He referred to a study by the Central Policy Review Staff, the original Cabinet Office “think tank” and added: “I cannot help feeling that the option of managed decline, which the CPRS rejected in its study of Merseyside, is one which we should not forget altogether. We must not expend all our resources in making water flow uphill.”  Mr Howe acknowledged the suggestion that the city could be left to a "managed decline" was potentially explosive.  "This is not a term for use, even privately," he warned Mrs Thatcher. "It is much too negative."  John Hoskyns, head of the Downing Street Policy Unit, also questioned the wisdom of sending Mr Heseltine to Liverpool, suggesting it was little more than a "political gesture".  "The automatic assumption within Whitehall and in the country will be that such a minister, if he is to be seen taking action - which is, after all, his political raison d'etre - must be seen to spend money," he wrote.  "This money is likely to be money wasted. Neither the chosen minister nor Whitehall as a whole, will have much idea of how to tackle the real problem-solving task, as distinct from the (important) political gesture.  However Mr Heseltine told the Prime Minister: "There is no point in thinking for one moment that the exercise would be anything other than a disaster if I was not empowered to take real decisions on my own responsibility whilst I am there.  "Without the announcement that some extra resources will be available I am sure that the Government's commitment will lack credibility.  When ministers met that September to discuss his proposals, he was out-manoeuvred by the Treasury which insisted it would "impossible" to fix a sum in advance without seeing exactly how the money would be spent.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly advised to abandon Liverpool to &ldquo;managed   decline&rdquo; by her senior advisers, newly released documents disclose.