Battle Of Orgreave Enquiry

[RollingJ]

11 minutes ago, Delbow said:

 

Well, justice is a feeling, isn't it? A sense of being seen and heard - it doesn't always require something to change. 

 

As for why the enquiry is finally happening, I wouldn't be surprised if this is Starmer's way of throwing some crumbs to people on the left of the Labour Party who he deceived in his leadership election bid.

Merely for political 'benefit', then? No real valid reason.

Edited July 13 by RollingJ

[crookesey]

4 minutes ago, Delbow said:

 

Well, justice is a feeling, isn't it? A sense of being seen and heard - it doesn't always require something to change. 

 

As for why the enquiry is finally happening, I wouldn't be surprised if this is Starmer's way of throwing some crumbs to people on the left of the Labour Party who he deceived in his leadership election bid.

A politician deceiving a member of their own party, wash your mouth out with soap. The miners took on a professional body and got what amateurs normally get when they take on pro’s.

[Delbow]

1 minute ago, crookesey said:

A politician deceiving a member of their own party, wash your mouth out with soap. The miners took on a professional body and got what amateurs normally get when they take on pro’s.

 

What actually happened was that the government and the police, who in theory were supposed to be public servants, conspired against a section of the public who helped pay their wages. That's never right. The enquiry should have been held a long time ago, but the state protected itself by delaying. So I find the 'it's too late' argument problematic, because it rewards the people who attacked the public and then used their positions to protect themselves. 

 

In that sense, perhaps holding the enquiry does fit with Starmer's 'public service' ethos.

[RollingJ]

@Delbow Politicians and public service - a total oxymoron.

[crookesey]

9 minutes ago, Delbow said:

 

What actually happened was that the government and the police, who in theory were supposed to be public servants, conspired against a section of the public who helped pay their wages. That's never right. The enquiry should have been held a long time ago, but the state protected itself by delaying. So I find the 'it's too late' argument problematic, because it rewards the people who attacked the public and then used their positions to protect themselves. 

 

In that sense, perhaps holding the enquiry does fit with Starmer's 'public service' ethos.

The unions assisted the government of the day in the destruction of the mining industry, similar happened with respect to that of the steel industry. I still wonder what was supposed to replace these monsters, surely there was a plan of some sort.

[Delbow]

4 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

@Delbow Politicians and public service - a total oxymoron.

 

That's the case now, but was it always? Is there not an argument that the post-war governments were in service of the people? Maybe we should be asking ourselves when that changed, and whether incidents like Orgreave were symptomatic of that change.

[crookesey]

Perhaps being an MP is now devalued if they actually attempt to do their job without the media constantly breathing down their necks, In the old days they did and called in favours, much of their work was done behind closed doors, how are they expected to do their jobs effectively when they are constantly brought to book by the media?

[Anna B]

6 hours ago, RollingJ said:

You are probably correct - who remembers, with clarity, what happened 40 years ago?

I think you'd remember quite well being beaten up or arrested.

Injustice tends to stick in the mind.

It's a pity anti-establishment things take so long for the truth to come out.

[RollingJ]

3 minutes ago, Anna B said:

I think you'd remember quite well being beaten up or arrested.

Injustice tends to stick in the mind.

It's a pity anti-establishment things take so long for the truth to come out.

A miner 40 years ago might not even still be here.

[peak4]

5 hours ago, crookesey said:

The unions assisted the government of the day in the destruction of the mining industry, similar happened with respect to that of the steel industry. I still wonder what was supposed to replace these monsters, surely there was a plan of some sort.

Yes, and I've kinked to it several times previously on other threads which I guess you've missed.
The Ridley Plan/Report, here helpfully scanned and converted to searchable text from the original typed document
http://pont.ist/ridley-plan/

 

Report of Nationalised Industries Policy Group         Orgreave Truth & Justice Campaign.
(The Ridley Plan)

In the 1970s when the Conservative Party was in opposition, they were making clandestine and ruthless plans to develop a more militarised police force to stifle dissent and attempt to destroy organised labour and the British Trade Union movement, introduce a mass privatisation programme and legislate against workers and human rights. In 1977, Tory backbencher Nicholas Ridley presented this report to Tory Party leader, Margaret Thatcher. The Ridley Plan was a detailed blueprint on how to provoke and win a battle against Britain’s Trade Union movement.

The Ridley Plan is necessary reading to understand how we got to where we are today.

 

See Also
Thatcher’s civilising offensive: The Ridley Plan to decivilise the working class University of Winchester