Downing Street Years - Margaret Thatcher [347]
* For discussion of the Athens European Council, see Chapter 12, pp. 335–8.
* I am a great collector of menus. For the connoisseur I reproduce the menu for dinner on 25 June: Assortiment de foie gras d’oie; Homard breton rôti, beurre Cancalais; Carré d’agneau aux petites girolles; Asperges tièdes; Fromages de la Brie et de Fontainebleau; Soufflé chaud aux framboises; Mignardises et fours frais. All washed down with the finest wines.
* Britain and Ireland — as island countries — were permitted to retain or take new measures on grounds of health, safety, environment and consumer protection.
CHAPTER XIX
Hat Trick
The preparations for and course of the 1987 general election campaign
All election victories look inevitable in retrospect; none in prospect. The wounds which Westland, BL and reaction to the US raid on Libya inflicted on the Government and the Conservative Party would take some time to heal. Economic recovery would in time provide an effective salve, as it became clear that our policies were delivering growth with low inflation, higher living standards and — from the summer of 1986 — steadily falling unemployment. But in the meantime, Labour had developed a thirst for power, moderated their image and gained a lead in the opinion polls. It was important that I should unify the Party around my authority and vision of Conservatism. This would not be easy.
STYLE AND TONE
Perhaps the most damaging accusation made against me during the Westland affair was that I did not listen. Like most allegations which stick, this contained a grain of truth. Once I begin to follow a train of thought I am not easily stopped. This has its advantages. It means that I can concentrate on a tricky point almost no matter what is going on in the background, a useful ability, for example, at Prime Minister’s Question Time. But it does, of course, also mean that I am inclined to talk over people and ignore timid or inarticulate objections and arguments. People who do not know me and how I work conclude that I have not taken in what has been said to me. Those who know me better will confirm, however, that this is generally not the case. I will often go away afterwards to revise my views in the light of what I have heard. Indeed, I have even been accused by some supporters of taking too much notice of those who do not agree with me.
The suggestion that I do not listen, particularly when it comes from ex-ministers, can, however, simply mean that I do not agree with their views. You might say I ‘chair from the front’. I like to say what I think quite early on and then see whether arguments are adduced which show me to be wrong, in which case I have no difficulty in changing my line. This is, of course, not the traditional formal way of chairing meetings. My experience is that a group of men sitting round a table like little better than their own voices and that nothing is more distasteful than the possibility that a conclusion can be reached without all of them having the chance to read from their briefs. My style of chairmanship certainly nonplussed some colleagues, who knew their brief a good deal less well than I did. But I adopt this technique because I believe in argument as the best way of getting to the truth — not because I want to suppress argument. In fact, I would