Mrs Thatcher: Exhilarated by the campaign

Are you exhilarated by campaigning, or is it a strain?

When I am out on a campaign trail, yes, I am exhilarated by it. Nevertheless it seems to be quite a long campaign, because my mind cannot help addressing itself to the longer term problems and yet I have to discipline myself and say, no, you must not count your chickens.

It is really quite a tussle, because by nature I like to have everything prepared. I would like to have made decisions today that I know I have to make at the weekend, but unless I get it right on Thursday, I won't be able to make those decisions, so you see the constant tussle.

If you are reelected tomorrow, will it be on promise or performance?

I think it will be because people voted for us last time to take a different direction, and they are endorsing that because they know what we are doing is fundamentally sound. They believe that, given time, it will work. So it is a combination of both.

If the electors' hope is betrayed, would you expect retribution in 1987 or 1988?

I do not believe their hope will be betrayed. I think the other way we were going led to the relative decline of this country. We are now starting to compete and I am sure the way we are going is the way to go.

When you tell a television interviewer not to stop you because you are in “full flood” , is that because you are excited, or a little overbearing, or what?

No, he (Brian Walden on Weekend World) asked me a question about our strategy for jobs. That is crucial to the whole election, and I most certainly was not going to give only half an answer, and the advertisers had to wait.

Now you have done the job, are you more confident of your capacity than you were in your 1979 campaign?

Yes.

Is there an issue above all on which this election has turned?

I think defence has played a bigger part than in any other election I remember, and I think it is the general handling of the economy. I think the question there is do you go for the magic cure, which you know will not cure, and is not magic, and does not exist, or do you address yourself to the fundamental problems which in your heart of hearts you know you ought to have addressed yourself to years ago. That, I think, is why we are winning.

If Labour is crushed tomorrow, what effect do you think that will have on our national life?

I think it would lead to the kind of reform of the Labour Party which Gaitskell wanted to pursue, and that would be very much better for everyone, in my view—it is not my party, but in my view—because state socialism is totally alien to the British character.

Your manifesto claims that the Government is “straightforward and resolute” . But are you so resolute? When you face awkward decisions like whether to hold a general election you dither like most of us, don't you?

No. Once we decided to have an election we set everything in train extremely quickly. I told interviewers at the new year who asked if this was election year: “I shall not think about it until after I have been in for four years.”

I thought voters might be reassured to know you have a human weakness or two.

Oh I have got lots, lots of human weaknesses, who hasn't?

When you talk of willingness to contemplate the use of weapons such as Polaris, is it enough for a Prime Minister to be resolute, patriotic, hostile to the Soviet system? Or does she need subtlety, and flexibility, and wisdom in judging an adversary's real intentions?

I think you always need subtlety and wisdom. You need to look at the facts. The facts are that Andropov has been head of the KGB; that the Soviet Union has had mounting expenditure on its defence system; has deprived its people of sufficient food and consumer goods to have mounting defence.

I happen to believe that you are more likely to negotiate disarmament from strength than from weakness; more likely to be able to take a constructive but unblinkered view of the Soviet Union on other matters—trade, travel, being able to get people out—if you are strong. Strength is more likely to get disarmament on both sides.

Do you believe there will be progress towards controlled disarmament?

Yes I do. One of the things they (the Soviet Union) are waiting for is the result of this election. Chancellor Kohl 's was a crucial election for the whole Western alliance. I think once he (Mr Andropov) knows he has got a strong President Mitterrand, a strong Chancellor Kohl, a strong government here, he is much, much more likely to move.

You have asked for a large majority. Do you find yourself becoming impatient, as your opponents allege, with the democratic constraints on a Prime Minister's great power?

No, I do not find myself becoming impatient in any way, I am a democrat. I am here only by virtue and power of the ballot. Obviously I want maximum support for my policies. Who does not? Of course. But I want it the only way: from the ballot box. [end p1]

If the electors decide in their wisdom that you should have an adequate majority for a full parliament, but no more than adequate, you will not think that unreasonable?

I have to accept the decision of the ballot box. The important thing is that the ballot box continues. I have to accept whatever is their decision. I naturally hope and want as big a support for my policies as I can possibly get, because I believe they are right, and because I think that for the world to know that I have large support means also that Britain rejects totally the kind of state socialism that has been put forward.

Will there be much room in your Cabinet for new blood?

Oh, it is always one of the very difficult questions that, you know. It is the worst thing that a Prime Minister has to do. Everyone says ‘you must get in so-and-so and so-and-so’, and I say ‘yes, and so-and-so and so-and-so. Now tell me, who am I going to put out?’ You always have to keep the thing on the move, you have to, because your young people are entitled to feel that when they perform well they have some hope of being promoted.

But it is very, very difficult, and you explain to people ‘look, it isn't that you have done things wrong, but I just have to make room, and aren't you fortunate in a way to have had the privilege of being in government for a time.’ It is the most difficult thing I have to do, but it has to be done, and I have to screw myself up to do it.

But you have decided on your new appointments, haven't you?

No I have not. This again is my not counting chickens. But it will not take me long to make up my mind when I face it. And always, always you must understand—I am painted as the greatest little dictator, which is ridiculous—you always take some consultations. You have got to keep people with you.

One thing that has got to be known quickly is the name of the new Foreign Secretary and the Chancellor. Is that right?

I am not sure, because last time the majority did not come through until about 4 o'clock in the afternoon—317 seats—and obviously I was not going to move until I knew that we had an actual majority. Now I don't know when the majority would come through this time. I am not sure whether we go to the Palace or not. I think in the past Mr Wilson and Mr Macmillan did not. But I don't know, we'll have to decide that at the time. But then, immediately one got some of one's senior colleagues here to consult, and then we started the next day. But don't forget that next day is Trooping the Colour, so I am not sure at the moment when it would be best to do any Cabinet changes. But we don't count chickens.

Has it crossed your mind that you may lose?

Yes it has crossed my mind, but it has only just flitted through it.