “Tay Bridge”). The codename was later changed to “True Blue”, thus giving the event an unbalanced feel."

I sincerely hope that, no matter what personal feelings anyone may have towards Margaret Thatcher, there will be no vile behaviour on the day, and that due respect will be given to the occasion, but some may feel they have to make their feelings known at this obvious opportune moment. The bottom line is that the cost of the funeral will be huge at a time when people are struggling on a daily basis.

[kaymar]

Unbelievable... The majority of those people dancing in the street, and attacking Baroness Thatcher, is by people who weren't even born when she was first elected. At 73 years of age, I well remember the years leading up to her coming into office, I REMEMBER the power cuts, and the rubbish piling up in the streets, and dead people not being buried, and the 3 day working week.
I remember her allowing people to start their own businesses more easily and buy shares, and buy their council houses , I remember her and President Reagan bringing about the end of the Cold War and the threat of Nuclear Armageddon ( we used to watch ads on how to survive a nuclear attack by Soviet Russia, thats what you call kids T.V.) .
I remember her putting a stop to Union Barons calling strikes at will, even though the workers didn't want to strike , often bringing the country to a grinding halt so shops ran out of bread, and garages ran out of petrol etc and I remember her telling Europe to keep their hands off OUR money.
All I know is that for all her faults , of which their were many, I dread to think what would have happened to this country if she hadn't been there at the time, because there wasn't a man in the Kingdom who could have grabbed this country by the scruff of the neck, drag if off its knees, slap it round the face a few times, and tell it to go and make money.
Oh and I remember that she was an old Lady who just passed away, and that her kids are crying.
They're giving her a ceremonial at St Paul's, as they should, as a Baroness, the first female prime minister, and the longest serving, being re elected 3 times.
Oh and the dickheads who try to throw eggs etc at her coffin as the World watches on T.V.(which they will), and shout obscenities ( which they will) should be ashamed of themselves for being so ignorant of the facts about a time of which they know nothing about !
O, and I have not mentioned the Falklands.
What I do know is, there has not been a prime minister since, who has had the balls that Lady Thatcher had.
Regarding her funeral arrangements, (code blue) these would have been a joint party decision, arranged long before this government came into power, the queen would have had to give her blessing, but would not have been involved, in the decision making.

That'll do for me, Delboy. I'm nowhere near as old as you but I too remember all that and agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. The cost? Nowhere near the headline sums quoted. The wages of those involved (police, troops, MIs etc) would have to be paid whatever they happened to be doing, they are not an additional cost to the taxpayer.

[Mo2013]

To some extent I believe that this purported cost is the product of a good deal of creative accounting. I also find debating the cost of a funeral distasteful - I don't mind briefly discussing the cost of a wedding; but I personally believe that the amount spent on either a wedding or a funeral won't guarantee any outcome.

At the end of the day - and here I must apologise in advance - this sad occasion will be a trial run for future ceremonial funerals. Therefore, to begin with people need to view this purported cost in a different light and dilute it accordingly.

Em

At a time when a great many people are up in arms about the welfare system, there is understandably resentment and anger at what this funeral will cost to the taxpayer. So it is acceptable to grumble about the welfare system, but it is not acceptable to grumble about the cost of this funeral? Maggie Thatcher said that there was no such thing as society, and that everyone was responsible for themselves, so on that conviction alone, her family should bear the whole cost.

[Delboy]

I'm sure I read that on Facebook yesterday.

HK, you did and as Mark said feel free to share this as many times as you like.

[HK phooey]

Delboy, I was just looking at your page to see if you'd posted it, I knew I'd seen it

[Delboy]

Re the Queen attending the funeral, from the Guardian

The Queen's decision to attend Lady Thatcher's funeral was a personal one only made the day after the former prime minister's death. Her presence elevates its status to that of state funeral in all but name.

It was only on Tuesday, after the Cabinet Office committee co-ordinating Operation True Blue announced the St Paul's Cathedral service would be held next Wednesday that the question of whether the monarch would attend was even put to her.

The Queen attends funerals very rarely. On this occasion, Buckingham Palace had no precedent because no other former prime minister had been granted a ceremonial funeral, let alone one on such grand scale.

Winston Churchill, the first prime minister of her reign, William Gladstone, and Lord Palmerston are among those to have been accorded a state funeral.

The Queen attended Churchill's funeral in 1965, But there is no rule book governing this unique set of circumstances so her decision to attend, with the Duke of Edinburgh, can be interpreted as a highly personal and significant gesture, indicative of the respect she had for the eighth and longest-serving of her prime ministers.

The decision to grant Thatcher the honour of a ceremonial funeral, however, was political, and taken a long time ago.

Protocol dictates permission for a ceremonial funeral must be sought from the monarch. The request to the Queen to approve such a funeral came from the government and Thatcher's family several years ago, believed to be around the time the Operation True Blue committee was set up under Tony Blair's premiership in 2006.

Unless the Queen had insurmountable personal or constitutional reasons to refuse, it would be assumed she would accede to such a request made by her democratically elected government. Undoubtedly, she would have been aware the decision could cause controversy.

"In granting the ceremonial, she would have been aware of all the difficulties that may or may not come with it. She's a wise woman and would have been well advised," said royal commentator Joe Little of Majesty Magazine.

Thatcher is said to have vetoed the idea of a state funeral, which requires a vote in parliament to approve funds, fearing it would lead to a divisive debate in the Commons.

[Boris+]

Hi Mo,

This is simply my personal view at the moment - and I don't want to start any disagreements. It has been said that the funeral costs should be borne by the family of the late Baroness Thatcher.

Well first of all there will be a large bill for inheritance tax I would imagine. Secondly - the family of the late Baroness Thatcher have already 'paid'. It would have cost them dearly when she worked long arduous hours and gave up time off in order to do her job. The sheer effort she put in, the quality and quantity of her work - all these have contributed to the decision to conduct a ceremonial funeral.

I would say that anyone (absolutely anyone) who was real true briton would come under the expansive umbrella of the well-worn phrase 'true blue'. I don't think that it is anything to do with the political activities or beliefs of Baroness Thatcher - but it is for me at least connected with her determination to do her utmost for her country. She always did her best and was steadfast.

This is simply my personal view, and no amount of arguing will change it.

Em

[Kendhni]

The wages of those involved (police, troops, MIs etc) would have to be paid whatever they happened to be doing, they are not an additional cost to the taxpayer.

Apart form the cost of additional policing required to handle the rent-a-mobs ... most of the additional costs will be to police those complaining about the cost .. you really couldn't make it up.

[Mo2013]

There is nothing to say that there will be any 'renta-mobs' for extra police to control; nevertheless, holiday leave has been cancelled, and there is a cost, a bottom line, which will be funded largely by the taxpayer, some of whom complain bitterly about welfare handouts, but are happy to fork out for this funeral, at a time of austerity for many.

[Mo2013]

Hi Mo,

This is simply my personal view at the moment - and I don't want to start any disagreements. It has been said that the funeral costs should be borne by the family of the late Baroness Thatcher.

Well first of all there will be a large bill for inheritance tax I would imagine. Secondly - the family of the late Baroness Thatcher have already 'paid'. It would have cost them dearly when she worked long arduous hours and gave up time off in order to do her job. The sheer effort she put in, the quality and quantity of her work - all these have contributed to the decision to conduct a ceremonial funeral.

I would say that anyone (absolutely anyone) who was real true briton would come under the expansive umbrella of the well-worn phrase 'true blue'. I don't think that it is anything to do with the political activities or beliefs of Baroness Thatcher - but it is for me at least connected with her determination to do her utmost for her country. She always did her best and was steadfast.

This is simply my personal view, and no amount of arguing will change it.

Em

Em, we are all entitled to our personal views, and arguing should not come into a civilised exchange. Whether or not her family 'paid' in family time is not quite the same as taxpayers footing a large proportion of the cost of this funeral, when there is not a lot of money around. It needs to be understood that a lot of people in this country did not like Margaret Thatcher. I saw an interview on BBC tv earlier this week in which a man said that to this day the effects of her decisions about the mines are still with families, with son still not speaking to father, and vice versa. Some of her policies were divisive and left deep wounds and for those deeply affected by her dogma, 'paying' for her funeral is something they will bitterly resent. This is simply my personal view and no amount of arguing will change it.

[Delboy]

Hi Mo,

This is simply my personal view at the moment - and I don't want to start any disagreements. It has been said that the funeral costs should be borne by the family of the late Baroness Thatcher.

Well first of all there will be a large bill for inheritance tax I would imagine. Secondly - the family of the late Baroness Thatcher have already 'paid'. It would have cost them dearly when she worked long arduous hours and gave up time off in order to do her job. The sheer effort she put in, the quality and quantity of her work - all these have contributed to the decision to conduct a ceremonial funeral.

I would say that anyone (absolutely anyone) who was real true briton would come under the expansive umbrella of the well-worn phrase 'true blue'. I don't think that it is anything to do with the political activities or beliefs of Baroness Thatcher - but it is for me at least connected with her determination to do her utmost for her country. She always did her best and was steadfast.

This is simply my personal view, and no amount of arguing will change it.

Em

Boris

It is reported that Baroness Thatcher, only ever took her MP's salary, her Prime Ministers salary she donated to charity. ??

[Manoverboard]

The £££ is surely small beer compared to the £75,000,000,000,000 ( is that 75 Billion ? ) that she saved this Country by getting our EU contributions reduced so I have no issues at all about the cost of it. Nor will I expect to call for a cheapskate ' do ' for Tony Blair or even Gordon Brown, we owe them our respect if nothing else.

Worldwide TV coverage will be a valuable contribution as well of course together with the follow up footage.

The Queen must have been pleased at the time to have a woman rather than a man to talk to at their meetings and perhaps they even formed a friendship of sorts. The Royals various, let's face it, are moving on a tad these days and this is or could be one such example.

[Mo2013]

I think that some sections of society who were adversely affected by her policies will care about how much money she saved the country etc. nor how much family time she sacrificed to carry out her duties; which was, after all, her personal choice. Taxpayers have no choice that their taxes will be used to pay for this funeral. There have always been those who have, and those who have not. I know someone who went to university, got a 2:1 in biomedical sciences, he has a job but it's not brilliant pay; he is doing the best he can. He lost a previous job and at that time needed help to support his wife and children. People who 'have' cannot empathise with those who need help. We can't all be bosses, captains of industry and entrepreneurs, and have enough money to buy shares etc. but that does not make those who are one of the indians, rather than a chief, lazy, feckless and sponging. Too many people believe what they read in comic newspapers. Thatcher's ideals divided the country into haves and have nots and no matter how unpalatable it is, the truth is that a lot of people just don't care about her, or want to pay for her funeral.

[Serendipity]

We can argue all we want about the rights and wrongs of Mrs Thatcher and whether she should be afforded the ceremonial funeral, at the end of the day she was our leading stateswoman for 13 years, voted in by the British public. Abroad she was greatly admired for standing up for what she believed in, something today's politicians know nothing about (or so it seems).
I sincerely hope that the yobs do not do anything to disrupt the funeral next week, apparently some left wing groups have been planning what they are going to do for years, half of them don't even remember the Thatcher years.....

[Boris+]

Hi Delboy,

What you said about the renumeration arrangements - that doesn't surprise me one bit.

Tell you what I would like to see (but I know it won't happen) - all these people who want to conduct protests .... that's going to cost money. It'll cost them to travel to the protest, then there's lost salary (if they are on benefit then that should be clawed back), and no doubt the cost of refreshments - and don't forget the cost of placards or hiring costumes or getting tee-shirts specially made. So, why don't they do something positive instead with all this fury, anger and the cost of it. They could put their energy and resources into doing something worthwhile. Ok, if they then want to 'name' their activiity - fine, but at least the energy etc would not have been wasted. They might even get a sense of satisfaction from achieving something worthwhile, and they would more likely than not cause less offence, run less risk of getting themselves into trouble, and be thought better of.

I do hope that everyone will respect the fact that a funeral is going to take place, and that it is most definitely not the right time to act in a manner which will show this country in a poor light.

For my own part I'm just grateful.

Em

[Delboy]

As long as those who don't care for Baroness Thatchers funeral or don't want to pay for her funeral, stay away from it and do not disrupt it, because as eggs are eggs it going to take place, and funded as discussed.
We all can probably give a personal experience, of somebody who has prospered and somebody who has not, irrespective of whichever government of whatever colour, has been in power. I don't think there has ever been a government yet, where there has not been the haves and haves not.
All I know is that Baroness Thatcher was the longest serving prime minister, and was re elected into office 3 times, after a public vote.

[Mo2013]

As long as those who don't care for Baroness Thatchers funeral or don't want to pay for her funeral, stay away from it and do not disrupt it, because as eggs are eggs it going to take place, and funded as discussed.
We all can probably give a personal experience, of somebody who has prospered and somebody who has not, irrespective of whichever government of whatever colour, has been in power. I don't think there has ever been a government yet, where there has not been the haves and haves not.
All I know is that Baroness Thatcher was the longest serving prime minister, and was re elected into office 3 times, after a public vote.

But who, in the end, was stabbed in the back by her own ...........

[Delboy]

As long as those who don't care for Baroness Thatchers funeral or don't want to pay for her funeral, stay away from it and do not disrupt it, because as eggs are eggs it going to take place, and funded as discussed.
We all can probably give a personal experience, of somebody who has prospered and somebody who has not, irrespective of whichever government of whatever colour, has been in power. I don't think there has ever been a government yet, where there has not been the haves and haves not.
All I know is that Baroness Thatcher was the longest serving prime minister, and was re elected into office 3 times, after a public vote.

But who, in the end, was stabbed in the back by her own ...........

The biggest mistake they ever made, and they have still not recovered from it.

[Kendhni]

The biggest mistake they ever made, and they have still not recovered from it.

I think it was probably her time to go .. which is a shame because she was the last prime minister that put this country and it's people before her own personal gain. We are actually a very lucky generation to have lived through the boom period that her policies generated (worldwide) .. it is a pity that subsequent governments appear to have wasted and squandered that legacy.

[Mo2013]

The biggest mistake they ever made, and they have still not recovered from it.

I think it was probably her time to go .. which is a shame because she was the last prime minister that put this country and it's people before her own personal gain. We are actually a very lucky generation to have lived through the boom period that her policies generated (worldwide) .. it is a pity that subsequent governments appear to have wasted and squandered that legacy.

It wasn't a boom period for everyone.

[Dark Knight]

might be being a bit dim here....but won't all the police, army etc , who are on duty for the funeral, have been getting paid anyway, all the politicians would be, all the reporters, etc etc etc

so everyone would be getting paid for that day, they have just been moved about a bit, so not really a huge drain on public spending, more a re-distribution of manpower??
the total cost is most likely the cost of a days pay for all and sundry who are involved, which would have been paid anyway

plus, I bet the overtime, if paid is most welcome

[Manoverboard]

... I think it was probably her time to go ...

I was certainly a supporter of her policies at the start but not unhappy to see her go ... indeed any Politico should go once they reach the extremes of what the Public will tolerate, be it to the right or to the left.

[Boris+]

I suspect that an awful lot of people could say now that it wasn't a boom time for them - but I bet that didn't stop people from over-spending albeit on credit .... in which case I have no sympathy. On the other hand (yes, I know it's a bit harsh, but) if people found that it wasn't a boom time for them, why didn't they make changes in their lives to overcome that situation?

No use whinging about it on and on now and blaming it all on a Lady who is unable to speak any longer.

Yes, I've got a smashing new pair of stout shoes - I can do a fair pace in those, so if I hear any whing ing going on, I think I'll just tell people to 'change the record'.

Boots and kippers - but not on Wednesday, out of respect.

Em

[Mo2013]

Margaret Thatcher did not care about the working class. If you were poor working class and your job had gone, and the industry you worked in destroyed, and you couldn't get another job, how could these people make any changes in their lives to overcome the situation? I'm sure they tried. But If you were in business, or had money (enough to pay 60% income tax) you were ok thanks. Who cared about those people who had lost their jobs? Not a selfish and uncaring society.

This is another quote I read today from journalist Brian Reade:

"Harold Wilson’s Scilly Isles send-off couldn’t have contrasted more ­starkly (with that of Winston Churchill). It was a two-bob funeral, simple and without fuss. Friends and family belted out the hymn Fight The Good Fight, local lifeboatmen took his ­coffin to a ­beach-side graveyard, and as the cortege drove past his pebble-dashed holiday home, ­political ­dignitaries gawped in amazement at its pokiness.­

Wilson’s humble death, like his humble life, was summed up in the tribute from Lord Tonypandy: “Harold had a fierce belief that ­ordinary workers were entitled to live in a just and compassionate society. There were no important people for him.”

And that included himself. He believed he was just a man doing a job, even though he won more ­general elections (four) than any 20th ­Century Prime Minister. Churchill and Thatcher only won four between them, yet they and their acolytes clearly believed they were political demigods, which is why he had that state funeral and she gets one on the Queen Mother scale." "We should let those she kicked while they were down be allowed to pay a fitting tribute by throwing parties in their locals, as an ­alternative to the nauseous ­Diana-style send-off she’ll receive in London next week."

People will 'whinge on and on about it' as long as they wish, and yes, they do blame it all on that lady. I didn't like her. I didn't like her patronising condescending personality, I didn't like her arrogance, her heartlessness and contempt towards those in society who didn't have the wherewithal to be any better than they were able to to be. 'She lived by the mantra that you were “One Of Us” or you were there to be beaten.'

[Boris+]

Hi Mo,

I am sure that you will agree that people who sometimes fall on hardship through the wrangling of big business etc need support?

In these dark and dire days there are examples of people who need support - perhaps I could take this opportunity of outlining the situation at HMV? It is indeed good news that some branches are to remain open/re-open. Perhaps you could support them ...... and buy a new record?

The Lady is dead, rolling around in the past etc is not going to get most people anywhere - so chin up, head to the future - and enjoy it.

Boots and kippers -

Em