Never mind elections, wars, revolutions, scandals and deaths, this week marks the 40th anniversary of probably the most gripping news story I have ever worked on as a journalist.
Gripping because there were vital economic, political and social issues at stake in this country.
Gripping because two powerful and exceptionally talented political leaders, Margaret Thatcher and Arthur Scargill, faced off.
Gripping because, in their own way, both sides were right.
Gripping that everyone in the country was caught up in the 1984-1985 miners’ strike and conflicted about it.
Gripping above all, for me as a journalist at the start of my career, because the strike reshaped this nation for the future.
On 5 March 1984, 6,000 miners walked out in South Yorkshire at collieries in Cortonwood and Bullcliffe Wood. That day the National Coal Board (NCB) announced there would be “accelerated closure” of 20 pits.
More from UK
On 12 March 1984, Arthur Scargill, the president of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), called a nationwide strike.
It became the biggest industrial dispute since the general strike in 1926, with 26 million working days lost. It did not come to an official end until a year later, on 3 March 1985.
Advertisement
The NUM and the NCB came into existence after the Second World War. They were part of the consensus, shared by both Labour and the Conservatives, that took much of heavy industry into public ownership.
Scargill was a radical left winger who believed a perfect socialist society had never been achieved. Even so, he was right that defeat for the miners would lead to the end of a whole way of life in which the state supported workers and their families, regardless of market forces.
Before the strike he had likened the Thatcher government to “the Nazis” and called for “extra parliamentary action” against “this totally undemocratic government”.
Prime minister Thatcher was right that the deep mine coal industry was uneconomic and subsidised by taxpayers and had been declining in Britain, Europe and North America for decades.
In Britain there were around a quarter of a million coal miners in 1984 compared to a million in 1922. The number of working collieries was down from over 1,000 to 173. Britain was already switching away from coal as the primary source of energy to natural gas and nuclear. Thatcher was subsequently one of the first leaders to recognise the danger of global warming through hydrocarbon emissions but this was not a principle issue at the time of the strike.
It was a febrile time in British politics. The previous summer, in the wake of military victory in the Falklands conflict, the Conservatives won a massive majority in the general election.
By the summer of 1984, Mrs Thatcher was calling the NUM “the enemy within”. She intended to elaborate on this theme in her party conference speech in Brighton in October, but it was disrupted by the IRA bombing of the Grand Hotel.
Thatcher was committed to confronting trade union power.
She was well aware that a miners’ strike in the early 1970s had effectively destroyed Ted Heath’s Conservative government. During the three-day week in the winter of 1974 there were daily power cuts around the country. Ministers appealed to the public to wash in two inches of shared bath water. Mr Heath lost the 1974 General Election on the question “Who governs Britain?”.
In the popular memory the 1984-1985 strike has been sentimentalised almost exclusively in favour of the strikers and their families. (James Graham’s recent TV series Sherwood is an exception).
During the strike the musician Billy Bragg and the filmmaker Ken Loach challenged audiences with the documentary Which Side Are You On?
Popular films since then, such as Billy Elliott, Brassed Off and Pride have centred on the solidarity of the mining communities and the aid they got from other anti-Thatcher movements including Women Against Pit ClosuresandLesbians And Gays Support The Miners. The depth of the lingering passions is encapsulated in the Billy Elliot The Musical song Merry Christmas, Maggie Thatcher: “We celebrate today/ ‘Cause it’s one day closer to your death”.
In reality the miners were not united and the country was not united behind them.
Scargill made the mistake of not holding a national ballot to strike. This meant that the Labour Party, then led by Neil Kinnock, a South Wales miner’s son, did not support the strike.
There was widespread public sympathy for the miners, who faced losing their livelihoods. But opinion polls during the strike showed greater, and strengthening, support for the employers over the strikers. Asked in December 1984 what they thought about the methods being used by the NUM and Scargill, 88% disapproved and 5% didn’t know.
There was near-unanimous backing for the strike in South Wales, Scotland, the North East, Yorkshire and Kent, where many of the richest seams were worked out. Other mining areas, especially Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire in the Midlands, did not go out on strike officially.
Communities were divided. Many angry confrontations took place as local strikers, joined by flying pickets, confronted police protecting those who drove or were bussed into work.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
In Yorkshire, violence between thousands of police and pickets shocked the nation in the so-called “Battle of Orgreave” outside a coking plant. A miner died in a similar confrontation in nearby Maltby. Official statistics record that 51 miners and 72 police were injured at Orgreave.
It was impossible not to get caught in the existential drama.
A Sky Newscolleague recalls: “I remember my uncle being on strike when I was a kid and I stayed awake in the nights worrying that he wouldn’t be able to buy any dinner and that he’d starve.
“He’s since told me that he had a great time on the buses to London to protest and they had plenty of beer. He had a police officer pal who asked to stand opposite him during the riots so they wouldn’t kick each other too hard.”
Scargill had also miscalculated by calling the strike in the spring when demand for energy was going down. The government had learnt its lesson from previous strikes and ensured stockpiling for at least six months. Scargill liked to say that the visible mounds of coal were like the hair in his combover – piled high around the edges and bald in the middle. He was wrong.
Later coal supplies resumed as more desperate miners went back to work, and their overseers in the separate NACODS union did not join the strike.
The government also tightened the law, including a squeeze on welfare payments to families, to make striking more difficult.
A breakaway Union of Democratic Mineworkers was formed. Working miners, encouraged by David Hart, a shadowy Thatcher advisor, went to court to successfully “sequester” the NUM’s assets, which prevented the union from funding the strike.
Meanwhile journalists exposed NUM officials were seeking financial support from the Soviet Union and Libya, although it is denied that any money was ever received.
The NUM was discredited. A return to work by defeated and desperate strikers became inevitable. Union power was decisively broken in de-industrialising Britain.
Today all Britain’s coal pits are closed, although there is still some open cast mining in the reprivatised industry. Active NUM membership in 2022 was just 82.
To the shame of successive governments there is a legacy of social deprivation in many former mining areas. In a spirit of protest, those left behind there voted strongly for Brexit and then made up much of the “red wall” which switched from Labour to Boris Johnson’s Conservatives in 2019.
The Conservatives were elected twice more immediately after the strike, in 1987 and 1992.
At Westminster an early day motion has been tabled marking this anniversary, paying tribute to the men and women of the strike and demanding an inquiry into its policing. It has attracted the signatures of just 27 MPs, including Jeremy Corbyn and Ian Lavery, who succeeded Scargill as an NUM president.
Scargill is now president of the Socialist Labour Partyand the International Miners’ Organisation. Aged 86 he is still making speeches, he supported Brexit and recently demanded solidarity with the Palestinians, according to The Socialist Worker.
For me there could have been no more useful education than reporting on, and seeing how others reported on, the personalities, the events and the issues of the great strike which divided the nation.
The health secretary has said that the cabinet is aware of the “pressure” on Chancellor Rachel Reeves amid volatile markets and a challenging broader economic picture – but appealed for the public to “give her time”.
Wes Streeting argued that the public “underestimates” the “amount of heavy-lifting” Ms Reeves has had to do and will have to continue to do, as he declared “total confidence” in her leadership in a staunch defence of her handling of the economy.
Separately, international development minister Anneliese Dodds, who attends cabinet, told Sky News that Ms Reeves has been “very clear about the long-term plan for our country” and she herself is “confident in that long-term plan”.
The comments from the two key ministers come after the past week saw a drop in the pound and an increase in government borrowing costs, which has fuelled speculation of more spending cuts or tax rises.
Streeting has ‘total confidence in chancellor’s leadership’
Speaking at the Jewish Labour Movement’s annual conference in north London, the health secretary acknowledged the fierce competition among all government departments for any available public funding from the Treasury, and told party members that all ministers “have to make choices and trade-offs” in where funding goes.
Mr Streeting went on to say that the chancellor and her deputy, Darren Jones, have “the hardest job of all because they have to make those choices across every bit of government spending, and they have to think about what’s in the interests of our overall economy and how we get businesses growing”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:14
Chancellor’s ‘pragmatic’ approach to China
He said: “I think people continue to underestimate both the amount of heavy lifting she has had to do in her first six months, and the amount of heavy lifting she will have to do in her next six months.
“And the cabinet doesn’t underestimate that – we understand the choices she has to make, the pressure she is under.”
As a result, cabinet ministers all “have a responsibility” to both “make tough choices and drive reform and value for money” within their departments, and also be “drivers of economic growth”.
“Nothing in the last six months has shaken my conviction that economic growth is the number one priority,” he said.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Continuing his defence of the chancellor’s handling of the economy so far, Mr Streeting said she is “trying to break us out of what has been the status quo and the economic orthodoxy of more than a decade”.
“People need to give her time, and they need to not forget that, without [Sir Keir Starmer’s] leadership, certainly we wouldn’t have won the last general election.
“Without Rachel’s leadership, we wouldn’t have won the last general election either. She built Labour’s economic credibility out of the ashes they were left in after the Corbyn leadership. And she has built that trust, built up that plan, and now she’s following through.”
He declared that he has “total confidence in the leadership that Rachel’s providing, and the leadership that the cabinet is following and driving with her, because all of us have to deliver economic growth for our country”.
Minister ‘confident in chancellor’s long-term plan’
Speaking in a separate session at the conference, Ms Dodds noted “speculation” about the fiscal headroom (the amount of money the chancellor will have available to spend), but said: “We have to focus on actually the evidence.
“And when we look at the evidence, we can see that the UK government has a chancellor who is very clear about the long-term plan for our country. She’s been delivering on it.”
Ms Dodds, who also attends cabinet, pointed to a “new fiscal system”, the chancellor’s new Industrial Strategy Council, as well as “record levels of investment under Rachel Reeves’s leadership”.
“I think it’s really important for us to focus on those fundamentals, on what has been achieved in a very short space of time. And I’m confident in that long-term plan that Rachel has been setting out.
“And we can already see the benefit of that, frankly, in terms of the UK’s reputation when it comes to public finances, but economic management more generally. Certainly that’s what I’ve heard internationally and keep hearing just now.”
Chancellor accused of having ‘fled to China’
The pair were speaking as the chancellor holds meetings in China in a bid to drum up investment for the UK economy, having ignored calls to cancel the long-planned trip because of economic turmoil at home.
Opposition parties have accused the chancellor of having “fled to China” rather than explain how she will fix the UK’s flatlining economy, and former prime minister Boris Johnson said Ms Reeves had “been rumbled” and said she should “make her way to HR and collect her P45 – or stay in China”.
Speaking during her trip, Ms Reeves said she would not alter her economic plans, with the October budget designed to return the UK to economic stability, and reiterated that “growth is the number one mission of this government”.
She said that “action” will be taken to meet the fiscal rules. That action is reported to include deeper spending cuts than the 5% efficiency savings already expected to be announced later this year, while cuts to the welfare bill are also said to be under consideration.
Anti-corruption minister Tulip Siddiq could lose her job if the investigation into her properties finds she broke government rules, a cabinet member has suggested.
She has referred herself to the prime minister’s independent adviser on ministers’ interests, Sir Laurie Magnus, following reports she lived in properties in London linked to allies of her aunt, Sheikh Hasina, the deposed prime minister of Bangladesh.
There have also been questions about trips she took to Russia alongside her aunt.
Ms Siddiq insists she has “done nothing wrong”.
As economic secretary to the Treasury, Ms Siddiq oversees anti-corruption efforts in the financial sector as part of her brief.
Mr Kyle told Sky News: “With Tulip, she’s referred herself straight away to this.
“There is a process under way and we know full well it will be a functional process, and the outcomes of it will be stuck to by the prime minister and this government, a complete contrast to what we’ve had in the past.”
He gave this answer after Trevor pointed out Labour would have been calling for a sacking if the roles were reversed and the Tories were in power.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:02
‘Tulip Siddiq will lose job if she broke rules’
Mr Kyle contrasted his party’s stance with the Conservative one – saying he called for an investigation into allegations of bullying from Priti Patel, and she “had to be dragged to that inquiry”.
He added that he let the inquiry pan out.
“The results came out, she was found guilty, and no action happened,” Mr Kyle said.
His response came after Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called for Ms Siddiq to be sacked yesterday.
Shadow chancellor Mel Stride repeated the calls today to Sky News.
He said: “What is not right is that the prime minister is not moving her out of that position and getting her to step down
“Because she is the anti-corruption minister, she has serious charges laid against her now, or serious accusations around corruption, and it’s going to be really impossible for her to do that job under current circumstances.
“So she should step down, and the prime minister needs to get a grip of that.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
The chancellor has said the budget is “non-negotiable” on a visit to China in the face of volatile markets back in the UK.
Rachel Reeves flew out on Friday after ignoring calls from opposition parties to cancel the long-planned trip because of economic turmoil at home.
The past week has seen a drop in the pound and an increase in government borrowing costs, which has fuelled speculation of more spending cuts or tax rises.
The Tories have accused the chancellor of having “fled to China” rather than explain how she will fix the UK’s flatlining economy, while the Liberal Democrats say she should stay in Britain and announce a “plan B” to address market volatility.
Former prime minister Boris Johnson said Ms Reeves had “been rumbled” and said she should “make her way to HR and collect her P45 – or stay in China”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:14
Chancellor’s ‘pragmatic’ approach to China
However, during a visit to Beijing’s flagship store of UK bike maker Brompton, Ms Reeves said she would not alter her economic plans, with the October budget designed to return the UK to economic stability.
“Growth is the number one mission of this government,” she said.
“The fiscal rules laid out in the budget are non-negotiable. Economic stability is the bedrock for economic growth and prosperity.”
The treasury added that making Britain better off will be at the “forefront of the chancellor’s mind” during her visit.
She said that “action” will be taken to meet the fiscal rules. That action is reported to include deeper spending cuts than the 5% efficiency savings already expected to be announced later this year, while cuts to the welfare bill are also said to be under consideration.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
The UK has laid out a new economic relationship with China, and to use one of China’s favourite phrases, both countries are selling it as a “win-win” situation.
It’s a significant development in restoring ties between the countries. The relationship has been beset by years of tension and suspicion. Both sides want to get it back on track.
China delivered a warm welcome for the chancellor.
Rachel Reeves was shuttled from a Beijing Brompton bike shop, to the Great Hall of the People and on to a state guest house.
China’s vice premier He Lifeng said: “The outcomes we have agreed today represent pragmatic co-operation in action.”
Pragmatic. There is that word again. Chancellor Reeves uttered it four times in her closing statement.
Despite the bonhomie, China is still likely to view these British overtures with caution.
She met her counterpart, Vice Premier He Lifeng, in Beijing on Saturday to discuss financial services, trade and investment, before heading to Shanghai for talks with representatives across British and Chinese businesses.
On Friday, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy defended the trip, telling Sky News that the climbing cost of government borrowing was a “global trend” that had affected many countries, “most notably the United States”.
“We are still on track to be the fastest growing economy, according to the OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] in Europe,” she told Anna Jones on Sky News Breakfast.
“China is the second-largest economy, and what China does has the biggest impact on people from Stockton to Sunderland, right across the UK, and it’s absolutely essential that we have a relationship with them.”
Rachel Reeves’s trip to China – the first by a British chancellor since 2019 – was always going to be controversial.
In recent years Conservative governments have been keeping Beijing at arm’s length – amid concern about espionage, the situation in Hong Kong, and the treatment of the Uyghurs.
David Cameron’s so-called “Golden Era” of engagement in the pursuit of economic investment, notoriously capped by a visit to an Oxfordshire pub for a pint with President Xi Jinping – has been widely written off as a naive mistake.
There are many – not least the incoming US President Donald Trump – who believe we should maintain our distance.
But in another era of economic turmoil, the pursuit of growth is the government’s number one priority.
This week’s difficult market news – with the cost of government borrowing surging, and the value of the pound falling – has thoroughly raised the stakes.
It is the first UK-China Economic and Financial Dialogue (EFD) since 2019, building on the Labour government’s plan for a “pragmatic” policy with the world’s second-largest economy.
Sir Keir Starmer was the first British prime minister to meet with China’s President Xi Jinping in six years at the G20 summit in Brazil last autumn.
Relations between the UK and China have become strained over the last decade as the Conservative government spoke out against human rights abuses and concerns grew over national security risks.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:45
How much do we trade with China?
Navigating this has proved tricky given China is the UK’s fourth largest single trading partner, with a trade relationship worth almost £113bn and exports to China supporting over 455,000 jobs in the UK in 2020, according to the government.
During the Tories’ 14 years in office, the approach varied dramatically from the “golden era” under David Cameron to hawkish aggression under Liz Truss, while Rishi Sunak vowed to be “robust” but resisted pressure from his own party to brand China a threat.
The Treasury said a stable relationship with China would support economic growth and that “making working people across Britain secure and better off is at the forefront of the chancellor’s mind”.
Ahead of her visit, Ms Reeves said: “By finding common ground on trade and investment, while being candid about our differences and upholding national security as the first duty of this government, we can build a long-term economic relationship with China that works in the national interest.”