Miners' Strike

[Symptoms]

Recently released Government papers show Scargs wasn't lying ...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25549596

 

and that Thatch's 'running dog jackals' (NACODS) were instrumental in stiffing the miners. 

 

What is remarkable is what a close-run thing the whole dispute was ... victory for the miners was within grasp but appears to have been snatched away by Gorbachev, the traitorous NACODS and the crooked UDM.

 

We may not have to wait long before Thatcher's apologists turn up to spin the same old guff about ballots.

[Adam Hogg]

What Is also Interesting Symptoms is the 75 pits to close over 3 years when the only figure spoken about at the time was 20 pits to close.

Shame However now Thatcher can't be held to account for her Lies and deceit.

[threegee]

And what sort of "victory" would that have been Sym?  An overthrow of a democratically elected government kind of victory, by a Marxist agitator who couldn't even carry his own membership behind him?  It was not a strike about pay or conditions. So what exactly would your victory have looked like?

 

Where exactly did Mrs Thatcher lie Adam, or is this more of what someone who was around at the time told you to believe?  She had a damn sight more integrity than politicians today!  In fact Ian MacGregor didn't lie either, if you examine exactly what he said.  Was it misleading?  Well yes, but there was a lot of misleading BS going around at the time, and his was a politician's devious answer.  The interviewers didn't ask the right questions, but then Scargill got off very lightly in interviews too.

 

I'm not aware of anyone accusing Scargill of lying either; he obviously got his information from somewhere.  At the time that there were going to be more closures seemed highly likely.

 

Scargill though got the job by intrigue and manoeuvring.  No wonder he feared democracy!  The top NUM job should have gone to good old red Mick McGahey, but he was cheated out of it.  Mick at least knew how far to push, and despite his leanings claimed never to mix the business of getting the best deal possible for his members with politics.  Scargill did entirely the opposite and impoverished them for no identifiable purpose whatsoever.  NUM members had the wrong guy foisted on them, and then blindly and stupidly followed him over the precipice, or at least the local ones did.

 

The resulting hardship was directly due to the illegal strike, and once Scargill embarked on that course there was never any doubt about the outcome.  You kid yourself if you believe otherwise Sym.  The Country simply was not going to be held to ransom by a communist who as running scared of his own membership.  That local miners were taken for such a ride, and kidded that there could be any other outcome but a total climb-down was almost beyond belief.  That they blame entirely the wrong person - and actually the best peace time PM this country has ever had - for this, is the sad consequence of decades of political indoctrination.

 

You know it's about time Scargill apologists put up a statue to our local hero.  I will happily re-write the words to Lil Abner and we can turn the whole thing into a hit musical!

 

[Adam Hogg]

Where exactly did Mrs Thatcher lie Adam, or is this more of what someone who was around at the time told you to believe?  She had a damn sight more integrity than politicians today!  In fact Ian MacGregor didn't lie either, if you examine exactly what he said.  Was it misleading?  Well yes, but there was a lot of misleading BS going around at the time, and his was a politician's devious answer.  The interviewers didn't ask the right questions, but then Scargill got off very lightly in interviews too.

She and MacGregor Both Lied, Both stated there was no plan to Destroy the British Coal Mining Industry however in a No. 10 Document Labeled "SECRET" It states at the bottom of the document on page 10 about the strike, "The situation also provides and excellent opportunity to acceleratre pit closures and to maximise open-cast operations and imports."

And both Macgregor and Thatcher Stated only 20 pits were to close, not 75 and that what Arthur Scargill stated about 70 pits going to close was Completely Untrue (lies) however shows he was right only 5 under.

Also the Goverenment gave MacGregor scripts to read to the press and Thatcher stated that no Cabinet Minister should speak about the strike to the press and/or public as it may give ammunition to the NUM.

Then Also States "in Contrast, any return by Ian MacGregor to the courts at this state is likely to undermine the moderate backlase which is developing within the NUM."

Shows They both feared anyone finding out there plan.

 

 

On another issue relating to this I want to find the hit list of the 75 pits anyone know the exact document that they are in? If anyone has found the list.

[threegee]

Did they really?  I think the leftie journos at the Beeb are struggling to find any evidence of this, and you certainly have none.  The reality was that no one lied, though there was plenty of the usual spin from both sides.

 

There's a huge reality gap locally; people believing what they've been told to believe, or worse, what their parents told them to believe.  If local people had travelled a bit more they'd have discovered that the Country at large held a quite different view.  There was a lot of sympathy for the miner's families, but utter bafflement about what they hoped to achieve.  That's why the NUM was split too.  Calling fellow workers scabs because they saw this and you didn't was just plain stupid.  And, demonising a PM who was doing her very best for the Country at large puts you on completely the wrong side of history.

[Symptoms]

GGG wrote: "And what sort of "victory" would that have been Sym? An overthrow of a democratically elected government kind of victory, by a Marxist agitator who couldn't even carry his own membership behind him? It was not a strike about pay or conditions. So what exactly would your victory have looked like?"

 

My 'victory' would have looked something like this ...

 

The traditionally negotiated planned pit closure programme would have continued where those pits that were 'worked-out', and/or where it was economically no longer viable to work them would close.  The NUM was never against pit closures, per say.

 

Proper investment in deep mining, resulting in a long-term viable industry.  Had this happened then I'm sure there would have been proper research and development into 'clean coal' technology at the power stations.  Oh how different the UK's current energy security would look like now when we consider the 300 years worth of coal reserves below Blighty.

 

Maybe local communities wouldn't have been destroyed and small towns/villages might still be vibrant places to live.

[Vic Patterson]

I'm right and your wrong! it's never that easy, politicians lie! Union leaders mislead! NEVER....

"The Country at large†were certainly no different from the miners who believed "what their parents told them to believeâ€

"And, demonising a PM who was doing her very best for the Country at large puts you on completely the wrong side of history.†and when Julie Andrews plays the part I believe we will all be convinced your correct!

[threegee]

GGG wrote: "And what sort of "victory" would that have been Sym? An overthrow of a democratically elected government kind of victory, by a Marxist agitator who couldn't even carry his own membership behind him? It was not a strike about pay or conditions. So what exactly would your victory have looked like?"

 

My 'victory' would have looked something like this ...

 

The traditionally negotiated planned pit closure programme would have continued where those pits that were 'worked-out', and/or where it was economically no longer viable to work them would close.  The NUM was never against pit closures, per say.

 

Proper investment in deep mining, resulting in a long-term viable industry.  Had this happened then I'm sure there would have been proper research and development into 'clean coal' technology at the power stations.  Oh how different the UK's current energy security would look like now when we consider the 300 years worth of coal reserves below Blighty.

 

Maybe local communities wouldn't have been destroyed and small towns/villages might still be vibrant places to live.

 

..and, as Neil Kinnock has recently pointed out, that's exactly what would have happened if Red Mick inherited the NUM leadership without the political manoeuvrings at the extreme left of Labour which excluded him.  Kinnock puts the full blame for the debacle on Scargill's refusing to negotiate. He is - for once - spot on in his view.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/mar/16/neil-kinnock-arthur-scargill-miners-strike

 

I don't know if you can quote "clean coal" being a major factor at that point in history, ideas have changed a lot since then.  It was chiefly that UK Coal was becoming too expensive against Eastern European product, as I think what you say partly acknowledges.  It's a price the Country would have paid though if it hadn't been for the accompanying left wing militancy and disruption.  Most people had had enough of three day weeks and constant industrial stoppages by then, and this included many miners, but Scargill misjudged that too.

 

What we got at the time was this nonsense about lifetime job guarantees, not just for the strikers but for future generations.  Any such promises given would have been completely worthless hot air, and the subject of endless future who-said-what disputes.  No industry or government could have gone there.  Labour were more than relieved that this didn't happen on their watch, and did absolutely nothing to reverse or mitigate anything later.

[Adam Hogg]

The reality was that no one lied, though there was plenty of the usual spin from both sides.

So Am I hearing this Right you are Saying now Arthur Scargill was telling the truth? But how could he not lie and Thatcher and MacGregor not Lie as well?

Also I have no lack of evidence I have seen it all in Black and white:

Letters from Thatcher to MacGregor saying "Get well soon" after he fell at Ellington, Plans to close more pits because of the strike, orders to Cabinet Ministers not the say anything fearing it would give the NUM Ammunition and many other documents.

[Orloff]

Decades of political indoctrination is what we are all getting now, and as for Blair, well he was more right wing than the Daily Mail, that's why he did not do anything,

[Adam Hogg]

Decades of political indoctrination is what we are all getting now, and as for Blair, well he was more right wing than the Daily Mail, that's why he did not do anything,

Well said Orloff.

[Alan Edgar (Eggy1948)]

She and MacGregor Both Lied, Both stated there was no plan to Destroy the British Coal Mining Industry however in a No. 10 Document Labeled "SECRET" It states at the bottom of the document on page 10 about the strike, "The situation also provides and excellent opportunity to acceleratre pit closures and to maximise open-cast operations and imports."

And both Macgregor and Thatcher Stated only 20 pits were to close, not 75 and that what Arthur Scargill stated about 70 pits going to close was Completely Untrue (lies) however shows he was right only 5 under.

Also the Goverenment gave MacGregor scripts to read to the press and Thatcher stated that no Cabinet Minister should speak about the strike to the press and/or public as it may give ammunition to the NUM.

Then Also States "in Contrast, any return by Ian MacGregor to the courts at this state is likely to undermine the moderate backlase which is developing within the NUM."

Shows They both feared anyone finding out there plan.

 

 

On another issue relating to this I want to find the hit list of the 75 pits anyone know the exact document that they are in? If anyone has found the list.

Can't ever remember anyone saying that the list of 70-75 Mr Scargill talked about was ever published. 

Does the Freedom Of Information Act cover the secret cabinet document of 1983:- http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/looking-for-subject/parliament.htm ?

The National Archives 

'Secret' meeting at No 10

Document marked "Not to be photocopied or circulated outside the private office" recording a meeting attended by seven people, including the prime minister, chancellor, energy secretary and employment secretary, at No 10 about pit closures

A document in the secret files includes an instruction that details of the meeting should not be made public

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a list of all the closures from 1984 that was published in 2004 by the BBC :- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3500979.stm

Although there were 170 collieries open in 1984, several merged before they closed which is why there are only 152 entries on this list. 

[threegee]

So Am I hearing this Right you are Saying now Arthur Scargill was telling the truth? But how could he not lie and Thatcher and MacGregor not Lie as well?

Also I have no lack of evidence I have seen it all in Black and white:

Letters from Thatcher to MacGregor saying "Get well soon" after he fell at Ellington, Plans to close more pits because of the strike, orders to Cabinet Ministers not the say anything fearing it would give the NUM Ammunition and many other documents.

 

MacGregor never said there wasn't a list.  He was asked about it and replied that he had never attended a meeting where such a list had been discussed.  This undoubtedly was true, but it wasn't what he was asked.  The Beeb interviewer simply wasn't doing his job!

 

Again, no one lied!  But Scargill was never properly nailed in interview about why he wouldn't make the strike legal either.  The whole sad thing had nothing to do with who was or was not telling the truth, it was a matter of spin.  Spin from Scargill that this was an Industrial dispute with a clear outcome: his aim was to bring down a democratically elected government.  Spin from the government that this was simply another dispute: they'd decided to draw a line in the sand, and had long seen this coming.

 

The winter of discontent had done for Jim Callaghan and indeed got Margaret Thatcher into power.  After trade unionists dictating how the country as run for decades the public had simply had enough.  There was agreement across the political spectrum that the Country had become totally ungovernable and that something had to be done.  All sorts of things had been tried (Google on In Place of Strife which was talked about endlessly at the time and eventually vetoed by TUC bosses) and failed miserably.  Even if you still believe that what Scargill did was justified or had any point, you have to admit that his timing was diabolical.

 

It was an entirely different era were may of the ideas that are now owned across the entire political spectrum weren't generally shared. The things Sym comes up with here about market forces etc. would have been heretical to many trade unionists of the 1960's and 1970's.  Maybe they still are to a few local dinosaurs, but they are the ideas the entire World (including ex-communist and communist countries) have been moving forward with for some decades now.  Scargill, to this very day, lives in a dream world where those rules and ideas don't apply, and if they apply to other people they certainly don't apply to him!

 

This is an interesting read: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22079887

[Adam Hogg]

Even if you still believe that what Scargill did was justified or had any point, you have to admit that his timing was diabolical.

If you ask any ex miners this question most of them will state this, "the strike was right to protect our industry, but he (Arthur Scargill) should have called a ballot and he would have won it."

I must say I agree with that.

[threegee]

If you ask any ex miners this question most of them will state this, "the strike was right to protect our industry, but he (Arthur Scargill) should have called a ballot and he would have won it."

I must say I agree with that.

 

The thing is Adam if he'd called a ballot there wouldn't have been a strike in the first place.  He refused to call one because he knew he'd lose.

 

I've huge sympathy with the coal mining industry - my ancestors, like yours, were part of it.  But this strike was so divisive it was a tragedy.  Not only did Scargill ensure the demise of mining locally, but he split his own union in a way which can never be healed.  He didn't (and still doesn't) care one jot about this or the hardship he caused.  The understandable bitterness of local people is completely misdirected; they were used for a sinister political purpose.  Now you can argue that they were sacrificed by government, but it came to the stage where the government had no option but to prepare for, and break, the strike.  Sym thinks that "victory" was very near, Scargill thinks it was a victory.  There was never any chance of a victory though, because the real purpose of the strike was a repeat of the 1974 strike which brought down a very weak and incompetent Edward Heath. He was the Tory idiot who got us into the EU - now if you are looking for a liar he's a self-admitted one!  But no government worth the name was ever going to see a repeat of this, and they had a full ten years to prepare.

 

The government did what a government has to do - rule for the majority interest, and survive to do it. Scargill did what Marxist plotters did and used his industrial power for purely political purposes. A majority of NUM members saw through this, but in typical Stalinist fashion Scargill overrode the majority will.

 

I'm not so stupid that I think most of the local people around at the time can be convinced that they made a huge mistake in backing this communist agitator.  But, I am concerned that the misplaced loyalty, half-truths and bitterness spill over into future generations.  You just have to look around the world to see how indoctrination of children in one-sided views of history, and in particular transferring your bitterness, impoverishes future generations.  In its extreme it ends up in narrow-minded old men, with a view to their own safety, sending children to their deaths wearing suicide vests!  People not around at the time need need to know the full story, and be credited with the intelligence to make up their own minds about history.  I don't see much of this happening at the moment.

[Maggie/915]

Just like other threads this is important for future generations .

Opinions differ and no one dies because they disagree.

Democracy .

[Malcolm Robinson]

Not to open old wounds.........

 

Pity we can't see both sets of 'papers' written at the time.  

 

http://www.thejournal.co.uk/news/revealed-how-margaret-thatcher-saved-6464068

[Symptoms]

Denis has shares in Nissan ... perhaps that informed Thatcher's decision.  Or maybe, like all these big contract things, a big bung was lodged in some off-shore account.

 

Even worse ... could Denis have been a mackem?

Edited January 12, 2014 by Symptoms

[Orloff]

On a different but similar note, back in the eighties, Thatcher went to China on a jolly with some sidekicks on the pretence to boost trade with China. Nothing much came of it with the exception of Mark Thatcher's company who scored big time!

[threegee]

I think "pretence" is a bit mean spirited.  Maggie really cared about her country, more so than any PM of recent decades I'd say.  If she went to promote trade for the UK then you can be pretty sure that's exactly why she went.  She didn't use the office to enrich herself as others have, and had to embark on a series of lecture tours to stuff some money away for her retirement. Though there's no doubt that Denis had done reasonably well in business, and was more than competent in his day.

Whereas... you do wonder how Teflon Tony acquired all his millions, and how both Miliband brothers are millionaires, neither ever having done a real days work in their entire lives!

 

Update: That forced me to do some investigation; it seems that she left surprisingly little, and if it hadn't been for wealthy friends wouldn't have been able to maintain the lifestyle.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/09/margaret-thatcher-estate-family-secret

 

You have to read to the bottom to find out:

 

Thatcher appears to have earned less than other former prime ministers – particularly Tony Blair

 

But heck, we could have guessed the last bit!

[Symptoms]

GGG wrote:  "... it seems that she left surprisingly little..."

 

Probably down to very good financial management.  She may well have given it to that feckless drone Mark at least 7 years before she croked ... a splendid way to keep the inheritance tax bill to a minimum (or zero).

 

I have no trouble aligning myself with those who find Blair's history and current methods disgraceful.

[Canny lass]

Are there any other memories of the miner's strike apart from the political issues? I remember it well for several reasons. I was working as a ward sister at the time and can still vividly recall two patients, both men in their late 70's, who were admitted with severe hypothermia due to not having any coal to light the fire at home. Both were retired miners. It was a tragic sight.

 

The other thing I remember were my nurses on the ward. Many of them were miner's wives. They were hungry due to lack of food and tired due to lack of sleep caused by worry. They were continually upset that their Children were also hungry and going to school without breakfast. They were sad to see their husbands becoming shadows of their former selves due to the stress of the strike and what it was doing to the family. Many voiced opinions about the strike to me that they didn't dare admit to their husbands.

 

I tried to see that their was Always food on the ward for them while they were at work by ordering the full quota of patient meals, even if their wasn't a full quota of patients, and their are quite a few Children who got some sort of breakfast thanks to all the extra bread, jam and cornflakes that we ward sisters stocked up with and then turned a blind Eye when it disappeared.

[Alan Edgar (Eggy1948)]

Are there any other memories of the miner's strike apart from the political issues? I remember it well for several reasons. I was working as a ward sister at the time and can still vividly recall two patients, both men in their late 70's, who were admitted with severe hypothermia due to not having any coal to light the fire at home. Both were retired miners. It was a tragic sight.

 

The other thing I remember were my nurses on the ward. Many of them were miner's wives. They were hungry due to lack of food and tired due to lack of sleep caused by worry. They were continually upset that their Children were also hungry and going to school without breakfast. They were sad to see their husbands becoming shadows of their former selves due to the stress of the strike and what it was doing to the family. Many voiced opinions about the strike to me that they didn't dare admit to their husbands.

 

I tried to see that their was Always food on the ward for them while they were at work by ordering the full quota of patient meals, even if their wasn't a full quota of patients, and their are quite a few Children who got some sort of breakfast thanks to all the extra bread, jam and cornflakes that we ward sisters stocked up with and then turned a blind Eye when it disappeared.

I personally was not affected but on behalf of many I knew at the time a thank you and your sisters.

[Symptoms]

Classic boss tactic ... starve them back to work.

[Adam Hogg]

The Miners strike should never have happened it turned Union against Government, Community against Police, even family against family in some sad cases, It was caused by people who it would not affect.

 

Mining should have still been part of our everyday life same as steel making and all the other industry we lost though the 80's and 90's and even now we still lose them.