Skip to main content

‘Rolling Back the Frontiers of the State, Only to See Them Re-imposed in Docklands?’: Margaret Thatcher, Michael Heseltine and the Contested Parenthood of Canary Wharf

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Thatcherism in the 21st Century

Abstract

This chapter demonstrates that Canary Wharf would not have happened without the London Docklands Development Corporation’s initial ‘localised Keynesianism’ and that the LDDC would not have happened without Michael Heseltine, something reinforced by recently-released archival material. It shows that the LDDC was an extremely un-Thatcherite mechanism for achieving urban regeneration, involving a great deal of intervention in the market, and staffed primarily by public sector officials, many of whom arrived from left-wing Labour councils elsewhere in London.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    More formally referred to as ‘the Cabinet Minister with special responsibility for Merseyside’ by the Prime Minister, during a meeting to discuss Heseltine’s work so far in September 1981.

  2. 2.

    In announcing the policy, a Treasury spokesman claimed that: ‘The government wants to create a powerful new body—similar to what happened in Docklands in the 1980s’.

References

Archival

  • Baker, Kenneth. 1985. Letter to Prime Minister, ‘Good News’. 3/10/85, National Archive (hereafter ‘NA’), PREM19/1920.

    Google Scholar 

  • E(EA). 1979a. 9th Meeting: Minutes. 25/7/79, NA, CAB134/4340. (1)

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1979b. ‘12th Meeting: Minutes’. 6/9/79, NA, CAB134/4340. (2)

    Google Scholar 

  • GLP. 1979. ‘Docklands: The Options’. 18/7/79, NA, AT41/319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregson, Peter. 1982. Letter to M. Thatcher, ‘Medway Town and Chatham Dock Closure’. 15/3/82, NA, PREM19/1114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunn, John. 1979. Letter to Mr Evans, ‘UDC’. 13/8/79, NA, AT41/319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornsby, Timothy. 1980. Letter to P. McQuail, ‘Post Mortem on Appointment of UDC Chief Executives’. 12 June 1980, NA, AT41/377/1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, Geoffrey. 1979. Letter to M. Heseltine, ‘UDCs’. 7/9/79, NA, T374/409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howes, C. K. 1986. Letter to P. McQuail, ‘Canary Wharf’. 30/1/86, NA, AT41/476/1.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1987a. Letter to P. McQuail, ‘Canary Wharf’. 20/1/87, NA, AT41/484/1. (1)

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1987b. Letter to P. McQuail, ‘Canary Wharf—An Estates View’. 17/3/87, NA, AT41/486. (2)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lankester, Tim. 1979. ‘No. 10 Record of Conversation’. 11/9/79, NA, PREM19/577.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1981. ‘Note of Meeting held at 10 Downing Street’. 7/9/81, NA, PREM19/578.

    Google Scholar 

  • LDDC. 1985. Emergency Board Minutes. 4/4/85, LMA, BO6/140/LD163/CB50.

    Google Scholar 

  • LDDC-DoE Liaison Meeting. 1982. Minutes. 9/9/82, London Metropolitan Archives (hereafter ‘LMA’), BO6/140/LD163/CB22.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1987. Minutes. 16/9/87, LMA, BO6/140/LD163/CB82.

    Google Scholar 

  • McQuail, Paul. 1986. Letter to PS/Sir G. Young, ‘Canary Wharf: Sale of Freehold’. 1/8/86, NA, AT41/479/1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norgrove, David. 1985. Letter to Prime Minister, Note attached to ‘Good News’. 3/10/85, NA, PREM19/1920.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, F. A. 1985. Letter to P. McQuail, ‘Canary Wharf’. 3/10/85, NA, AT41/475/1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, J. 1979. ‘UDCs’, Internal Memorandum, HM Treasury. 24/7/79, NA, T374/409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Permanent Secretary. 1981. Letter to Secretary of State, ‘London Docklands Development Corporation’. 20/3/81, NA, AT81/215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridley, Nick. 1986. Letter to Prime Minister, ‘Urban Development Corporations. October 1986, NA, PREM19/1921.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treasury Circular. 1979. ‘UDCs’. 16/8/79, NA, T374/409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, Reg. n.d. ‘Curriculum Vitae’, NA, AT41/377/2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wybrew, John. 1986. Letter to Prime Minister, ‘Docklands Light Railway and Canary Wharf’. 18/4/86, NA, PREM19/1921.

    Google Scholar 

Oral History Interviews

  • Interview with Anonymous Civil Servant by Jack Brown, 5/9/2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Interview with Lord Heseltine by Jack Brown, 17/7/2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Interview with Sir Peter Hall by Jack Brown, 6/11/2013.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jack Brown .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Brown, J. (2020). ‘Rolling Back the Frontiers of the State, Only to See Them Re-imposed in Docklands?’: Margaret Thatcher, Michael Heseltine and the Contested Parenthood of Canary Wharf. In: Mullen, A., Farrall, S., Jeffery, D. (eds) Thatcherism in the 21st Century. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41792-5_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics