Draft 1 (so far)
The inquest into this Hillsborough disaster has brought about new concerns over the policing and accountability of the government over the battle of Orgreave. During the Miners strike of 1984 / 5, miners gathered at the site of the coking plant near Rotherham to demonstrate their disapproval of the closure of pits around the country. What they faced that day on 18th June was a sea of Met Police, who were told to deal with the situation in ways that were suggested to be as required.
Food banks, soup kitchens, a three-day week and politically charged turmoil. This was 1984, segregation was to be the only way to bring down Arthur Scargill and his army of Miners; Margret Thatcher, then prime minister understood the brotherhood and the unity of the workers and the mining communities, she would use this unity against them to close all but a few collieries in the England and Wales.
Yorkshire has been home to coal mining for generations before 1984 there were over 60 collieries at the centre of communities providing work for all generations. This employment was at the centre of most small villages around South Yorkshire, the collieries not only employed men to work on the coal face but electricians, nurses, office workers and engineers. The colliery was the central hub, working men’s clubs would be the unity of each community and people would come together, and in times of austerity, they would be the meeting place for the unions. Workers were rewarded with affordable housing, pensions and a sense of longevity in the profession. After the strike of 1972 miners believed that their defeat of the police and government had secured their jobs and conditions should continue to improve.
The election of 1972 saw the return of a Conservative government, Margret Thatcher ruled with an iron fist and was set out to make an example, she saw the defeat of previous elections by the Labour government humiliating and believed that the country should be run by a strong government, not one dictated to by unions of workers. She set out plans to reform Great Britain and to do this she believed that imported goods would be the future of our economy. Thatcher believed that people should also own their own homes; people were encouraged to take out mortgages and move away from a rented property. Her time as prime minister brought about big changed to the economy and social landscape. Her plans started with the threat of closing down the Collieries of Yorkshire and Wales. Arthur Scargill and the National Coal Miners Union (NUM) rose up in protest to these plans, the union took a majority vote to take strike action. Their focus was to protect workers jobs and pay, hoping that Thatcher would stand down just as a previous government had in 1972 Scargill and the NCM were in for the long haul.
Before the strike begun in 1984 incentivisation was introduced, productivity was rewarded. This pitched colliery against colliery, miner against miner, Scargill had warned the miners against this as he knew that segregation was to be the only way to bring down the unity of the working class Nottingham miners were given this opportunity to earn a bigger paycheck through this scheme; it was Thatcher’s intention to stockpile the coal in preparation for the inevitable strike action that would come, she saw this as an opportunity to divide the union. Miners in this area were able to earn up to £100 a week, while they knew the risks of not taking strike action, the loss of such as earning would be a hard pill to swallow. This certainly pitched miner against miner and created a divide amongst the collieries, it ultimately created a bigger divide between working-class communities and the police and most certainly the government. New tougher laws had also been implemented, that prevented the additional support from other professions, Thatcher knew that while others would agree with the Miners and would wish to raise concerns over their jobs, she needed people to stay in work and keep the country running. NUM union would be walking into a very tough battle, made even harder with the government hell-bent on implementing its plans to reform the country. Despite this Scargill had once before defeated the government in 1972 at Scattergate, he believed that they could do the same again in 1984.
Pickets had been In place for a number of weeks at the Orgreave coke plant near Rotherham, tensions had begun to rise and ultimately come to a head on the 18th of June. It was reported that around ten thousand miners were in attendance that day, more than there had been in previous weeks but as before it was a peaceful picket line. There had been the usual push and shove of the police line as there had been in days before but no violence had broken out in this time. On the 18th, the picket line was marched into the site at Orgreave by police, ushered into place and surrounded. Miners were faced with a sea of officers in riot shields and mounted patrols. The day was orchestrated by one man; Anthony Clement he was the chief officer of the South Yorkshire police. As groups of miners made their way to the site they were stopped, searched and warned to turn their cars around. Once at the site it had been reported that there was certainly tension in their air and that something was about to happen. Miners turned up other topless or in t-shirts, while officers in full riot gear face them, Clement had been instructed to deal with this situation and implemented his plans to cover up accounts of police beatings and unjust behaviour.
Police reports detail the account of the day, stating that the picket line was becoming increasingly irritated by the number of lorries entering the plant, they were prevented by police from talking to the drivers and encouraging them to turn around with the hope of forcing the plant into closure, just as they had done at Scattergate. With around ten thousand miners feeling trapped, frustrated and voiceless it was inevitable that trouble would break out. The police presence provoked some individuals to respond by throwing stones into the crowd of police. With a signal from Anthony Clement the horses were deployed and charged into the crowd of miners, a military-style plan of attack had been implemented. Short shield riot officers would follow, taking anyone they could on the route. Arrests were made during this time, two officers to one miner. Individuals were arrested on the grounds of riot, an offence that holds the threat of life in prison. It is argued that throwing a stone into a crowd or at a police officer is regarded as a public order offence and would carry no more than a fine. It has to be asked, why were the police instructed to use this law that had previously been unused for sixty years?
The violence and intimidation we have seen should never have happened. It is the work of extremists. It is the enemy within. M.Thatcher TV Interview for BBC2 Newsnight (27 July 1984)
Police reports maintain the level of force used was out of necessity to gain control of the situation. The horses and short shield riot police were used to separate and disperse the crowd. It is argued by the miners that the police had crossed a line in their professionalism on this day, and days that followed. In response to the Police actions, Miners retaliated by throwing stones and missiles, aiming to stop or prevent the charge of officers. Further Police reports and media coverage of the events that day state that the miners were to blame and that the violent attacks were unjust. Media reports supported the police and identified them as the heroes of the day, arresting these thugs and rioters, condemning the behaviour of the miners. Thatcher called the Miners the enemy within, she argued that anyone who is against the government and the progress of the country is an enemy. It could be suggested that this is also true of those who worked closely with the Priminister, would anyone stand up to her and suggest that she was out of line and call off the strikes? They too would be branded the enemy.
In an interview with the BBC in 2015, ex-police officer Bob Bird did not wish to concede this battle with the pickets, he believed that the actions in 1972 needed to be corrected and he saw it as an insult to the profession that those officers were broken down by the union. He stated that the ethos of the day was not to allow the Miners into the plant, to stay strong and win. Individual reports from miners document the incident in a very different light. Ex-miner Stef Wysocki gives his account in the same BBC documentary, highlighting the brutal attack from police officers he received that day. He states that while stood in the middle of a field, surrounded by other workers, he noticed the police charging towards him. Who are they after he thought, he looked around. Oh me, he exclaimed. Wysocki was arrested by two officers and was dragged, beaten and thrown into the back of a van. Photographers of the day document this account, in court the jury heard these details and the images show Wysocki being arrested at the bottom of the hill and as he reaches the top, he is dripping with blood and being dragged.
A personal account from this day was told by my Granddad, John Baldwin. John and his son Kevin along with two other colleagues attended Orgreave, Kevin states that they were amongst the first 30 people there. They had been ushered into a field and were faced with police in all directions. I would speculate that John had maybe shouted something at the police but Kevin did not allude to this. John was then beaten with a baton, hit to the floor and his arm broken. He stood up, took a deep breath and head-butted the officer. A swarm of them jumped on your granddad and arrested him, dragged him away, Kevin recalls as he remembers the day. With only a provisional drivers licence, my uncle had to find his way to his dad to get the car keys and meet him at the police station as he was being processed. This incident alone explains a lot about my granddad’s views towards the government, the police and I don’t blame him. He was proud to be a miner, a working-class hero who becomes chief officer of the miner’s rescue. This is a man who would put his life in line to save that of another. My granddad was awarded medals for his bravery and actions, attending one of the biggest mining disasters of South Yorkshire. My granddad was there. On this day in 1984 at Orgreave, he was faced with politics, government and police corruption telling him he couldn’t feed his family, do the job he loved and earn a living. In some ways his actions are understandable.
There have been allegations of police corruption and statements being dictated or altered to suit that of the police during the ordeal at Orgreave. Even six years later this practice was still taking place. During the inquest of the Hillsborough disaster, there had been evidence of police editing statements. Reports found that senior officers at South Yorkshire police had dictated statements given by the Met police at Orgreave. Further investigation saw police reports using the same language and even identical statements, phrases and words to describe situations.
As we stood there in the line a continuous stream of missiles come from the pickets into the police line.
This statement was used by 31 officers from 4 different forces, I have to ask at this point, was it the intention of the police to fabricate the whole event and continue Thatcher’s ideology of making these miners the enemy of the nation? As previously suggested, there had been no arrests for a riot in 60 years. Was this heavy-handed approach justified by the prospect of condemning people to a life in prison, just to make an example out of them? To prove a point that the police and government could not be dictated to by the masses, by the unity of the working class.
Court trials that followed in 1985 had fallen through due to inconsistencies in the police reports. Of the 93 arrested for riot, none were convicted. Arguments over the arresting officer, time, and accountability of the events were all in question during these cases. Statements from Members of Parliament and Politicians state that Thatcher’s view of the Miners was that of yobbos and thugs. She had already branded them the enemy within and was determined to win this war. The government and police could not concede this fight and work together they were able to twist the media and aimed to sentence these men to life in prison for a riot.
Amendments / additions / version 2:
The inquest into this Hillsborough disaster has brought about new concerns over the policing and accountability of the government over the battle of Orgreave. During the Miners strike of 1984 / 5, miners gathered at the site of the coking plant near Rotherham to demonstrate their disapproval of the closure of pits around the country. What they faced that day on 18th June was a sea of Met Police, who were told to deal with the situation in ways that were suggested to be as required.
Food banks, soup kitchens, a three-day week and politically charged turmoil. This was 1984, segregation was to be the only way to bring down Arthur Scargill and his army of Miners; Margret Thatcher, then prime minister understood the brotherhood and the unity of the workers and the mining communities, she would use this unity against them to close all but a few collieries in the England and Wales.
Yorkshire has been home to coal mining for generations before 1984 there were over 60 collieries at the centre of communities providing work for all generations. This employment was at the centre of most small villages around South Yorkshire, the collieries not only employed men to work on the coal face but electricians, nurses, office workers and engineers. The colliery was the central hub, working men’s clubs would be the unity of each community and people would come together, and in times of austerity, they would be the meeting place for the unions. Workers were rewarded with affordable housing, pensions and a sense of longevity in the profession. After the strike of 1972 miners believed that their defeat of the police and government had secured their jobs and conditions should continue to improve.
The election of 1979 saw the return of a Conservative government, Margret Thatcher ruled with an iron fist and was set out to make an example, she saw the defeat of previous elections by the Labour government humiliating and believed that the country should be run by a strong government, not one dictated to by unions of workers. She set out plans to reform Great Britain and to do this she believed that imported goods would be the future of our economy. Thatcher believed that people should also own their own homes; people were encouraged to take out mortgages and move away from a rented property. Her time as prime minister brought about big changed to the economy and social landscape. Her plans started with the threat of closing down the Collieries of Yorkshire and Wales. Arthur Scargill and the National Coal Miners Union (NUM) rose up in protest to these plans, the union took a majority vote to take strike action. Their focus was to protect workers jobs and pay, hoping that Thatcher would stand down just as a previous government had in the strike of 1972, Scargill and the NCM were in for the long haul.
Before the strike begun in 1984 incentivisation was introduced, productivity was rewarded. This pitched colliery against colliery, miner against miner, Scargill had warned the miners against this as he knew that segregation was to be the only way to bring down the unity of the working class. Nottingham miners were given this opportunity to earn a bigger pay check through this scheme; it was Thatcher’s intention to stockpile the coal in preparation for the inevitable strike action that would come, she saw this as an opportunity to divide the union. Miners in this area were able to earn up to £100 a week, while they knew the risks of not taking strike action, the loss of such earning would be a hard pill to swallow. This certainly pitched miner against miner and created a divide amongst the collieries, it ultimately created a bigger divide between working-class communities and the police and most certainly the government. New tougher laws had also been implemented, that prevented the additional support from other professions, Thatcher knew that while others would agree with the Miners and would wish to raise concerns over their jobs, she needed people to stay in work and keep the country moving. NUM would be walking into a very tough battle, made even harder with the government hell-bent on implementing its plans to reform the country. Despite this Scargill had once before defeated the government in 1972 at Scattergate, he believed that they could do the same again in 1984.
Thatcher wanted to streamline the economy and saw the coal mining industry as one that was becoming costly. Some collieries were receiving subsidies to keep them open; this cost out weighted the price of the coal that was being mined. An example of this was the colliery at Herrington; it has been receiving subsidies up to the value of two million pounds. Harsh economic decisions had to be made to bring this country into a state of growth and prosperity. Thatcher’s government saw these closures as one way to do this. It would seem that logic and a sense of humanity was lost during these decisions. Up to 700 men and their families would stand to loose their way of life that had been in safe hands for the past 100 years. The Coal mining Board, who suggested the closures of these pits, argued that the men wishing to continue to work could do so and would be found work in neighbouring towns. For some families this was not good enough, and their way of life and communities were being torn apart at the very idea of this.
The demise of the Coal mining industry had begun in the 1940’s year on year there were collieries closing and less men working down these pits, In 1947 there were 134 mines in Durum alone, while in 1984 there were only 11. This gradual demines did not see major upset from the coal miners or the unions as they believed that there was still a future in the industry. The privatisation of some mines had been the downfall of the industry, is the opinion of some miners. Ian McGregor of the coal board planned to make the industry more economically viable by closing down up to 20 collieries, reduce the workforce by 20,000 and reduce productivity by 4 million tonnes a year. An aggravated union and workers saw this as an attack on their lives and they communities. The coal mining board had admitted that the communication of their plans to close these mines had not been effective. This could have been the spark that the fire needed to engulf this battle. It would have been unfair to suggest that the coal board was not investing in these colleries, it saw these outdates mines as being un economic and not viable to keep open. Investments were put into new establishments such as the mine at Selby; it was to be the largest in Europe. However, the work force needed would have been a quarter of that to produce the same coal from collieries in Durum. The industry was moving and becoming more economically viable, apprenticeships and jobs were there for those who wanted it, you just had to be prepared to move.
Pickets had been in place for a number of weeks at the Orgreave coke plant near Rotherham, tensions had begun to rise and ultimately come to a head on the 18th of June. Reports from the miners was that the introduction of officers from other forces such as the MET and the army, this was when issues started to arise and the events become violent. There has been a range of numbers thrown around of those in attendance that day some report suggested that around ten thousand miners were in attendance that day, more than there had been in previous weeks but as before it was a peaceful picket line. There had been the usual push and shove of the police line as there had been in days before but no violence had broken out in this time. On the 18th, the picket line was marched into the site at Orgreave by police, ushered into place and surrounded. Miners were faced with a sea of officers in riot shields and mounted patrols. The day was orchestrated by one man; Anthony Clement he was the chief officer of the South Yorkshire police. As groups of miners made their way to the site they were stopped, searched and warned to turn their cars around. Once at the site it had been reported that there was certainly tension in their air and that something was about to happen. Miners turned up other topless or in t-shirts, while officers in full riot gear face them, Clement had been instructed to deal with this situation and implemented his plans to cover up accounts of police beatings and unjust behaviour.
Police reports detail the account of the day, stating that the picket line was becoming increasingly irritated by the number of lorries entering the plant, they were prevented by police from talking to the drivers and encouraging them to turn around with the hope of forcing the plant into closure, just as they had done at Scattergate. With around ten thousand miners feeling trapped, frustrated and voiceless it was inevitable that trouble would break out. The police presence provoked some individuals to respond by throwing stones into the crowd of police. With a signal from Anthony Clement the horses were deployed and charged into the crowd of miners, a military-style plan of attack had been implemented. Short shield riot officers would follow, taking anyone they could on the route. Arrests were made during this time, two officers to one miner. Individuals were arrested on the grounds of riot, an offence that holds the threat of life in prison. It is argued that throwing a stone into a crowd or at a police officer is regarded as a public order offence and would carry no more than a fine. It has to be asked, why were the police instructed to use this law that had previously been unused for sixty years?
The violence and intimidation we have seen should never have happened. It is the work of extremists. It is the enemy within. M.Thatcher TV Interview for BBC2 Newsnight (27 July 1984)
Police reports maintain the level of force used was out of necessity to gain control of the situation. The horses and short shield riot police were used to separate and disperse the crowd. It is argued by the miners that the police had crossed a line in their professionalism on this day, and days that followed. In response to the Police actions, Miners retaliated by throwing stones and missiles, aiming to stop or prevent the charge of officers. Further Police reports and media coverage of the events that day state that the miners were to blame and that the violent attacks were unjust. Media reports supported the police and identified them as the heroes of the day, arresting these thugs and rioters, condemning the behaviour of the miners. Thatcher called the Miners the enemy within, she argued that anyone who is against the government and the progress of the country is an enemy. It could be suggested that this is also true of those who worked closely with the Priminister, would anyone stand up to her and suggest that she was out of line and call off the strikes? They too would be branded the enemy.
In an interview with the BBC in 2015, ex-police officer Bob Bird did not wish to concede this battle with the pickets, he believed that the actions in 1972 needed to be corrected and he saw it as an insult to the profession that those officers were broken down by the union. He stated that the ethos of the day was not to allow the Miners into the plant, to stay strong and win. Individual reports from miners document the incident in a very different light. Ex-miner Stef Wysocki gives his account in the same BBC documentary, highlighting the brutal attack from police officers he received that day. He states that while stood in the middle of a field, surrounded by other workers, he noticed the police charging towards him. Who are they after he thought, he looked around. Oh me, he exclaimed. Wysocki was arrested by two officers and was dragged, beaten and thrown into the back of a van. Photographers of the day document this account, in court the jury heard these details and the images show Wysocki being arrested at the bottom of the hill and as he reaches the top, he is dripping with blood and being dragged.
A personal account from this day was told by my Granddad, John Baldwin. John and his son Kevin along with two other colleagues attended Orgreave, Kevin states that they were amongst the first 30 people there. They had been ushered into a field and were faced with police in all directions. I would speculate that John had maybe shouted something at the police but Kevin did not allude to this. John was then beaten with a baton, hit to the floor and his arm broken. He stood up, took a deep breath and head-butted the officer. A swarm of them jumped on your granddad and arrested him, dragged him away, Kevin recalls as he remembers the day. With only a provisional drivers licence, my uncle had to find his way to his dad to get the car keys and meet him at the police station as he was being processed. This incident alone explains a lot about my granddad’s views towards the government, the police and I don’t blame him. He was proud to be a miner, a working-class hero who becomes chief officer of the miner’s rescue. This is a man who would put his life in line to save that of another. My granddad was awarded medals for his bravery and actions, attending one of the biggest mining disasters of South Yorkshire. My granddad was there. On this day in 1984 at Orgreave, he was faced with politics, government and police corruption telling him he couldn’t feed his family, do the job he loved and earn a living. In some ways his actions are understandable.
Quotes and stories from Uncle Kev from that day.
There have been allegations of police corruption and statements being dictated or altered to suit that of the police during the ordeal at Orgreave. Even six years later this practice was still taking place. During the inquest of the Hillsborough disaster, there had been evidence of police editing statements. Reports found that senior officers at South Yorkshire police had dictated statements given by the Met police at Orgreave. Further investigation saw police reports using the same language and even identical statements, phrases and words to describe situations.
As we stood there in the line a continuous stream of missiles come from the pickets into the police line.
This statement was used by 31 officers from 4 different forces, I have to ask at this point, was it the intention of the police to fabricate the whole event and continue Thatcher’s ideology of making these miners the enemy of the nation? As previously suggested, there had been no arrests for a riot in 60 years. Was this heavy-handed approach justified by the prospect of condemning people to a life in prison, just to make an example out of them? To prove a point that the police and government could not be dictated to by the masses, by the unity of the working class.
Court trials that followed in 1985 had fallen through due to inconsistencies in the police reports. Of the 93 arrested for riot, none were convicted. Arguments over the arresting officer, time, and accountability of the events were all in question during these cases. Statements from Members of Parliament and Politicians state that Thatcher’s view of the Miners was that of yobbos and thugs. She had already branded them the enemy within and was determined to win this war. The government and police could not concede this fight and work together they were able to twist the media and aimed to sentence these men to life in prison for a riot.
Returning to work Monday the 4thof March 1985, the silence as women escort their husbands, the bittersweet sense of relief. Returning to work, a source of income and all the while knowing that the previous years hardship was in vein. Having been defeated by the government and police, miners returned to work heartbroken, egos bruised but not down and out. For some people the strike had highlighted the need to move on and find an alternative employment. Electricians, Mechanics and Nurses would go on to develop their own businesses or find employment in the NHS. Some men would continue to work in the collieries, moving from pit to pit as they close. The industry would continue to take hits from financial cuts and be undercut by cheaper resources from over seas. While people returned to work a hatred and disgust in the actions of those police officers would grow and continue to segregate people, job roles and values. This incident that in our lifetime saw one of the bloodiest battled between police and picketers is still being talked about decades later. Who will be held accountable for the actions. Diane Abbot suggested that there is no reason to re-visit this incident as policing in this country has moved on a great deal so there is nothing new to learn. She continued to suggest that as there were no deaths during the battle at Orgreave there was no need for an inquest to point blame at any one side. While I see her point that policing has moved on, I think that this issue should be revisited and someone should be held to account for the actions that were well documented on that day. It could be that accountability will never be, the then prime minister is no longer with us to give her version of events and stand trial. Is there no wonder a generation of hate and distrust in the political and justice system is fractured with no signs of healing?
The output for this article I believe could take on two different ideas. I like the concept of a heavy, coffee table book that shouts out and tells the story of this period in history. I believe that there is more to tell in this and that through images and conversations we would gain a better understanding of what had happened on that field, that day at Orgreave. A book, in print stands as a testiment and as a momento of these events. A collection of images and the narative running through, building a visual of this time of austerity and struggle for so many working class families.
In addition to this a flyer or pamphlet that reflects those that would have been handed out by the union members would enable the key details of the story to be told in a more accessible way.
Pixels and Serifs. 