There are lessons for today in the defeat of the miners’ strike which began 30 years ago next month
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the start of the miners’ strike. Most people aged 40 or younger will have little or no personal recollection of that dramatic industrial dispute. For those over 40, however, the experience of the miners’ strike, even if experienced vicariously, will be profound. It set brother against brother, government against citizen, and, ultimately, wooden truncheon against flesh and bone.
It forced people to take sides; it was impossible to be neutral. For the left, it was a straightforward ‘good versus evil’ fight to the death. For the right, it was the opportunity to take on, and defeat, the ‘enemy within’ in the shape of militant trade unionism. Sir Walter Marshall (soon-after ‘Lord’) was appointed by Margaret Thatcher to lead the Central Electricity Generating Board. He, alongside the new energy secretary, Nigel Lawson, had one simple goal from early 1981 onwards: build up the coal stockpiles at the power stations and prepare for battle in the coal fields.
When it came, support for striking miners came from across the Labour and trade union movement. The Women Against Pit Closures groups, support groups on college campuses, the collections of food parcels (presaging by some decades the explosion of ‘food banks’ for the poor) and donations from across the world kept the families of south Yorkshire, Lanarkshire and Kent from starvation. It was perhaps the last great act of industrial solidarity, before Britain became firmly post-industrial and the curry houses and call-centres took over from the factories and foundries.
As recorded in drama from Our Friends in the North to Billy Elliot, the striking miners fought on for a year. Then, on 3 March 1985, with their banners and brass bands at their head, garlanded by carnations, they trudged back to work, defeated. Within 12 months, over 40,000 miners had left the pits, with their redundancy cash in their hands. Thatcher’s victory was total. She smashed the National Union of Mineworkers and killed the industry it served.
The anniversary should be marked with a celebration of the miners and their communities, and their heroism in the face of riot shields and police horses. But there needs to be something more than the old badges, songs and slogans. There needs to be a proper understanding of what went wrong, of how an unpopular government could win a dispute with an industry which had formed part of national life since the start of the industrial revolution, which had shaped the landscapes of our towns, villages and imaginations.
If the striking miners were lions, then the donkey-in-chief was Arthur Scargill. Today Scargill cuts a rather pathetic figure. When he stood for parliament in 2001, in the Labour heartland seat of Hartlepool, against New Labour’s Peter Mandelson, he got 912 votes, or 2.4 per cent of the vote. He has been involved in a series of legal battles with the NUM over the funding of his London apartment in the swanky Barbican. As an apologist for Stalin and someone who attacked the Polish Solidarity trade union’s struggle with the Communist regime as ‘anti-socialist’, Scargill has been left like debris by history’s high tide.
Yet in 1984 he saw himself as a revolutionary leader like Lenin or Che Guevara. Even a cursory glance over his political writings and speeches reveals a simple truth: his mission was not to secure better wages, conditions and a future for the coal miners his union represented. It was to use the NUM as the vanguard in a revolution to overthrow, not merely a democratic government, but a social system. This delusion meant that he made serious tactical errors: starting the strike in the summer and not allowing a national ballot to legitimise it.
But far worse was the major strategic error in believing that miners were revolutionaries, and that Britain would undergo a revolution like Russia, China or Cuba. When trade union leaders hold such views (and Scargill was not alone in this, then or now), they cannot hope to claim to be ‘representative’ of their members. When they are elected on the smallest of votes, or eschew democratic procedures such as national ballots, such leaders cannot expect to carry their members with them. The tragedy is that the miners could have won some of their demands in the 1980s, just as they had in the 1970s, with a different, moderate leader, and a willingness to negotiate and compromise.
The industrial syndicalism of Scargill, shot through by the Marxism-Leninism of his youth, represents a strain of politics which can still be found at the top of Britain’s largest trade unions. The lesson of the miners’ strike is that such politics, when allowed expression beyond the pages of the Morning Star, leads to disaster. As Martin Adeney and John Lloyd, historians of the strike, wrote of the NUM: ‘In trying to gain all, they had lost much: most of all, they had lost, for themselves and their comrades in the movement, the great illusion of possessing an irresistible power.’
———————————————————
To put it bluntly the strike was a disaster. The northern miners were
led into it without a full democratic ballot which split the union.
Their innate and admirable sense of loyalty to the leaders of the union
was betrayed. Truly it was `lions led by donkeys`. It was doomed from
the start. It was as if the commander of the Light Brigade ordered the
hopeless charge ignoring the fact that half of the cavalry were refusing
to advance. I was living and working in the south of England at the
time and every time Scargill opened his mouth support for Thatcher
stiffened and consolidated.
Of course, as we know, most
strikes fail, however heroic the steadfastness of the strikers. The real
gains for workers are mostly achieved at a national political level and
are slowly accrued. This strike alienated the political middle, divided
the labour movement, and ensured many more years of reactionary
Conservative rule. What made me particularly angry was the fact that as a
teacher in a Comprehensive School in Essex I was on the receiving end
of resurgent Toryism.
I remember this strike , Thatcher had planned this strike for years. Funny Imet Arthur Scargill , a man I have known for many years at the celebration of Saltley Gate last year, this was my first campaign as a trade unionist 41 years ago, we relived a few memories, for a man of his age, he looked very fit & healthy, far from a pathetic figure at all. His speech was vibrant & motivating, something our young MPs could learn from. I think the writer of this article is very bias. Before I get accused of being a Trot or any thing like that. I am not, just a fair minded individual who has been in this movement for over four decades.
I have just read that article about the strike. It is extremely uninformed and subjectively biased.
First of all the miners didn’t have any real choice over the time the strike started. The announcement that Cortonwood pit was to close, despite assurances from the NCB that at least 10 years’ life remained for the pit, was the catalyst, orchestrated by the government to provoke the miners to begin the strike there and then. There really was no other option.
Secondly, the various Lodges and Areas did not all come out on strike at once; it took place over a week or so. The NUM is not a national monolith, it is a federation of all the area unions and each voted before coming out on strike.
Third, the NUM’s mission was NOT to secure better wages and working conditions, perhaps the one thing the author gets right, or to bring about a revolution; it was to save the
pits, jobs and the mining communities from the planned onslaught of the Thatcher government..
Fourth, a special delegate conference made the decision to come out on strike nationally under the provisions of Rule 42, and the decision was based on the premise that it would not be fair for those in certain areas (ie Notts) who earned very high wages because of the geology of the coal seams underground and the new technology, to vote other members in less productive pits out of a job. The forms for a national ballot were already printed and ready to be distributed. Arthur Scargill, far from prohibiting a national ballot, abided by the
conference decision.
The conference decision was fair and it was reasonable, and the views of the miners were clearly on display when over 160, 000 of a workforce of 180, 000 came out on strike.
The anonymous writer of this article really should research his facts more thoroughly in future, or at least stop doing the Tories’ dirty work for them and attacking the miners’ leader.