Pearson Edexcel · A-Level · History
Course version: 9HI0 · Version from Sept 2015
The extent to which state intervention and the public sector were…
Full specification wording
What impact did Thatcher’s governments (1979–90) have on Britain, 1979–97?: The extent to which state intervention and the public sector were ‘rolled-back’.
‘Rolling back the state’ meant reducing direct government ownership, spending and regulation.
Checked against the Pearson Edexcel 9HI0 specification (opens in a new tab) on .
- Point 2 of 4
- 4 key terms
Study notes
From the checked teaching notes for this specification point.
The idea
‘Rolling back the state’ meant reducing direct government ownership, spending and regulation. Privatisation sold British Telecom in 1984, British Gas in 1986 and water in 1989, and council house sales under the 1980 Housing Act transferred over a million homes to owners. Compulsory competitive tendering exposed some local services to private bids. Yet the state remained large: the National Health Service was not privatised, defence and social security spending stayed high, and central government increased control over local authority finance through rate-capping and the community charge. Regulation also grew in privatised utilities. So the public sector shrank in ownership but not in overall spending or central direction, and the extent of roll-back is therefore partial and contested.
What earns the marks
- Explains what rolling back the state meant in terms of ownership, spending and regulation, and distinguishes these three dimensions.
- Uses evidence of roll-back such as British Telecom, British Gas and water privatisation, council house sales and compulsory competitive tendering.
- Identifies limits to roll-back, including continued NHS provision, high defence and social security spending, and tighter central control of local government finance.
- Judges the extent of change by comparing public spending and central direction before and after 1979 rather than assuming privatisation equals a smaller state.
- Evaluates competing interpretations, for example that regulation replaced ownership or that centralisation increased even as ownership fell.
Common mistakes and how to put them right
Equating privatisation with a smaller state overall.
Put it right: Note that public spending and central control remained substantial.
Ignoring council house sales as part of roll-back.
Put it right: Include the 1980 Housing Act and the transfer of over a million homes.
Assuming the NHS was privatised.
Put it right: State that it remained publicly funded and provided, though internal market reforms were introduced.
Exam tips
- Organise the answer around the three dimensions of ownership, spending and regulation so the extent of roll-back is judged, not just described.
- Use named policies and dates, such as the 1980 Housing Act, British Telecom in 1984 and British Gas in 1986, to support each claim.
- Conclude with a clear line on how far, and in which respects, the state was actually rolled back.
Try the lesson
The start of the What impact did Thatcher’s governments (1979–90) have on Britain, 1979–97?: The extent to which state intervention and the public sector were ‘rolled-back’. lesson, made from checked teaching notes for this specification point.
Have a go first
Which of the following best demonstrates the limits of the Thatcher governments' attempts to 'roll back' the state?
Listen
Rolling back the state’ meant reducing direct government ownership, spending and regulation. Privatisation sold British Telecom in 1984, British Gas in 1986 and water in 1989, and council house sales under the 1980 Housing Act transferred over a million homes to owners. Compulsory competitive tendering exposed some local services to private bids. Yet the state remained large: the National Health Service was not privatised, defence and social security spending stayed high, and central government increased control over local authority finance through rate-capping and the community charge. Regulation also grew in privatised utilities. So the public sector shrank in ownership but not in overall spending or central direction, and the extent of roll-back is therefore partial and contested. A strong answer earns marks for these points. Explains what rolling back the state meant in terms of ownership, spending and regulation, and distinguishes these three dimensions. Uses evidence of roll-back such as British Telecom, British Gas and water privatisation, council house sales and compulsory competitive tendering. Identifies limits to roll-back, including continued NHS provision, high defence and social security spending, and tighter central control of local government finance. Judges the extent of change by comparing public spending and central direction before and after 1979 rather than assuming privatisation equals a smaller state. A common slip: Equating privatisation with a smaller state overall. Instead, note that public spending and central control remained substantial. Exam tip: Organise the answer around the three dimensions of ownership, spending and regulation so the extent of roll-back is judged, not just described.
Put the events in order
Put these events in the order they happened, earliest first.
- 1. Privatisation sold water
- 2. Housing Act transferred council houses to owners
- 3. Privatisation sold British Gas
- 4. Privatisation sold British Telecom
Key words
Say what each word means before you turn the card.
Privatisation and ownership
Try answering aloud or in your head before turning the card.
Public spending and the welfare state
Try answering aloud or in your head before turning the card.
Central–local government relations
Try answering aloud or in your head before turning the card.
Regulation and the limits of roll-back
Try answering aloud or in your head before turning the card.
See every definition
- Privatisation and ownership
- Selling state-owned assets such as British Telecom, British Gas and water, which reduced direct government ownership.
- Public spending and the welfare state
- State spending that stayed high, as the National Health Service was not privatised and defence and social security spending remained high.
- Central–local government relations
- Central government increased control over local authority finance through rate-capping and the community charge.
- Regulation and the limits of roll-back
- Regulation grew in privatised utilities, so roll-back in ownership did not mean a smaller state in overall spending or central direction.
There is more to this lesson
The full lesson goes on to check your understanding and help you earn the marks. Create a free account to carry on, with your progress saved.
A week of Premium from your first lesson · Then the free plan continues · No card, no charge
Test your understanding of What impact did Thatcher’s governments (1979–90) have on Britain, 1979–97?: The extent to which state intervention and the public sector were ‘rolled-back’.
Active recall beats re-reading. Take an instant quiz now to test what you’ve learned and lock it into long-term memory.
A week of Premium from your first lesson · Then the free plan continues · No card, no charge