pmurtdlanod1 Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Have a look at the link I supplied in post 197. You'll see the Confrontation was anticipated (planned) by the Conservative party, or at least by Nicholas Ridley, back in 1977. thanks yes i was aware of that and a very prudent action by the Government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Have a look at the link I supplied in post 197. You'll see the Confrontation was anticipated (planned) by the Conservative party, or at least by Nicholas Ridley, back in 1977. Wouldn't it have been remiss of any government not to have a set of contingencies after what happened in '74? Surely Scargill must have expected to government to have learned from that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lizmachin Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Have a look at the link I supplied in post 197. You'll see the Confrontation was anticipated (planned) by the Conservative party, or at least by Nicholas Ridley, back in 1977. I would hardly say the link shows anything was planned. All it shows is that a government had contingency plans to deal with anticipated industrial action by folks who thought they had more power than elected governments. It is called contingency planning. It is why countries have armed forces as a contingency in case they are attacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkey104 Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Whereas the country cared or wanted to get at the truth of what happened in Hillsborough, nobody really cares about Orgreave except a few embittered miners who still insist on calling it the battle of Orgreave. The general public don't want to see millions wasted on another enquiry whose result will not have any effect on policing whatsoever due to the vast changes in policing practices from those of the distant past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geared Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Wouldn't it have been remiss of any government not to have a set of contingencies after what happened in '74? Surely Scargill must have expected to government to have learned from that... Well clearly he didn't? ---------- Post added 02-11-2016 at 17:11 ---------- Talking of inquires, it looks like they've now started one for West Ham's stadium. If they're willing to do one for something so frivolous then maybe they can crack on with Orgreave? London Stadium inquiry 'a breakthrough' - BBC News Campaigners have welcomed the start of an investigation by London Mayor Sadiq Khan into a £50m rise in the cost of converting West Ham's London Stadium. The outlay to modify the Olympic venue has risen from £272m to £323m. The investigation will look into inherited issues, including the cost of moving retractable seating. "This is a breakthrough in our long campaign to highlight the intolerable burden on taxpayers," read a statement from the Olympic Stadium Coalition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Considering that not a single fan was proportioned blame for Hillsborough, maybe the people pushing for an Orgreave enquiry also expect every miner to escape any blame as well. One of the major differences between this and Hillsborough is that football, and to a lesser extent, football violence, still exists. There were still lessons to be learnt and be applied to football policing and stadium design even after 30 years. In contrast large scale industrial action no longer exists in the UK. The industries, unions and policing methods are long gone. What would be learnt from an enquiry? That SYP was bent and picket lines were violent? We already know that. Football violence was irrelevant to Hillsborough. I have no expectations of anybody who warrants it escaping accountability. You have no idea what we don't know, just as prior to the Hillsborough revelations. ---------- Post added 02-11-2016 at 17:25 ---------- Ah so you have been privvy to selected info then?? why do you think they should be held to account for something that happened over 30 years ago under a different gov?? what criminal behaviour ?? oh the picketing miners?? flying pickets? etc throwing bricks and darts at Police?? the police carried out a very efficient containment operation with no serious injuries and no deaths? whats not to like:o You apply remarkably low standards to your powerful institutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukdobby Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 (edited) Well clearly he didn't? ---------- Post added 02-11-2016 at 17:11 ---------- Talking of inquires, it looks like they've now started one for West Ham's stadium. If they're willing to do one for something so frivolous then maybe they can crack on with Orgreave? London Stadium inquiry 'a breakthrough' - BBC News For once the right questions are being asked about West Hams Stadium,it looks like someone's got full pockets,is it down to Boris?...who knows This is now Orgreaves gone. Edited November 2, 2016 by ukdobby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Whereas the country cared or wanted to get at the truth of what happened in Hillsborough, nobody really cares about Orgreave except a few embittered miners who still insist on calling it the battle of Orgreave. The general public don't want to see millions wasted on another enquiry whose result will not have any effect on policing whatsoever due to the vast changes in policing practices from those of the distant past. That was far from accurate for a long, long time. You only have to read threads on this very site for a representative sample. How do you no there would not being a significant effect on policing? Why would an inquiry be restricted to the police force? ---------- Post added 02-11-2016 at 17:31 ---------- Well clearly he didn't? ---------- Post added 02-11-2016 at 17:11 ---------- Talking of inquires, it looks like they've now started one for West Ham's stadium. If they're willing to do one for something so frivolous then maybe they can crack on with Orgreave? London Stadium inquiry 'a breakthrough' - BBC News And for the record, no wrongful deaths or convictions, so let's lay that myth to rest - they are not requirements for the launching of an inquiry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_bloke Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Football violence was irrelevant to Hillsborough. I have no expectations of anybody who warrants it escaping accountability. You have no idea what we don't know, just as prior to the Hillsborough revelations. I'm sure the ex miners and associated unions will be expecting to escape accountability, else they wouldn't be so keen to push for an enquiry. I have issue with your other comment re: Hillsborough; whilst I don't want to derail the thread, football violence has everything to do with Hillsborough, it's why matches were aggressively policed and fans stood in pens. If games passed peacefully there wouldn't have been a Hillsborough. If miners hadn't been at Orgreave, a steel works, there would have been no 'battle'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 I'm sure the ex miners and associated unions will be expecting to escape accountability, else they wouldn't be so keen to push for an enquiry. I have issue with your other comment re: Hillsborough; whilst I don't want to derail the thread, football violence has everything to do with Hillsborough, it's why matches were aggressively policed and fans stood in pens. If games passed peacefully there wouldn't have been a Hillsborough. If miners hadn't been at Orgreave, a steel works, there would have been no 'battle'. No, fair enough, you are absolutely correct in that it did indeed have a great deal to with the context in which Hillsborough happened. Apologies for my incorrect assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now