One of the objections to the Police & Crime Commissioner model of policing governance, often used by those working inside the service, is that it would and has 'politicised' the police. Whilst regular readers of this blog will know, I look forward to PCCs being replaced by a better system, they are not responsible for bringing politics into policing. Perhaps one of the clearest examples of that was during the miners strike in 1984.
Here are some quotes from Hansard (28/10/14) in a speech by Michael Dugher:
One of the Cabinet documents was a record of a meeting the then Prime Minister held in Downing street on 15 September 1983. It states absolutely clearly that Mr MacGregor, the chairman of the NCB,And few days ago, in a blog on the Channel 4 website written by Paul Mason:
“had it in mind over the three years 1983-85 that a further 75 pits would be closed”.
The final paragraph of the document reads:
“It was agreed that no record of this meeting should be circulated.”
What a surprise.
We know that significant pressure was placed on the Home Secretary to step up police measures against striking miners to escalate the dispute, which again is something that is denied. Released documents from 14 March 1984 show that Ministers at the time pressured the Home Secretary to ensure that chief constables adopted
“a more vigorous interpretation of their duties.”
At the time, it was claimed that the police were acting entirely on their own constitutional independence—what a joke.
Earlier this year, the National Union of Mineworkers, led by the excellent General Secretary Chris Kitchen, produced an impressive report, drafted by Mr Nicky Stubbs, following months of forensic analysis of the recently released Cabinet papers. The report has brought even more disturbing details to light. It shows that Ministers were even prepared to override normal judicial processes, and ensure that local magistrate courts dealt with cases arising from the dispute in a much quicker fashion. It also outlines how Ministers conspired to cover up the extent of their plans for the mining industry. [my added bold]
Amid
the cooled air of a vault at the National Archive I trace my finger
across Maggie Thatcher’s handwriting, in the margin of a typewritten
note marked Secret.
She’s scribbled: “13 RoRo, 1,000 tons a day, 50 lorries a day…”
She’s scribbled: “13 RoRo, 1,000 tons a day, 50 lorries a day…”
Amid the cooled air of a vault at the National Archive I trace my finger across Maggie Thatcher’s handwriting, in the margin of a typewritten note marked Secret. She’s scribbled: “13 RoRo, 1,000 tons a day, 50 lorries a day…”And later in the piece (which I recommend that you read in its entirety):
“Violence will not succeed for the police and courts will not bow to it. They are the servants not of government but of the law itself,” Mrs Thatcher said in her Mansion House speech that year.I would like to think that professionally independent policing has advanced since then, and with the Human Rights Act and other legislation, Chief Constables would not be so pressured.
The documents reveal this was a fiction. [again my added bold]
What do you think?
Jon,
ReplyDeleteDo you have a link to the cited NUM historical research please?
My recollection was that the NUM strike started in some coalfields and NUM regions. It was not a national strike. In the first week Yorkshire NUM pickets poured into Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, where the strike had little support. There was little sign of a police response, as conceded at the time (maybe) by the local chief constables.
Following high-level, political intervention the police were mobilised nationally and ACPO set up a national coordination centre for 'mutual aid'. Large numbers of police were then deployed to Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. So began a period of confrontation.
I am afraid not David - the only links I have are the ones I have added. Your recollection matches mine - altho it is long time ago!
Delete