have been different. That argument has three basic flaws.
First, fails to recognise miners in 1984 were taking exactly the same kind of action that they had taken in 1981. Recall the action of 1981 was unorcial sunke action, supported by Notts, South Derbyshire Leicestershire vote. If that had been done on this occasion the outcome in the early weeks of the dispute would have transformed the situation.
Secondly, it fails to recognise, by the time of our conference on 19 April nearly 80 per cent of our members were already on strike. history of this union have you held a ballot vote of members already decided with their feet to take action against the Coal Board decision to try and destroy their jobs and their communities. And thirdly, the argument also fails to recognise, viently forgets, that on a previous occasion areas, including those three areas Notts, South Derbyshire Leicestershire — refused to accept the democratic decision of our membership as determined in an individual ballot vote, and proceeded to negotiate with the National Coal Board an incentive scheme that has led this union into divisions and split.
There have also been suggestions (again, from critics, cynics, even some our colleagues) that traditional, picket-line militancy is dead. Nothing could be further from the truth, and accurate historical analysis will prove that point beyond doubt. Colleagues, it was not a failure of mass picketing, but a failure to mass picket that represented a in many sections union, and other trade unions, and we must lear the lessons of what took place in 1984-85.
For the sake of the record, and in order that the academics, and intellectals, BISCOES should not be too confused, let me too ampare what took place in Saitley i 972, and Orgreave in 1984. The mas ting of Orgreaye, like Sattley in that and had been ballot Ana never in the who have For conactually halting its on 18 June.
tactics Orgreave, WIch Evolved throughout the Yorkshire, and our members.
of the media, they, to which I refer. 1972, proved so effective that contrary to popular belief, it led to British Steel operations on 18 1984. But unlike Saltley, where picketing was stepped up and involved the whole of the labour movement of Birmingham, the picketing at Orgreave was scaled down following the success I have consistently argued that the which brought us victory at Saltley should have been employed at with increased picketing we would inevitably have inThe trade union and fabol lovement not only in Sheffiel but 1974, whole of South and brought the flow of coke from Orgreave to a complete halt We are involved in a class war, and any attempt to deny that flies in the face of reality. Don't believe me, listen to what Margaret Thatcher, and Peter Walker keep saying about this union Just look at the attack of the establishment on the National Union of Mineworkers, eloquently than I, demonstrate the nature of the class wat Confronted by our enemy's mobilisation, we are entitled, Idea GLC indeed obliged, to call upon our class for massive support. In any future industrial action any cluding ours — this must be done.
Fourthly it is a fact that must be fac ed the NUM did not receive the level of support we needed and were entitled to expect from our colleagues in the wider movements. In spite of pleas from this union, the leaders of the power workers refused to give us the basic support they gave in 1974 - - a measure of support again, I should add for the record, was not present in 1972 (contrary to any statements made by media experts). In by operating basic guidelines determined by the Trades Congress in September power workers stopped the flow of coal into British power stations.
I try never to personalise, but I want to make one thing clear, if the leaders of the power station workers in the EETPU had been less concerned in inviting Tebbitt to open one of their centres and more concerned to call upon their members to support the miners, they would have represented real trade unionism. acquiescing in the conversion of coal-fired power stations to SCCLIVIS General Workers Union. Their support was not only an inspiration, it was an example to other unions of what trade union solidarity is all about.
Sham Last October, NACODS, committed themselves to a united fight with the NUM on pit closures, suddenly capitulated to the Boards during talks Photo: GM COOKSON at the conciliation service ACAS, and accepted was a deal that amounted to deception.
This NACODS-NCB described as "sacrosanct' by both the Board and government, was praised to the skies by pundits and politicians who criticised the NUM for refusing to accept it. The agreement — which we said was worthless troduce into the colliery review cedure an independent appeals body, acceptable to unions and to the Board which would review any dispute about the future of a colliery or unit after all other procedures had been exhausted.
Four months after the end of the strike, the Coal Board violated this and has announced instead that it will appoint on its own, unilaterally one inspector. They're going to appoint an independent inspector. The NUM warned that the agreement was a sham, and we are proving it as each day passes. We suggested that if they wanted an in1974 dependent review body, what better ap peal body than the National Reference Tribunal.
Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, not an old friend of the NUM. We were prepared accept Reference Tribunal as the independent review body, but lan MacGregor and the don't want an agreement. They want to continue to pursue their own policy of trying to destroy this industry:
way that they destroyed the British stec having what everyone now knows was supposed to inprO leadership has openly "sacrosanct' agreement.
Hijack Do you know who appointed it?
the National operations wanted none of it. They million.
sacked, During the strike, the Labour Party allowed itself to be preoccuppied with allegations of 'violence', scripted daily by the media - when they should have been attacking the government for its violence against our industry, and defending our members in the same way as Thatchel defended her riot squad in blue. That should have been the pre-occupation of the party right the way throughout our industrial dispute.
Of course the High Court decision last autumn to fine the NUM, and then place an order of sequestration upon us failed to stop the union functioning Further legal moves then resulted in the High Court sacking the three NUM trustees and appointing a. receiver, whose purpose was to bring the union's administration to a standstill by hijacking our funds.
As a result of his appointment, our funds have now been depleted by fl Those funds would still be in. tact had the union's trustees not been the trusteeship placed in
the hands of the receiver who is supposjed to be looking after the assets of the NUM. I think it imperative to make the point that the receivership of this union marks a very dangerous precedent for other trade unions. It means that the unions in Britain todav can in fact be seized literally overnight, and the whole movement has understand they've got an obligation to fight back against the appointment of a receiver in this, or indeed any other trade union.
Whilst we're analysing the dispute, we've also got to analyse the role of the media, if for no orter reason, they've been analysing us. Throughout year, and longer, the media has played a role which Goebbels would have been proud of. broadcasting have smeared and lied about our union, its leadership and its members. It's no good just blaming •TUDLICLUS Journalists - many of them here today whom will say privately that they 'support' the miners have Themselves to be used to attack us every day at every turn, as we fight to protect and sustain our industry. But in hurling weapon after weapon at the NUM, our enemies have revealed more than their natred of us — they have revealed their Their viclousness springs my bibule to yuulig that our pits and jobs.
Women
than capitalist Press and editors.
when I say that nothing allowed organised and paign. men Someone Stashe miners, whose courage and determination throughout the 12 months battle remain an inspiration to us all. Our union must continue to fuly involve them at all levels, to provide education, and to tap their tremendous energy and skills to the full, for the use of this union in the fight to save I also take this opportunity, yet again, to pay my tribute to the magnificent force which has emerged to take its rightful place alongside the NUM I'm referring to the magnificent women's support groups. No words of mine can pay adequate tribute to their historic contribution to our common struggle. I peneve I spcak on Delal 01 Ichael McGahey and Peter Heathfield as well gives me greater pride than my assocation with the Women Against Pit Closures campaign, and those brilliant women who supported that camThere is absolutely no doubt that their collective strength is crucial to the fight that still lies ahead of us.
What of the future? For the NUM, the tasks ahead present the greatest closures that we urge the Labour Party and TUC to campaign in parliament and throughout the nation.
The brilliant economic case against pit closures produced by Andrew Glyn of Oxford University shows that the cost to Britain's taxpayers of closing a pit is almost double that of keeping it open, employing workers and producing valuable coal. We're involved in a fight for Britain's future, and the extent to which we succeed or fail fundamentally affects other workers and the nation's destiny.
The rail and steel industries, now under increasing attack and must learn the lessons of the last 12 months, and understand that the surest way to save British steel and the railwavs 1s tc previous commitment that I've had. I firmly believe that the NUM must then be invited to share in the responsibility of running the National Coal Board as it should be run — of the people, by the people and for the people. The Board must be accountable to those who work within our industry, and the chairman should be the nominee of the unions. Only in this way can the great wrongs of the past five years be righted, and our industry expanded line with the 1974 Plan For Coal.
Peace should membership.
developed in those It follows therefore that we must Socialist Action 19 July 1985 against pit closures, to save jobs or indeed to represent as powerfully as we CHALETES entire At a time when the industry is under attack from the most ruthless government seen in our lifetime, it would be a disaster for every member of this unior if any breakaway were to take place But, as history shows all too clearly, it would be most disastrous of all fo themselves formed such breakaway. I call in this presidential address in 1985 on all sections of our union to take strength from the lessons of 1984-85, and from the fact that we are all part of a national union.
I pledge for my part to accept the decisions of conference whether it be
----- pull-quotes -----
COAL NOT SOLE