UKC

But , despite being proved liars by their own recently released papers, will it actually change anyone's mind about voting Tory at the next election?
(it is not like anyone who votes actually trusts politicians anyway.)

In reply to Jim C:
ALL political parties lie, even when they're in office.
So, by your implied logic perhaps we shouldn't vote for any of them.

In reply to FesteringSore:



Correct, as you will have gathered from any previous posts on politicians
( I have always been in favour of a NOTA vote)

The point is, why is it on the TV news headlines that the government lied 30 years ago , did anyone really not know already that Scargill was right ( irrespective of their politics)

In reply to Jim C:

Right or not, in my opinion he screwed the miners as much as Thatcher did. Was a personal battle for both that totally lost sight of the needs of those they were representing.

In reply to Jim C:

Yes it's news, because we finally have the proof of the truth that we long suspected

Will it change anyone's opinion of Thatcher ? I doubt it

She laid a Machivellian trap and Scargill fell into it, but there are many who feel the outcome justified the means

That's the nature of history, it puts mor emphasis on the bigger picture than the cannon fodder

Would I vote Tory at the next island - no, not because of Thatcher, but because of people like Gove, Hunt and Pickles

In reply to Jim C:

Whichever side of the debate you're on it's interesting to note that Thatcher didn't exactly lie. Scargill said they had a list of 75 pits they wanted to close, that is, however subtly, different from wanting to close 75 undecided upon pits which is what these papers say Thatcher wanted.

By being so specific Scargill made it very easy for the conservatives to just say we don't have a list of 75 pits that we want to close, which was entirely truthful.

In reply to FesteringSore:



Well yes that's the view I've taken, in my opinion the system is bent beyond any form of realistic repair so until a new improved system is put in place I'll never vote at the ballot box again.

In reply to Chris the Tall:






Which is how the elites view us the public, we're all just fodder to be treated with little or no respect, just because people decide to vote for them and work hard for their whole careers doesn't mean they won't use the same tactics again.

However the public have the greater numbers, and one of the reason why they like to keep us divided and maybe this is why they keep this whole charade of 'vote red, no vote blue, no vote red' going.

In reply to Jim C:


1)It was thirty years ago so, no.

2) As pointed above above. There is no evidence of a list of pits so as pointed above strictly speaking they were not lying but being "economical with the truth" which is what governments and civil servants do.

3) We know that (rightly) Thatcher regarded Scargill as challenging the rule of law and parliamentary democracy and was prepared to "bend the rules" accordingly. It's not news.
She wasn't alone. Gormley was reporting on Scargill to MI5.

4) 75 pits over 3 years is 30% lower than the annual rate of closure over Wilson's 8 years.
Why single out Thatcher?

5) It's perfectly possible that even if there was a proper list of 75 pits for closure that the government didn't know the contents. Certainly in the '60s and '70s the NCB refused to divulge information on the profitability of individual pits to the Ministry of fuel, energy etc (assuming it actually had such information).

In reply to Jim C: I got this by e-mail from Nick Colton.
Worth a look
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25550053

That is exactly how I remember the picket lines, police brutality, I filmed it but it was never shown on the evening news bulletins, pressure from above on the editors and Granada were firmly putting themselves in place for a renewed franchise in Thatchers lottery.
I don't think all the police on the lines were really police, certainly not local ones.
It took a lot to convince the miners we were on their side, we had collections for their strike fund at work which we delivered to them in buckets, eventually we got so matey they were bringing us fish and chips back from the chippy because we couldn't leave the lines. Sad times.

In reply to Jim C:
I've copied here my post on Trangia's thread in The Pub because it's equally relevant to this one:

I do not believe that Scargill's agenda had a lot to do with the miners themselves. As a communist he exploited the situation in an attempt to create and maintain a trade union led stranglehold on the country. It was for this reason that he opposed the use of nuclear power stations which he saw as undermining(no pun intended) the strength of the miners.

In reply to FesteringSore:
I think I agree with you about Scargill, but there is no doubt that Thatchers policy was to break him and his union and to hell with the miners and their lives and livelehood. Fact remains that we as a country would be in a better position now if a greater portion of the mines had been kept open. Mines that the cost of re-opening them now really does mean that they are not viable. A more moderate prime minister would have seen a better way for the country to deal with the problem of costly coal mines than just shutting them all, a bit of forward vision perhaps.
Oh and of course emasculating the unions meant more in the tory party's friends coffers.