Political Policies (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes

Political policies

John Major's tenure as Prime Minister brought both continuity and change to Conservative policy-making. While privatisation continued, Major introduced reforms designed to improve public services and sought to address Thatcher's most unpopular policies. His approach combined market principles with attempts to enhance accountability and responsiveness in the public sector.

Privatisation and industrial policy

Following the 1984-85 miners' strike, the coal industry faced further decline. The National Coal Board lost customers during the dispute, and collieries closed within months of the strike ending. The 1987 and 1994 Coal Industry Acts prepared the ground for mine privatisation, which was administered by Secretary of State for Industry Michael Heseltine.

Electricity generation also underwent privatisation during this period. Once removed from public ownership, electricity generators could refuse to purchase coal, worsening conditions for the already struggling coal industry. Even Nottinghamshire miners, who had demonstrated loyalty by not joining the strike, found themselves unprotected. The declining industry received no assistance from the collapse of the Union of Democratic Mineworkers, which had broken away from the NUM. This eliminated employees' collective bargaining power.

Citizen's Charter

Citizen's Charter was a programme announced by Major in 1991 that aimed to increase accountability and responsiveness in public services. The initiative promised to treat citizens more like valued customers, with services measured against agreed targets. Where organisations met their targets, they received 'Charter Marks' as recognition of success.

Although health and education were not privatised, the changes introduced reflected the privatisation agenda's underlying principles. The reforms sought to introduce market forces and reduce what was termed bureaucracy – the excessive managerial paperwork associated with large organisations in both public and private sectors, particularly aspects of management considered unnecessary.

Health system reforms

The NHS underwent reorganisation as an internal market, whereby different units within the health service could purchase services from one another. The intention was to introduce market forces and thereby reduce costs whilst improving efficiency. This represented an attempt to apply private sector principles to public service delivery.

Education reforms

Education reforms similarly aimed to reduce bureaucracy. The power of local authorities over state schools, which had historically been substantial, was reduced as schools gained increasing autonomy. Published performance league tables exemplified Citizen's Charter methods, designed to enable parental decision-making. This 'watchword' of 'choice' positioned parents as consumers who could select schools based on published data.

Education secretary Gillian Shepherd developed plans Major later described in his autobiography as 'hit squads' to address schools judged insufficiently effective. The Teacher Training Agency was established in 1994 to provide additional training for teachers already working, ensuring they remained current with changes in educational policy and practice.

In 1997 the National Curriculum was introduced, standardising what pupils should be taught at different ages in state schools across England, Wales and Northern Ireland (though not Scotland). This represented either the complement or contradiction of 'choice', depending on interpretation of its implementation.

Council tax

Understanding that the poll tax had contributed substantially to Thatcher's fall, Major asked Michael Heseltine to serve as Secretary of State for the Environment and eliminate the unpopular measure. In March 1991, Heseltine introduced the 'council tax', designed to be fairer than either of the two preceding systems:

• The tax was based on property values rather than per person
• Unlike the rates, it was paid by everyone

Residential areas were assessed and grouped into different price bands, with the tax paid depending on the band into which properties fell. No tax proves universally popular, but the council tax achieved greater public acceptance than the poll tax. Removing it from the list of Labour's potential campaign issues for the next election proved impossible. However, it represented progress in the right direction for a party determined to retain power.

Law and order

Home Secretary Michael Howard pursued reforms in law and order policy. He worked to reduce judicial discretion in sentencing by introducing fixed and minimum sentences. At the 1993 Conservative Party conference, Howard declared that 'prison works', after which the prison population began climbing.

National Lottery

1993 witnessed the introduction of the National Lottery, a gambling system whereby people purchasing tickets paid for prizes, costs and administrators' profits, whilst also donating substantial sums to the arts, heritage, sport and 'good causes'. This policy generated both revenue and public engagement whilst supporting culturally valued activities.

'Back to basics' campaign

At the 1993 Conservative Party conference, Major announced a policy drawing attention to past divisions over Europe. He noted the speed of societal change, suggesting his audience might respond positively given that Conservatives often prefer postponing and minimising change whilst questioning innovation. He praised what he termed 'the old values – neighbourliness, decency, courtesy' and announced it was 'time to get back to basics'. His amplification specified individuals accepting responsibility rather than passing it to the state, clearly alluding to Thatcher's comment on 'society'.

Intended to promote socially conservative values, the campaign produced disastrous political consequences. It meant that decency, or otherwise, of politicians' private lives assumed even greater importance, helping trigger the issue of 'sleaze' – the perception that Conservative MPs were involved in financial impropriety or moral misconduct.

Approach to Northern Ireland

Major experienced an early confrontation with the IRA. On 7 February 1991, a republican group launched a mortar attack on 10 Downing Street whilst the war cabinet was in session discussing the Gulf War. Two shells missed their target, one landing in the back garden. Several people sustained injuries, but no government members were hit.

Downing Street Declaration

In 1993, John Major and Irish Taoiseach Albert Reynolds issued a joint statement, the Downing Street Declaration. It stated that:

• The people of Ireland had the right to self-determination
• The people of Northern Ireland had the right to choose whether that province should leave the UK and join the Republic of Ireland
• The people of the island of Ireland had the right to solve problems in the north-south relationship by mutual agreement

The Prime Ministers also stated that their governments would work towards a peaceful constitutional settlement and an end to political violence in Northern Ireland.

Negotiations remained open to all parties, including those linked to paramilitary organisations, once they had foresworn violence. This produced an IRA ceasefire the following year, which subsequently brought a matching ceasefire from the Combined Loyalist Military Command.

Unionists viewed developments with suspicion, having followed the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement cautiously. However, as historian D. George Boyce notes, they decided to engage with it rather than attempting to undermine it.

Conservative divisions

Although Major's replacement of Thatcher altered the political dynamic somewhat and allowed individual policies to be abandoned, underlying divisions had been developing for many years.

Poll tax resolution

The poll tax had been a fatal miscalculation by Margaret Thatcher, but its abandonment by Major and Heseltine neutralised the issue as a source of continued division.

European divisions

Deep divisions within the Conservative Party over relations with the EEC troubled every leader before and after Thatcher. The treaty signed in the Dutch city of Maastricht caused substantial debate amongst Conservatives and prompted revolt by backbenchers least sympathetic to EEC membership.

The treaty contained exemptions specifically negotiated for the UK, allowing the country to remain outside certain new developments. These 'opt-outs' had been negotiated by Major and his team, partly because they disagreed with the plans, partly because they recognised the difficulty of persuading parliamentary colleagues to accept them.

The treaty was signed in February 1992, shortly before the general election; it would only take effect once parliament had ratified it, passing it into law. The foreseeable problem was those backbench members bound to vote it down.

The initial parliamentary response was positive, and prompt ratification might have caused few problems. Postponement meant it came after a Danish referendum on Maastricht in June 1992, in which the Danes rejected the treaty (they later accepted it in a second referendum following further negotiations). Conservatives opposed to Maastricht started demanding a British referendum.

At the second reading of the European Communities (Amendment) Bill, 22 Conservatives opposed the measure; the committee stage (where details would be examined line-by-line) was postponed. The government attempted an intermediary stage in November, but this time more Conservatives voted against and some abstained. The debate appeared interminable and opponents submitted numerous amendments intended to delay the bill's progress – a staggering 600 amendments in total. April 1993 witnessed attempts to write in the necessity of a referendum but this bill was defeated.

The third reading was reached in May 1993; it passed, but with 46 Tory rebels voting against. Opposing your own government is not normal behaviour for MPs; the scale of the rebellion demonstrated the depth of division and strength of feeling.

The bill then proceeded through the House of Lords before returning to the Commons for further discussion. This process of readings, movement between the two houses, the committee stage, and amendment votes represents normal parliamentary procedure for any bill becoming law. What was unusual was the length of the process, the fierceness of the debating, the number of amendments and the scale of rebellion by the government's own side.