This is the last article you can read this month
You can read more article this month
You can read more articles this month
Sorry your limit is up for this month
Reset on:
Please help support the Morning Star by subscribing here
MARGARET THATCHER exploded with fury when it was suggested that she be excluded from the unveiling of the Falklands memorial at St Paul’s Cathedral, newly published documents show.
The then prime minister is said to have responded “explosively” on being told that there would not be room for her in the cathedral’s crypt for the 1985 unveiling by the Queen.
An exchange of memos and letters released by the Margaret Thatcher Archive Trust begins with a warning from the Church of England that due to ecclesiastical protocol and limited space the sheer number of clerics and royals present would mean no politicians could be invited.
The row followed a previous fall-out with archbishop of Canterbury Robert Runcie when the PM accused him of a lack of patriotism after he prayed for the Argentinian dead in a 1982 memorial.
An aide’s memo outlined the proposal, saying: “My first reaction was that it was very curious not to suggest the PM be at the unveiling of the plaque.
“There would be four chiefs of staff present, and the clergy … would amount to 13 in number.”
To add to the PM’s anger, Michael Heseltine, defence secretary at the time, passed a letter to the PM which showed that he had signed off the arrangement.
According to Chris Collins, the only historian to have studied the papers, she responded by scrawling on the letter: “Kindly ask the secretary of state to see me immediately.”
The word “immediately” is underlined twice.
Mr Collins said: “Ms Thatcher’s private office was paying close attention to the arrangements in part because the Archbishop of Canterbury was preaching and memories of the 1982 service of thanksgiving had not faded.
“It had not initially seemed like a problem until the cathedral authorities hit upon the idea that they needed an extraordinary number of clerics to be present.”
He added: “The suspicion has to be there that they hit upon a scheme to prevent her taking over due to some natural sense that it was their place to organise the ceremony and it shouldn’t become some kind of political rally.”
