Kemi Badenoch has been Conservative leader for more than a month now. We are also approaching the 50th anniversary of the ascension of the Tories’ first female leader, Margaret Thatcher. Both came from modest backgrounds, holding scientific degrees and inherited a defeated and demoralised party. In my new book, ‘Forging the Iron Lady: Margaret Thatcher, the 1970s, and the Origins of Neoliberalism’, I chronicle Mrs Thatcher’s rise to power and her tenure as Leader of the Opposition. What might Kemi Badenoch learn from that?
First, moving the party to the Right took Mrs Thatcher years. Her Shadow Cabinet was steeped in a ‘postwar consensus’ of economic intervention and activist government. There was no coherent ‘Thatcherism’ in 1975. It took time to develop. The party’s pronouncements in opposition, such as ‘The Right Approach’ (1976), remained centrist. The Soviets dubbed her the ‘Iron Lady’, but her aides called her ‘cautious Margaret’. One of Thatcher’s great skills, however, was strategic patience, conceding in the near term while articulating a new vision to be realised when conditions became ripe.
She also recognised the need for change. Britain in 1975 was a mess, with runaway inflation and destructive industrial relations. Thatcher and others, especially Keith Joseph and Geoffrey Howe, concluded fault lay with both the previous Heath administration and the Labour Government they opposed. Yet many of her colleagues, having served under Heath, did not accept this, even though Heath’s U-turns led to massive Keynesian reflation, aggressive intervention in industry and an incomes policy.
The Conservative Research Department was directed by Chris Patten, who thought the Tories just needed to win back voters lost to the Liberals, not radically change direction. But Keith Joseph had a revelation: since the war, Conservatives had abetted the drift toward socialism. A newer, truer conservatism needed to be born to stop this. He founded the Centre for Policy Studies as a conduit for bringing outsiders with new thinking into the Tory fold. From the CPS emerged John Hoskyns and Norman Strauss, the authors of the ‘Stepping Stones’ strategy. They argued the wretched condition of Britain required more than a few clever slogans. It required a ‘sea change’ in politics and policy – convincing the electorate to reject socialism and addressing the ‘system triggers’ standing in the way of reform.
The obstacle above all others was the trade unions. At the time, the unions were seen as a ‘virtually irresistible’ force. They brought down Heath, and Jim Callaghan was soon to suffer the same fate. For moderate Conservatives, taking on the unions was political suicide. Enter Hoskyns and Strauss, bidding them to do just that. However, they were also strategic thinkers who developed a plan to make this work: publicly challenge the unions on their behavior, prompting them to cry foul. Then, with debate open, demand they defend their practices, such as no strike ballots, which would manoeuvre them into defending the indefensible, or conceding the need for reform. At a stroke, Labour’s greatest strength – its relationship with the unions – would be transformed into a vulnerability.
Just in time! In autumn 1978, the Winter of Discontent began: a series of strikes battering the nation into the following year. Petrol ran out, food went undelivered, hospitals shut down, bodies went unburied and, not for the first time that decade, the lights went out. Thatcher and the Conservatives might have dithered in the face of crisis, as they had for the previous three years, had Stepping Stones not provided strategic direction. Thatcher was now able to catch the public mood and ride their discontent into Downing Street. The timely intercession of events rebounded to her political benefit because a narrative promising a new direction was in place.
Kemi Badenoch has self-consciously offered shades of Margaret Thatcher, with her pugilistic style and commitment to ‘anti-wokeness’. Yet 2025 is not 1975, thankfully. Thatcherism developed as a response to the specific ailments of the 1970s. Copying the old prescriptions will not do.
Badenoch’s first task is to define her version of the Conservative Party and the Britain she would like to lead someday. Her core principles have been outlined: an emphasis on individual responsibility, equality over equity, support for families and a concern for British citizens over new arrivals. But policy meat will have to be put on these bones of principle. Doing so requires convincing the party it must change. Her recent speech admitting Tory failures on immigration is a good start.
Norman Strauss emphasised the ‘need for new data’ – evidence to the electorate the party had changed. Having been turfed out after 14 years, the need arises again. Like Thatcher, Badenoch is in a tenuous position within the party: only a third of Tory MPs voted for her, and big beasts like James Cleverly are lurking on the backbenches. Transforming the party demands the sort of authority Badenoch does not yet possess. Strategic patience is, once again, needed. Thatcher moved pragmatically and thoughtfully while never wavering from her core beliefs, a skilled practitioner in politics as ‘the art of the impossible’. Achieving this may require reinforcement from party outsiders. Labour’s large majority forestalls an early election, which may allow the time to chart a new direction.
In 1979, events broke Mrs. Thatcher’s way, but it was a damn close-run thing. Had the Winter of Discontent happened a year earlier, or if Callaghan had called for an election in the autumn of 1978, Margaret Thatcher might be a historical footnote. By the time it did occur, she was ready, but only just. Strategic patience is useful; having a plan to address opportunities when they arise is essential.
Badenoch’s challenge may be greater than Thatcher faced. The 2024 election was the Conservatives’ worst showing ever. They have a huge margin to make up against Labour, and Reform looks a more formidable threat than the Liberals of olds. Can Badenoch rise to the challenge? As a senior Tory MP said, ‘We know she’s Mrs. T. We just haven’t worked out if that’s Thatcher or Truss.’ To become the former, she might want to brush up on how Maggie handled her time in opposition. May I recommend some reading?
‘Forging the Iron Lady’ by Terrence Casey is published by Routledge.
Terrence Casey is the author of ‘Forging the Iron Lady: Margaret Thatcher, the 1970s, and the Origins of Neoliberalism’ (Routledge 2025) and Professor of Political Science at the Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology in Terre Haute, Indiana.
Columns are the author’s own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of CapX.
