Thatcher earned her place as a major figure in 20th-century

When the Thatcher government took office in May, 1979, it started to confront these problems. All of us with hindsight have cause to be grateful to that government, much as I and many others disliked its style at the time. Mrs Thatcher also played a major role in bringing low the tyranny of Soviet communism to which British Labour movement politicians and trade union leaders (with their hospitality visits to Moscow and fraternal USSR deputations) had so long truckled down.

The legacy of Thatcherism in the UK is far from perfect but, by and large, her 11 years in power were the best for most of us. Of how many post-war democratic leaders in Britain can you say that?

That she was a major figure in British, European and world late 20th-century history is not to be doubted.

Gus Logan,

2 York Road,

North Berwick.

I congratulate Alan Owen and Iain Paterson on their excellent letters regarding the deeply flawed legacy of Margaret Thatcher and the disastrous consequences of many of her policies during and following her years as prime minister (Letters, April 10).

I also agree, probably for the first time, with Alex Gallagher and his comments on the destruction of many of Britain's major industries, leading to much long-term unemployment and the devastation of communities and families.

Two other policy failings have had serious long-term consequences for the UK. First, because of her irrational dislike of railways, she refused to allow the much-needed investment in Britain's outdated and inefficient rail industry. This eventually led to the nonsensical decision of the following Major government to privatise British Rail by dividing it into two separate entities, with Network Rail responsible for the tracks and stations, while the government sold long-term franchises to private train-operating companies. As a result, our present railway systems are 30 years behind those in Europe in terms of modern rolling stock and operating efficiency.

Secondly, Mrs Thatcher's confrontational attitude towards the European Union has been counter-productive. She claimed she was "defending Britain's interests" by opposing every move towards EU development, while regularly demanding opt outs and financial rebates. As a result, while the EU grew in size and economic significance, Britain missed a golden opportunity to establish itself as one of the leading nations, along with Germany and France, with real influence over key policy decisions on important issues. Today we are regarded by most European leaders merely as a constantly carping neighbour, pursuing our own narrow interests and threatening vetoes to get our own way.

The Iron Lady was certainly a dominant force in British politics but she was not omniscient and made many mistakes and errors of judgment. She was merely a long-serving prime minister who dominated her cabinet, her party and Parliament by her strong personality and stubborn conviction that she was always right.

Her legacy is by no means entirely positive, and I believe her policies have not been to the long-term benefit of the country.

Iain AD Mann,

7 Kelvin Court,

Glasgow.

I never thought I would find myself writing to agree with Alex Gallagher in his letter which sums up the divisive, greedy and uncaring nature of the Thatcher era (April 10).

Unfortunately, it falls short by not explaining why her legacy was perpetuated by the New Labour governments of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

David Hay,

458 Clarkston Road,

Glasgow.

Heartfelt congratulations to Ian Bell for his incisive and insightful comment on the Thatcher years ("Her spirit prevails in a broken disturbed country", The Herald, April 9).

I was anticipating being poised with my laptop ready to vent my ire about her megalomania and patronising tone, her fraudulent privatisations and deregulations, and the absurd claims from Lord Forsyth on Radio Scotland that she "tore down the Iron Curtain" and much more.

Ian Bell has done this in devastating detail, and has made me feel much better.

Peter Moore,

3 Bellevue Road,

Ayr.

Thatcher's legacy? Perhaps the most eloquent commentary came in the "From the archives" column on the day she died (The Herald, April 8).

It reported that 25 years ago, then Labour leader Neil Kinnock had launched an attack on her imminent social security reforms, accusing her of "pushing the poor to the margins of society" and "ignoring advice about the impact the changes would have".

Mr Kinnock said his hostility to her proposals were "to robbery, not reform".

Same old Tories.

Alex Mathieson,

15 Riselaw Terrace,

Edinburgh.

The UK and international broadcasters have spent the past couple of days repeating over and over the main events of Margaret Thatcher's time in office: the miners' strike, the Falklands War, the poll tax, her assault on the EU, the sale of council houses, the destruction of the UK's heavy industry in the north of England and Scotland and so on.

There has not been a single word about perhaps the most important event of her time as prime minister: the development of Scottish North Sea oil. Yet it was this more than anything else that allowed her to do what she did. And if anything '"saved" Britain, it was that development.

Nick Dekker,

1 Nairn Way,

Cumbernauld.

Gordon M Taylor attributes selective amnesia to Alex Salmond and Gordon Wilson concerning the SNP's role in assisting Margaret Thatcher's acquiring of power (Letters, April 10).

Also, he carefully avoids James Callaghan's role in ensuring the SNP's eventual support for the Tories.

A few months earlier, aided and abetted by Scottish Labour MPs, and sowing the seeds of his own downfall, Mr Callaghan ensured that with its 40% rule, the referendum on Scottish devolution could never return a positive result.

For the benefit of those too young to remember, the 40% rule required not 40% of those who voted to say Yes but 40% of those on the electoral register to do so.

In other words, for purposes of the referendum, abstentions were simply counted as No votes.

Tom O'Neill,

26 Westcliff,

Dumbarton.

I MUST take issue with Alan Clayton's letter about the Hillman Imp car plant at Linwood (Letters, April 10).

I worked in the Linwood plant during the last 21 years of its existence. I visited car plants in England and America and never saw anyone in those plants who was better than those at Linwood.

The plant suffered from mismanagement and political ineptitude up until the last few years before its demise. Its need was greater then than at its inauguration but like everything else in the manufacturing industries in Scotland, we were expendable.

Lawson Stewart,

17 Victoria Road,

Paisley.