Was the Rt. Hon. James Hacker a tory or a liberal?
Jun 20, 2004 at 11:39 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 6

kartik

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
1,642
Likes
10
I've been rereading the Yes Prime Minister book. I always thought that Hacker was a conservative, now I'm starting to think the authors may have intended him to look more like a Labour PM. (Probably to avoid getting in to trouble with the Iron LAdy). Any thoughts.
 
Jun 20, 2004 at 11:58 PM Post #2 of 6

Big D

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 1, 2004
Posts
578
Likes
10
I thought that the main point of it was that Whitehall ran the government while the Ministers were just public figures to provide a voice to those that did make the policy decisions.

Maybe I missed something?

I would agree that today he might be seen as a Labour PM, because let's be honest New Labour has done to the Conservatives what Oasis did to the Beatles!!
icon10.gif
 
Jun 21, 2004 at 12:09 AM Post #4 of 6

Tuberoller

Divorced an Orpheus to keep his wife.
Joined
Oct 23, 2001
Posts
4,941
Likes
15
Hmmmm! This is a book discussion? My bad. I'll knock it back.
 
Jun 21, 2004 at 1:37 AM Post #5 of 6

plainsong

Headphoneus Supremus: Untie!
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Posts
6,453
Likes
26
I'm not in the UK, but we get 2 UK news channels.. and as someone who thought Oasis had promise at first..

That was too classic!
biggrin.gif


Tuberoller, yeah it was also a tv series, Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister. I think it also ran on some PBS channels in the US as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big D
I thought that the main point of it was that Whitehall ran the government while the Ministers were just public figures to provide a voice to those that did make the policy decisions.

Maybe I missed something?

I would agree that today he might be seen as a Labour PM, because let's be honest New Labour has done to the Conservatives what Oasis did to the Beatles!!
icon10.gif



 
Jun 21, 2004 at 4:46 AM Post #6 of 6

kartik

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
1,642
Likes
10
My intial theory that he was a tory sprung from the backdoor route and extreme boringness that he and John Major shared. Moreover he is often a bitter critic of the unions and quite ambiguous to industry. In contrast, most of his upbringing seems far less egalitarian and at times clearly lacks sophistry that I'd expect from a Tory PM. Maybe the authors had him be a PM from a party while being ambiguous to his political affiliations to make sure the book stayed relevant irrespective of the dominant party at any given time.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top