COME BACK, MICHAEL!
Page 28
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
MICHAEL Heseltine's public
disagreement with Margaret Thatcher and the rest of the Cabinet over the future of Westland enlivened a normally dull political period.
Many commentators saw this as a bid to distance himself from Government policies, and become a front-runner replacement for the Prime Minister. Her reluctance to sack him was said to stem from a fear that he will be much more dangerous than any previous sacked minister. We shall see.
Heseltine's first ministerial job was Parliamentary Secretary to the old Ministry of Transport, following the 1970 general election. The post was shot from under him later the same year when the MoT temporarily vanished into the newly formed Department of the Environment.
But let us dream for a moment. Suppose that in October 1983, after Cecil Parkinson's troubles, the Prime Minister had sent Heseltine back to Marsham Street, instead of Nicholas Ridley. (Well, I said it was a dream). Would "leaks" and "off-the-record briefings" be feeding the media with the following stories over the next few weeks?
"Transport Secretary Michael Heseltine is heading for a controversy with the Chancellor over the forthcoming Budget. Mr Heseltine's friends say that he is resisting a Treasury proposal to increase by 20 per cent the 'environmental surcharge' levied on the heaviest lorries. He sees this as an arbitrary tax on the most efficient vehicles."
Sunday Times, January 19.
"Lord Whitelaw's emollient skills at resolving potentially damaging disputes between his colleagues were used to good effect yesterday. He presided over a meeting of Ministers at which Transport Secretary Michael Heseltine is understood to have acquiesced in Chancellor Nigel Lawson's intention to make the heaviest lorries pay more for the damage they cause to the environment. After the meeting Lord Whitelaw said: 'The Government's policy on this has always been clear. No, I haven't got time to explain it now. Naturally Michael, as a loyal member of the Government, accepts it.' " The Times, Wednesday, January 22.
"Sources in Whitehall deny that Michael Heseltine has lost his battle with Nigel Lawson over higher taxa
non on juggernauts. The Transport Secretary is said to regard the question as still open. Treasury sources, however, described Mr Heseltine as 'not only a bad loser but slow to realise when he has lost'."
London Standard the same evening.
Heseltine: "Now, Brian, you've been involved in politics long enough to know that suggestions of a split between Nigel and me — over lorry taxation or anything else — must be absolute bunkum. We are both loyal supporters of Government policy — at least, I am, and I am sure Nigel would say the same. But that does not rule out all discussion of what that policy should be."
Today programme Radio 4, Thursday, January 23.
Lawson: "Well, I heard what Michael told you earlier, Brian, and of course I agree with him. Any Minister who disagrees with Government policy would be bound to resign — at least, any honourable Minister. Michael has not resigned, so you and the listeners can draw the obvious conclusion." Today programme, later the same morning.
"The Prime Minister is described in Downing Street as being 'irritated' by the semi-public feud between her Chancellor and her Transport Secretary. She has invited the Heseltines to Sunday lunch at Chequers, and will use the occasion to tell Mr Heseltine to 'cool it'."
The Guardian Friday, January 24.
"Michael Heseltine prepares for a Prime Ministerial lunch-time rebuke today for his resistance to increased lorry taxation. But he is said to be unrepentant. 'Michael sees no sense in forcing up prices by raising transport costs, said one friend who did not wish to be identified. 'Moreover he has had a lot of private support from people in the water, gas and electricity industries, who object to being used by the Chancellor as cash cows. If he resigns, or is sacked, over the lorry taxation issue he will campaign against the prices of all these vital services for the whole population being forced up simply to finance pre-election tax reductions for the better off."
The Observer, Sunday, January 26.
"Mr and Mrs `Tarzan' Heseltine came to lunch on Sunday. Goldilocks was in for a richly deserved wigging from The Boss for publicly objecting to Fatty Lawson's plans to squeeze a •few more millions out of the juggernaut yobbos. Over a private pre-lunch tincture I tried to explain to him that if the hauliers didn't pay up Lawson might increase the tax on Scotch still further. But he didn't seem to grasp the point. When I went into M's study after' zan had left she was looking at tod Observer and seemed more thougi than I had seen her since Parky told her about his spot of bother that typist woman."
"Denis Thatcher's" letter to 1 Bill in Private Eye, January 29.
"Sources close to the Prime Min: today played down any suggestion conflict between the Chancellor the Transport Secretary over h taxation. They deny that the ques was even mentioned during the Hc tines' lunch visit to Chequers last S day. 'They arc old friends and t neighbours,' said the sources. 'It natural that the Thatchers should in them for a purely social occasion.' ' Daily Telegraph, Saturday, Febru 1.
"I now turn to lorry taxation. House will recall that earlier this ) there were some quite unfounded mours of disagreement between my Hon Friend the Secretary of State Transport and myself. The nor] pre-Budget secrecy prevented me fr commenting fully at the time. Bu can now scotch the rumours by tell the House that 1 am proposing no crease in Vehicle Excise Duty on 1 ries this year. On the contrary, rates for the heaviest vehicles will reduced so that each class will pay more than the track costs it impos This should give a welcome boost all sectors of British industry." Budget speech, March 1986.
Ah well. Back to the reality of Ridl • by Janus