Labour closed more mines than the Tories!

[Mo Gosfield]

Thatcher knew full well that McGregor in charge of the NCB would get Scargill's back up.

I think Scargill was itching for a fight and it didn't matter who the figureheads were. Neil Kinnock laid the blame firmly on Scargill on tv this week.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

I think Scargill was itching for a fight and it didn't matter who the figureheads were. Neil Kinnock laid the blame firmly on Scargill on tv this week.

His fatal error was not calling a strike ballot. If the NUM had voted for strike action their sister union NACODS would have also balloted.

 

[abc]

I think you're confusing things here.

It's irrelevant how many coal mines were closed, it's the manner in which it was done is what caused the most issues.

Miners were literally given 2 weeks notice of cessation of employment, no redundancy payout and no pension.

The biggest issue though was that people who had worked all their life in mining communities just lost everything including their homes and the cost of the closures, even now far outweighed the cost of keeping them open.

The irony now is that many Conservaties accept that if we'dve continued coal production for just another 10 years then our current thirst for energy would not be half as reliant on foreign imports as it currently is and we would therefore be paying around 40% less than our electricity than we are now!

I dont think its 'irrelevant' how many mines were closed. The anti Thatcher lobby have always made their No1 cause for their 'hatred' the fact that she 'destroyed' the mining industry. I never thought she had much choice to do what she did but I always accepted that she was the only PM responsible for closing pits. I now learn that the previous Labour PM (who was in power for less time as well) closed around 100 more pits than she did! I think that is hugely relevant.

Regarding the terms of redundancy: If what you say is true (I have no idea) then that's really tough and IMO indefensible. But do you know if the miners who lost their jobs under Wilson were treated differently?

re the devestation to the mining communities, the costs etc: I can see no reason why this would have been any different for a mining community whose pit was closed under Wilson than under Thatcher.

The irony: Do many Labourites accept the same argument if Wilson hadn't closed (more) pits?

Actually not trying to take a pro Thatcher stance but I do think the black and white stance taken by some Labour supporters and the 'left' per se is turning out to be at best selective and in truth rather hypocritical.

 

[CheeseRolls]

I dont think its 'irrelevant' how many mines were closed. The anti Thatcher lobby have always made their No1 cause for their 'hatred' the fact that she 'destroyed' the mining industry. I never thought she had much choice to do what she did but I always accepted that she was the only PM responsible for closing pits. I now learn that the previous Labour PM (who was in power for less time as well) closed around 100 more pits than she did! I think that is hugely relevant.

Regarding the terms of redundancy: If what you say is true (I have no idea) then that's really tough and IMO indefensible. But do you know if the miners who lost their jobs under Wilson were treated differently?

re the devestation to the mining communities, the costs etc: I can see no reason why this would have been any different for a mining community whose pit was closed under Wilson than under Thatcher.

The irony: Do many Labourites accept the same argument if Wilson hadn't closed (more) pits?

Actually not trying to take a pro Thatcher stance but I do think the black and white stance taken by some Labour supporters and the 'left' per se is turning out to be at best selective and in truth rather hypocritical.

I think the stats are presenting a very narrow view of pit closures. As others have pointed out once reserves are exhausted then a pit closes. There were plenty of people prepared to argue that many of the pits closed under the Thatcher government were far from exhausted and that with significant investment in a number of mines and new seams some of this coal could have been produced at competitive prices. Was that the case ? well we will never know.

I am no fan of Scargill, but I also don't buy into the argument that he could have bought the country to it's knees. Much of the support he garnered was from working people who felt forced into a corner to fight for their livelihood. A more moderate conciliatory government, should have been able to effectively isolate the NUM, but history as they say is written by the victors.

 

[Brighton Mod]

The thing is, there were whole communities that were decimated by the closures of the pits. The pits weren't economical, some were practically empty and had to be closed, but it should have been done so much more carefully. Unfortunately the war between the government and Scargill & the minors meant that all efforts were concentrated on the war, not on making things better for the communities effected.

Its terrible when these things impact on individuals, but the mining industry is not the only one to have experienced such closures. Steel manufacturing, car production, textile production, call centres, military towns and the banking industry. Yes more thought could have been placed in re training and re skilling but would any of the miners have taken these options at that time. There is an amazing amount of bitterness around still, but as a previous contributor has written, mining was and is a horrible profession at that stage having the highest death rate per industry. The tragedy was that the miners believed their leader, thought that they would win as in 74/75 under Heath and then found themselves in a position of not being able to go back or foward.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

I dont think its 'irrelevant' how many mines were closed. The anti Thatcher lobby have always made their No1 cause for their 'hatred' the fact that she 'destroyed' the mining industry. I never thought she had much choice to do what she did but I always accepted that she was the only PM responsible for closing pits. I now learn that the previous Labour PM (who was in power for less time as well) closed around 100 more pits than she did! I think that is hugely relevant.

Regarding the terms of redundancy: If what you say is true (I have no idea) then that's really tough and IMO indefensible. But do you know if the miners who lost their jobs under Wilson were treated differently?

re the devestation to the mining communities, the costs etc: I can see no reason why this would have been any different for a mining community whose pit was closed under Wilson than under Thatcher.

The irony: Do many Labourites accept the same argument if Wilson hadn't closed (more) pits?

Actually not trying to take a pro Thatcher stance but I do think the black and white stance taken by some Labour supporters and the 'left' per se is turning out to be at best selective and in truth rather hypocritical.

Well apart from destroying the mining industry , there is also the textiles and manufacturing industry just for starters

 

[e77]

"The miners didn't deserve him, they deserved much, much better. My view is Margaret Thatcher and Arthur Scargill deserved each other. But no-one else did." - Neil Kinnock

 

[simmo]

I am no fan of Scargill, but I also don't buy into the argument that he could have bought the country to it's knees. Much of the support he garnered was from working people who felt forced into a corner to fight for their livelihood. A more moderate conciliatory government, should have been able to effectively isolate the NUM, but history as they say is written by the victors.

The mining industry did bring the country to its knees in 1974, when during the miners strike then the country endured a 3 day week and blackouts. Heath called an election basically saying back me or the miners and lost!

Scargill was involved in that too. Not NUM president, but Yorkshire NUM leader. (I think he was quite a "hero" of the 74 strike which helped him get elected NUM president a few years later). No bones should be made about Scargill, he was a Communist he admitted this on TV at the time, he wanted to "roll back Thatcherism" (meaning his motive was not exclusively for the miners wellbeing) and he called the strike (without a ballot).

In 1974 the miners won (Thatcher was a member of the govt that was brought down) in 1984 they lost (I think she learned from the mistakes of 74 and with papers being released subsequently showing a stockpiling of coal/oil etc this seemed to be the case)....and Scargill was the utter dunce that called the strike at the end of spring 1984!

 

[Seagull on the wing]

So nothing to do with Thatcher appointing McGregor as Chairman of the NCB after his hatchet jobs at British Leyland and British Steel ?

Who were again being ruined by the unions...the car industry killed itself....thanks to Red Robbo and cronies....so think the blame lies with the unions more than anybody else...

 

[WATFORD zero]

"The miners didn't deserve him, they deserved much, much better. My view is Margaret Thatcher and Arthur Scargill deserved each other. But no-one else did." - Neil Kinnock

Most sensible post/quote that i have seen. Unfortunately you had two people who weren't going to let the mining industry and its workers get in the way of their political ambitions.

 

[ferring seagull]

Who were again being ruined by the unions...the car industry killed itself....thanks to Red Robbo and cronies....so think the blame lies with the unions more than anybody else...

Add in Shipbuilding which suffered massively through demarcation and the stubborn refusal of the unions to agree on just one 'shipbuilding' union. Jobsworths ?

As a result, and this is fact, imagine a large liner being built where there is no agreement on the order of things etc. The carpenters put in their magnificent work, then the leccies come along and the carpentry has to be ripped out, reinstated and then the plumbers etc. etc.

Sadly, it wasn't management who ran the shipyards !

 

[TheMajor]

And he still wants the union to pay for his flat in the Barbican (£34k a year) and he wants them to pay for it for his widow after he's gone. His greed and selfishness is beyond compare. Oh, and he's a supporter of Stalin. Nice.

I thought he supported Barnsley

 

[HovaGirl]

the problem is that most of the mining communities only existed in the location in the first place for the mine. there were no other jobs or sources of jobs, you could hardly expect the government to invent jobs to replace the mines. well i say that, of course thats exactly what some do expect. really the solution would be to move those communities, but where?.

In the 19th century, you often find families in the County Durham censuses who had moved from one mining village to another, between one census and another. They went where the work was. And, as you say, many of those mining villages existed only to service the mining industry, with few other jobs, other than the shoemaker or a dressmaker (often a euphamism). New pits opened up all the time and the families went where the pits and the jobs were. In the 1970s, it was much too difficult for people to leave a village and find work elsewhere, as their ancestors had done for generations. Keith Joseph was derided for telling such people to "get on your bike" to look for work, but they didn't have the fortitude or determination of their ancestors. They expected the State to find them work.

 

[HovaGirl]

I think Scargill was itching for a fight and it didn't matter who the figureheads were. Neil Kinnock laid the blame firmly on Scargill on tv this week.

That's the most sensible thing Kinnock has ever said. Kudos to him.

 

[HovaGirl]

His fatal error was not calling a strike ballot. If the NUM had voted for strike action their sister union NACODS would have also balloted.

And then the strike wouldn't have taken place, but Scargill knew that.

 

[HovaGirl]

I dont think its 'irrelevant' how many mines were closed. The anti Thatcher lobby have always made their No1 cause for their 'hatred' the fact that she 'destroyed' the mining industry. I never thought she had much choice to do what she did but I always accepted that she was the only PM responsible for closing pits. I now learn that the previous Labour PM (who was in power for less time as well) closed around 100 more pits than she did! I think that is hugely relevant.

Regarding the terms of redundancy: If what you say is true (I have no idea) then that's really tough and IMO indefensible. But do you know if the miners who lost their jobs under Wilson were treated differently?

re the devestation to the mining communities, the costs etc: I can see no reason why this would have been any different for a mining community whose pit was closed under Wilson than under Thatcher.

The irony: Do many Labourites accept the same argument if Wilson hadn't closed (more) pits?

Actually not trying to take a pro Thatcher stance but I do think the black and white stance taken by some Labour supporters and the 'left' per se is turning out to be at best selective and in truth rather hypocritical.

My ex-miner friend got a packet in redundancy as did his miner father. He now has a 5-bed detached house and umpteen holidays abroad a year. He also had his mortgage paid by the miners union throughout the strike, plus many of his important bills. Much of his health needs are paid for by the union. If he sneezes, he can blame it on his time down the mine and claim compensation. They're all doing it, he says.

 

[jakarta]

In the 19th century, you often find families in the County Durham censuses who had moved from one mining village to another, between one census and another. They went where the work was. And, as you say, many of those mining villages existed only to service the mining industry, with few other jobs, other than the shoemaker or a dressmaker (often a euphamism). New pits opened up all the time and the families went where the pits and the jobs were. In the 1970s, it was much too difficult for people to leave a village and find work elsewhere, as their ancestors had done for generations. Keith Joseph was derided for telling such people to "get on your bike" to look for work, but they didn't have the fortitude or determination of their ancestors. They expected the State to find them work.

I think you will find that was the Chingford Skinhead (AKA Norman Tebbit) that came out with the On your Bike anecdote - not that I disagree as I actually upped sticks to Aberdeen FFS to chase work back in the 1990's....

 

[HovaGirl]

I think you will find that was the Chingford Skinhead (AKA Norman Tebbit) that came out with the On your Bike anecdote - not that I disagree as I actually upped sticks to Aberdeen FFS to chase work back in the 1990's....

Well remembered! Yes, it was Norman Tebbit.

 

[Lower West Stander]

Scargill in the 80s was the continuation of the politically motivated union leaders of the 70 s such as Gormley and Scanlon. These guys had a political agenda driven by the far left and used the Unions they led to these ends. The workers they represented were pawns I their game.

Thatcher was a far better politician thanScargill and that is why she beat him. As already said on here his decision to go out on strike without a ballot has to be his biggest mistake - he let his political agenda cloud his judgement.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

And then the strike wouldn't have taken place, but Scargill knew that.

Indications at the time suggested a YES vote and the waverers in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire would have fallen into line and accepted the national decision.