As we shall see in the fourth of these posts, after some period of retirement, Margaret Thatcher argued that she was not that into climate change action. But there are recurrent, and obvious themes in her talks as Prime Minister. These speeches, and one TV interview, cannot be dismissed as a mere phase as they stretch from September 1988 to November 1990. I am making little commentary here, mainly just quoting her. More examples could be found in these speeches, and more in other speeches; this is not an attempt to be definitive. Apologies to everyone not that interested in a frustrating history.
From the brief analysis of the previous speech we can take several Thatcherian themes
- We have to live with nature (life is fragile)
- Humans are degrading the environment and that can destroy civilisation
- Take science seriously
- IPCC is great
- Recognition of complexity, non linerality, uncertainty
- Economic growth important but must be bounded.
- Action is difficult but must be taken
- Government spending
- recycle waste
- control emissions
- conserve country
- replant forest
- research
- Foreign Aid
So let us see how these work in other speeches by her.
We have to live with nature (life is fragile)
the health of the economy and the health of our environment are totally dependent upon each other.
27 Sep 1988
Protecting this balance of nature is therefore one of the great challenges of the late Twentieth Century
27 Sep 1988
We, who have inherited so much, must hand on a safe, secure future to our children and to their children; to all who come after us. As I said earlier this year: “No generation has a freehold on this earth. All we have is a life tenancy—with a full repairing lease.”
8 Dec 1988
we realise that once you start to fiddle about with the Earth’s balance, you are in danger.
30 Dec 1988 Interview for Frost on Sunday
We must hand on the title deeds of life to our grandchildren and beyond. That is our obligation. We here resolve to make it our duty.
7 Mar 1989
Humans are degrading the environment and that can destroy civilisation
For generations, we have assumed that the efforts of mankind would leave the fundamental equilibrium of the world’s systems and atmosphere stable. But it is possible that with all these enormous changes (population, agricultural, use of fossil fuels) concentrated into such a short period of time, we have unwittingly begun a massive experiment with the system of this planet itself.
27 Sep 1988
the assumption we have made that the atmosphere somehow would not change and what Man could do was very small compared with it—it is not very small any more! It is having an effect upon it and we have a duty to future generations and therefore, we must look very carefully because it can have two enormous consequences: climatic change—we do not know what consequence—and if it gets warmer parts of the ice cap could melt and the waters could come right in and cover certain parts of the land.
30 Dec 1988 Interview for Frost on Sunday
We rightly set out to improve the standard of life of the world’s peoples but we have now realised that we could be undermining the very systems needed to maintain life on our planet.
7 Mar 1989
carbon which was fixed in the ground as coal, oil and gas and was there over millions of years is being released back into the atmosphere over a matter of decades. We are changing our planet’s environment in new and dangerous ways.
6 Dec 1989
We have cared too little for our seas, our forests and our land. We have treated the air and the oceans like a dustbin. We have come to realise that man’s activities and numbers threaten to upset the biological balance which we have taken for granted and on which human life depends.
6 Nov 1990
It appears from the above that, as PM, recognised the general problem of ecological destruction, through the unintended consequences of economic (and other) action.
Take science seriously
the increase in the greenhouse gases—carbon dioxide, methane, and chlorofluorocarbons—which has led some to fear that we are creating a global heat trap which could lead to climatic instability. We are told that a warming effect of 1°C per decade [this is probably a misprint] would greatly exceed the capacity of our natural habitat to cope.
27 Sep 1988
Scarcely a week goes by without reading or hearing of some new discovery. We learn more about the linkages between different aspects of atmospheric chemistry, between the chlorofluorocarbons and the greenhouse effect.
7 Mar 1989
science holds the key to the solution of the problem, as well as to its definition.
7 Mar 1989
On the broader front of global warming, we have had the scientific report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change.
27 Jun 1990
This brought together the wisdom and scientific expertise of several hundred of the world’s best scientists. They gave us an authoritative view of the implications for the world’s climate of the enormous increases in carbon dioxide which are reaching the atmosphere year by year:
From our cars,
From our factories and our power stations,
Figures we cannot ignore.
We know, too, that our industries and way of life have done severe damage to the ozone layer. And we know that within the lifetime of our grandchildren, the surface temperature of the earth will be higher than at any time for 150,000 years; the rate of change of temperature will be higher than in the last 10,000 years; and the sea level will rise six times faster than has been seen in the last century.
4 August 1990
The IPCC report is a remarkable achievement. It is almost as difficult to get a large number of distinguished scientists to agree, as it is to get agreement from a group of politicians. As a scientist who became a politician, I am perhaps particularly qualified to make that observation! I know both worlds.
6 Nov 1990
This last comment indicates her identification with scientists as well as politicians. This does not seem a casual idea for her.
Complexity, non linerality, uncertainty, unintended consequences
The fact that half the carbon dioxide generated by the industrial revolution is still in the atmosphere gives some idea of the size of the problem. And we’re still adding three billion tonnes a year. To ignore this could expose us to climatic change whose dimension and effects are unpredictable. So energy efficiency is crucial.
8 Dec 1988
There are still many uncertainties about it. For example, we have a lot more to learn about the mechanisms of ozone creation and destruction and about the effects of increased ultraviolet radiation on living organisms.
7 Mar 1989
Now, the damage to the environment comes from the actions of millions of people conducting peaceful activities which contribute to their health, their well-being and their work in agriculture or industry, activities in other words which are perceived as beneficial.
7 Mar 1989
The real dangers arise because climate change is combined with other problems of our age: for instance the population explosion; — the deterioration of soil fertility; — increasing pollution of the sea; — intensive use of fossil fuel; — and destruction of the world’s forests, particularly those in the tropics.
6 Nov 1990
Climate change may be less than predicted. But equally it may occur more quickly than the present computer models suggest.
6 Nov 1990
Conservatism and the environment
Conservatives are not only friends of the earth, we are its trustees. But concern for the environment is not, and never has been, a first priority for Socialist governments. As we peel back the moral squalor of the socialist regimes in Eastern Europe, we discover the natural and physical squalor underneath. They exploited nature every bit as ruthlessly as they exploited the people. In their departure, they have left her chocking amidst effluent, acid rain and industrial waste. …
31 March 1990
Capitalism is not the enemy of the environment, but its friend and guardian. As more people own property, so more people have an incentive to protect it from pollution.
This we have learned from experience and no more so than in the last ten years in Britain. So much of the wealth created by a flourishing economy has been ploughed back directly into measures to protect and enhance our environment.
In the last five years, we have cut the level of lead in our air by half…. from October this year, all new cars will have to be able to run on unleaded fuel.
This is not the record of a Government with no time for the environment. We stand for clean streets, clean rivers clear seas, fresh air, green acres.
31 March 1990
Economic growth important but must be bounded.
The future of the community demands that business does not try to prosper at the expense of the environment…. That means that the chemicals and other materials we use must be disposed of in a way that safeguards the environment. It also means we must heed the dangers posed by the greenhouse effect.
8 Dec 1988
who has yet looked at the true costs of coal and oil if we must ultimately separate the greenhouse gases they produce and prevent them from going into the atmosphere
6 Dec 1989
There are no simple economic mechanisms to govern countries’ behaviour in this field. The action we must take must harness the market and run with the grain of human nature. It was not regulation but the decisions of millions of individual consumers and the response of industry’s research and commercial initiative which has led to the development of ozone-friendly products, bio-degradable plastics and phosphate-free detergents
6 Dec 1989
Like the Garden of Eden to Adam and Even, anything which is given free is rarely valued. This is especially true of the global environment which mankind has used as a dustbin for decades.
6 Dec 1989
Action is difficult but must be taken
In the past when we have identified forms of pollution, we have shown our capacity to act effectively. The great London Smogs are now only a nightmare of the past. We have cut airborne lead by 50 per cent.
27 Sep 1988
Mr President, the evidence is there. The damage is being done. What do we, the International Community, do about it?
8 Nov 1989
we already have a £2 billion programme of improvements to reduce acid rain emissions from our power stations. We shall be looking more closely at the role of non-fossil fuel sources, including nuclear, in generating energy. And our latest legislation requires companies which supply electricity positively to promote energy efficiency.
8 Nov 1989
Our task as governments is this—
27 Jun 1990
It is to follow the best advice available, To decide where the balance of evidence lies, And to take prudent action.
Our ability to come together to stop or limit damage to the world’s environment will be the greatest test of how far we can act as a world community.
4 August 1990
The danger of global warming is as yet unseen, but real enough for us to make changes and sacrifices, so that we do not live at the expense of future generations.
6 Nov 1990
Many of the precautionary actions that we need to take would be sensible in any event. It is sensible to improve energy efficiency and use energy prudently; it’s sensible to develop alternative and sustainable and sensible … it’s sensible to improve energy efficiency and to develop alternative and sustainable sources of supply; it’s sensible to replant the forests which we consume; it’s sensible to re-examine industrial processes; it’s sensible to tackle the problem of waste.
6 Nov 1990
Promises are easy. Action is more difficult. For our part, we have worked out a strategy which sets us on the road to achieving the target…. We now require, by law, that a substantial proportion of our electricity comes from sources which emit little or no carbon dioxide, and that includes a continuing important contribution from nuclear energy
6 Nov 1990
I see the adoption of these policies as a sort of premium on insurance against fire, flood or other disaster. It may be cheaper or more cost-effective to take action now than to wait and find we have to pay much more later
6 Nov 1990
We must work together
The thing that emerges from this is that none of us can do it alone. What we could do alone would have some effect, but a small effect, and the world is getting together. There is a United Nations Environmental Protection Group which is very good and this is something that has to be pursued through that.
30 Dec 1988 Interview for Frost on Sunday
The problems will only be solved by common action and every country must play its full part and every citizen can help
7 Mar 1989
It was Immanuel Kant who said that it is often necessary to make a decision on the basis of knowledge sufficient for action but insufficient to satisfy the intellect. Let us therefore do what makes sense in any event, such as conserving tropical forests and improving energy[fo 11] efficiency. In parallel, we must intensify our scientific efforts to model and predict climate change. A new centre to do just this is being established in this country.
6 Dec 1989
Costs are inevitable
we have to do the things on environment because we have a duty to do so and most of us wish to improve the environment in any event. It cannot be done without a cost. We have to take the nitrates out of water—that will be an extra process which will cost money, but we must have the safe water—and we have to do more on the coasts and that will cost money. We have to take the sulphur out of coal—that will cost money. The answer to the greenhouse effect is, of course, to have more nuclear and if we have more nuclear, all the technology is known to look after the residual nuclear waste, that too costs money but you do not get the greenhouse effect from that.
So you cannot talk about improving the environment without being prepared to pay for the purer water and the better electricity without damaging the environment.
30 Dec 1988 Interview for Frost on Sunday
the costs of doing nothing, of a policy of wait and see, would be much higher than those of taking preventive action now to stop the damage getting worse. And the damage will be counted not only in dollars, but in human misery as well. Spending on the environment is like spending on defence—if you do not do it in time, it may be too late.
4 August 1990
Research
Britain will continue to play a leading role in trying to answer the remaining questions, and to advance our state of knowledge of climate change. This year, we have established in Britain the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research for this purpose.
6 Nov 1990
But the need for more research should not be an excuse for delaying much needed action now. There is already a clear case for precautionary action at an international level. The IPCC tells us that we can’t repair the effects of past behaviour on our atmosphere as quickly and as easily as we might cleanse a stream or river.
6 Nov 1990
Foreign Aid
So yes, we have a duty. We have to make progress. The Third World wants to make as much progress as we have, but we now have to look at how we are going to maintain that particular atmosphere which supports life, which supports the chain of animal life as well. Absolutely vital. That is why I came out with your quote.
We do not have a freehold. We have a lease of life and at the end of that lease we pass it on to the next generation.
30 Dec 1988 Interview for Frost on Sunday
[We give] £40 million a year to Bangladesh. I said: “Look! It is no earthly good going on relief because they have got floods. We have to get together with all of the countries in the area to try to get the soil back up there, the trees back up there, the silt from the rivers!”
You have to be careful how you do this because those countries are sensitive and you have to say: “Look, there is a problem! Please can we help!” Not: “You have got to do this, that and the other!” but “Please! Can we help? If you need help to do these things, we will put our aid to do those things!”
30 Dec 1988 Interview for Frost on Sunday
if you do not keep the trees and the forests, you do not get the rain; and also, you do not get the carbon dioxide used up, so immediately we have been talking about this on a much bigger scale and we and our Overseas Development Association are giving some of our aid to those countries who are prepared to keep their tropical rain forests.
30 Dec 1988 Interview for Frost on Sunday
the new technologies and substances which are becoming available should help others to avoid the mistakes which we in the highly industrialised countries have made
7 Mar 1989
it is the duty of the industrialized countries to help them obtain and adopt the substitute technologies which will enable them to avoid our mistakes. And an important part of that will be to help them financially, so they can meet the extra costs involved.
27 Jun 1990
A Colleague’s Comment
Recently, another now ex-leader of the Conservatives had this to say about Thatcher:
[She was] better qualified than any other politician to understand climate science and to foresee the likely course of climate change if left unchecked…. [Her] concerns led to her becoming the first leader of any major nation to call for a landmark United Nations treaty on the issue…
Four years later, as Environment Secretary, I played a small role in ushering that UN treaty into existence at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Its resolutions did not require countries to commit themselves to specific reductions in emissions, but it was significant because it was the first step….
It is important to stress that it has never been a Conservative value to be ‘anti-science’. When climate scientists speak, we should listen.
Putting one’s fingers in one’s ears and denying the problem is not a rational response. The only pragmatic approach is to listen, evaluate and act.
The fact is that we have time to avoid the worst excesses of climate change, by reducing greenhouse gas emissions to levels that will keep impacts at manageable levels.
The good news is that in Britain, we are cutting our emissions effectively and doing so is certainly not harming our economy….
This summer has shown that Margaret Thatcher was correct. We are conducting an experiment with the atmosphere and it is a dangerous one.
Thirty years ago Margaret Thatcher warned of man-made global warming. Daily Mail 16 August 2018.
Even this short collection of remarks shows a degree of dedication and realism towards the climate problem, and possibly bode well for the future – indeed had Thatcher not been deposed, and had she continued in this way, we might be considerably better off than we are now – but after her loss of office, her position ground to fixity and refusal, although it has to be recognised that the UK has a much better position on recognising the consequences of climate change and ecological destruction than Australia, Canada, or the US.
Tags: climate change, neoliberalism, politics
Climate, technology and chaos Blog 
Leave a comment