Thatcherism & Social Conflict (AQA A Level History: Component 2: Depth study): Revision Note

The miners' strike, 1984–1985

Why did the strike happen?

• The dispute grew out of a long-running argument over the closure of uneconomic pits

  • In 1981, the National Coal Board (NCB) warned that 23 pits would need to close

  • The government backed down rather than risk a repeat of the industrial defeats of 1972 and 1974

• By March 1984, the position had changed

  • The NCB announced the closure of 20 pits

    • This would have led to a loss of at least 20,000 jobs

  • In response, more than three-quarters of the country's 187,000 miners went on strike

    • The strike began at Cortonwood Colliery in South Yorkshire

• Arthur Scargill, president of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), claimed the government had a secret plan to close 70 pits

  • Cabinet papers released under the thirty-year rule in 2014 later showed a strategy to close 75 pits over three years

• The government was much better prepared than in earlier industrial disputes

  • Coal stocks had been built up at power stations over the previous 18 months

  • North Sea oil made an energy crisis less likely than in 1973

  • Ian MacGregor had been appointed chairman of the NCB with government backing to take a tougher approach

How was the strike fought?

• The NUM was divided from the beginning

  • Scargill refused to hold a national ballot, which weakened the union's legal position

    • It also damaged support for the strike among some miners and the wider public

• Most Nottinghamshire miners crossed the picket lines to continue working

  • Striking miners condemned them as 'scabs' and 'traitors'

  • They later formed the breakaway Union of Democratic Mineworkers (UDM)

    • The UDM accused Scargill of putting hard-left politics ahead of miners' interests

• The government presented the dispute as a test of democratic authority

  • Ministers argued that an unballoted strike should not be able to force policy on an elected government

  • Thatcher compared the dispute with the Falklands conflict and referred to the strike's leaders as the 'enemy within'

Approach: Thatcher gave this speech to Conservative backbench MPs on 19th July 1984, while the strike was still under way

The source is useful for showing how the government wanted the dispute to be understood. Thatcher presents the NUM as trying to impose its will without a ballot and frames the strike as a question of law, democracy and government authority

However, she was speaking to her own political supporters during the dispute. The source is therefore much stronger for showing the government’s argument than for giving a balanced account of what was happening in the coalfields

Policing

• Policing became one of the most controversial parts of the dispute

  • Forces were coordinated nationally through the National Reporting Centre

    • Police were sent across the country to different pits

• The police used several methods:

  • The officers were equipped with batons to deal with striking miners

  • The mounted police were a common presence at picket lines

  • They taunted striking miners by waving banknotes at them

• The most famous violent confrontation was the Battle of Orgreave on the 18th June 1984

Other industrial disputes

The legal squeeze on the unions

• The government reduced trade union power through legislation before confronting unions directly

• Secondary picketing was outlawed in 1980

  • Unions could no longer picket workplaces that were not directly involved in a dispute

• From 1984, unions were required to hold ballots before calling industrial action

• The closed shop was also restricted

  • Workers could no longer be forced to join a union as a condition of employment

• These changes limited several of the tactics that had helped unions during the disputes of 1972 and 1974

  • By the time of the miners' strike and the later disputes, unions were operating under much tighter legal controls

Approach: This extract comes from a Conservative Party strategy document written in 1977 by a group chaired by Nicholas Ridley. It was intended for internal party use rather than publication

The source is useful because it shows that senior Conservatives were thinking about how to reduce union power before Thatcher entered government. It also identifies the miners as a likely source of future confrontation

However, it was a planning document written in opposition. It shows what some Conservatives hoped to do, not what would definitely happen once they were in government

Disputes in the public sector

• Public sector unions became more militant as pay disputes increased in the early 1980s

  • High inflation meant that many disputes were about pay rather than job losses

• COHSE (Confederation of Health Service Employees) and NUPE (National Union of Public Employees) represented health service workers

  • Their disputes often attracted public sympathy

• Teachers had rarely taken major industrial action before

  • A prolonged dispute over pay and conditions developed in the mid-1980s

• The government did not respond to every dispute in the same way

  • Ministers sometimes made concessions when public support clearly favoured the workers

    • This contrasts with a much firmer approach taken towards the miners

The Wapping Dispute, 1986

• By the mid-1980s, some employers were more willing to challenge union power directly

  • The newspaper industry became a major example

    • Rupert Murdoch was the most prominent employer involved

• In January 1986, Murdoch moved production of his newspapers to a new plant at Wapping

  • New printing technology reduced the need for many traditional print jobs

  • The move also weakened the bargaining position of the print unions

  • The print unions tried to stop production and distribution

    • They failed to prevent the publication of a single title

• The dispute ended after 13 months

  • The unions failed to recover their previous bargaining power

  • Wapping became another important example of declining trade union influence

The poll tax and extra-parliamentary opposition

Why was the Community Charge (poll tax) introduced?

• The Community Charge, better known as the poll tax, was designed to replace domestic rates and reform local government finance

  • Under the rates system, tax was based on the rental value of property

    • Only householders received a bill

  • The Community Charge was a flat-rate payment made by almost every adult

• Ministers argued that the new system would make local government more accountable

  • More people who voted for local services would contribute directly towards their cost

  • If councils increased spending, local voters would see the effect in their own bills

    • The government hoped this would put pressure on councils to control spending

• The legislation passed through Parliament in 1987 and 1988

  • The Local Government Finance Bill received its second reading on 16th December 1987

  • The Community Charge was introduced in Scotland in 1989

  • It followed in England and Wales in 1990

Approach: Nicholas Ridley was Secretary of State for the Environment when he defended the Local Government Finance Bill in the House of Commons on 16th December 1987

The source is useful for showing the government’s reasons for replacing rates. Ridley stresses fairness and accountability, arguing that almost all adults should contribute towards the local services they used

However, Ridley was the minister responsible for the Bill, so he was making the government’s case for the reform. The source should be tested against criticism of the flat-rate system, especially over ability to pay

Why was the poll tax opposed?

• The main criticism concerned ability to pay

  • A pensioner on a low income could face the same basic charge as a millionaire living in the same area

  • Rebates of up to 80% were available to the poorest

    • Critics argued that people just above the rebate threshold could still struggle to pay

• Labour attacked the lack of any direct link between the charge and income

• Opposition also came from within the Conservative Party

  • Some Conservative backbenchers favoured a band linked to income

  • The Tory Reform Group argued that the scheme could increase central government control rather than strengthen local accountability

• Ministers also recognised practical difficulties

  • The charge would be more complicated to collect than domestic rates because councils had to identify and bill individual adults

Approach: John Cunningham was a Labour frontbench MP speaking during the same Commons debate on 16 December 1987. He attacked the Community Charge as unfair because everyone in an area would pay the same basic amount regardless of income

The source is useful for showing the central Labour argument against the policy: fairness should be linked to ability to pay. Used alongside Ridley, it also shows that the two sides disagreed over the meaning of fairness itself

However, Cunningham was speaking for the opposition against the Bill. His speech is therefore evidence of Labour’s case against the policy rather than proof by itself that the tax would operate unfairly

Opposition outside Parliament

• Resistance began to organise before the Community Charge had even been collected

  • Anti-Poll Tax Unions appeared across the country

    • They encouraged people not to register and, later, not to pay

• Large-scale non-payment created a practical problem for councils

  • Councils and courts would have to pursue large numbers of individuals separately

• The poll tax became one example of a wider pattern during the Thatcher years

  • Parliamentary opposition was often weak and divided

  • Critics therefore used:

    • pressure groups

    • protest campaigns

    • churches

    • universities

    • the arts

Universities and the arts

• Some criticism came from institutions that were not normally part of party politics

• Oxford University voted against giving Thatcher an honorary degree

  • The decision was a protest against cuts to higher education

  • Previous Oxford-educated post-war prime ministers had received the honour

• Writers and performers also criticised Thatcherism

  • Playwrights including Caryl Churchill, David Hare and Alan Ayckbourn wrote works that satirised or criticised aspects of the period

  • Red Wedge brought together musicians, including Billy Bragg and Paul Weller, to campaign against the government

  • Television dramas such as Boys from the Blackstuff reached large audiences with stories about unemployment and its effects

Pressure groups and protest

• Pressure groups challenged the social effects of government policy

  • Shelter campaigned on homelessness

  • Age Concern campaigned on pensioner poverty

• Opposition to nuclear weapons also became a major protest movement

  • The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) revived after the 1979 decision to base American Cruise missiles in Britain

• Women established a peace camp outside Greenham Common in September 1981

  • The camp opposed the deployment of Cruise missiles

  • In April 1983, around 70,000 protesters formed a human chain from Greenham Common to Aldermaston

  • The camp continued after the missiles were removed in 1991

    • It finally closed in 2000

The Church

• The Church of England also became a prominent source of criticism

  • Bishops, including David Jenkins in Durham and David Sheppard in Liverpool, spoke publicly about poverty and deprivation

• In 1985, the Church published Faith in the City

  • The report called for greater action to help deprived urban communities

  • It questioned the social consequences of economic policies that placed a heavy burden on poorer areas

Social divisions under Thatcherism

The uneven impact of economic change

• The effects of economic change were concentrated in particular parts of Britain

  • Coal, steel and shipbuilding areas, predominantly in the North, lost a large number of jobs

  • Service industries grew fastest in the South

• This widened the existing north-south divide

  • Two people could experience the 1980s very differently depending on where they lived

  • Former industrial areas were more likely to experience unemployment and deprivation

• Urban decline became more visible in some inner cities

  • Poor health, depression, alcohol dependency and drug use increased in some of the most deprived areas

  • Young people could no longer assume that they would find the same local work as their parents

    • Many moved away in search of employment, weakening communities further

Riots and the policing of race

• A series of serious riots broke out in English cities between April and July 1981

  • The worst of these occurred in:

    • Brixton, London

    • Toxteth, Liverpool

    • Handsworth, Birmingham

    • Chapeltown, Leeds

  • These areas also had high unemployment and severe deprivation

• Further riots took place in Brixton, Handsworth and Tottenham in 1985

• Relations between the police and some Black communities were already tense

  • The Sus Law allowed police to stop and search people they suspected might commit an offence

  • Many Black and Asian young people believed it was being used disproportionately against them

  • The law was repealed in 1981

    • Critics argued that racial prejudice had become institutionalised within the police, although the Scarman Report rejected that view

• Operation Swamp intensified tensions in Brixton shortly before the April 1981 riot

  • Police stopped around 1,000 people in six days

• The Scarman Report was commissioned to investigate the 1981 disturbances

  • It identified deprivation and racial disadvantage as important causes

  • It also examined a breakdown of trust between police and local communities

• Later changes in policing followed the unrest

  • Greater attention was given to police-community relations

  • The riots made race, policing, and inner-city deprivation major national political issues

Approach: Faith in the City was published in 1985 by the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Commission on Urban Priority Areas. It examined conditions in deprived inner-city communities

The source is useful because it criticises the social effects of government economic policy while accepting some of its stated aims, including self-reliance and economic freedom. Its criticism focuses on who carried the costs of change, especially people with little choice over their circumstances

However, it was a commissioned Church report concerned specifically with deprived areas. It therefore gives strong evidence for conditions in those communities, but not for the experience of Britain as a whole

The legacy in the coalfields

• Mining communities continued to feel the effects of the 1984 - 1985 miners' strike long after it ended

  • Many families had survived for a year on:

    • child benefit

    • food donations

    • collective support

• The division between striking and working miners did not disappear when the strike ended

  • Villages and families could remain divided for years

• Pit closures created a longer-term problem

  • In many mining areas, the colliery had been the main local employer

  • Once it closed, there were often few available jobs

• The social effects, therefore, continued after the industrial dispute itself had ended

  • Employment loss affected community life as well as individual incomes

Approach: The source is useful for showing the everyday experience of a mining family during the strike. Marshall describes reliance on small donations, cheap food and benefits, and also remembers the effect of pit closures on the next generation

However, it is a retrospective personal memory. Her account was recorded long after the strike and for an exhibition organised by the NUM, so it should be compared with other evidence. It remains valuable for showing how the dispute was remembered inside mining communities

Divisions in local government and the press

• Several Labour-run councils openly challenged Conservative government policy

  • Conflict was particularly strong in London and some northern cities

• Parts of the national press attacked these councils over:

  • spending

  • local taxation

  • equality policies

• Critics in the press sometimes grouped these councils together under the label 'loony left'

  • This was a hostile political label rather than a neutral description

  • It simplified major differences between councils and individual policies

• The dispute showed how local government had become another area of political conflict

  • Labour councils could present themselves as resisting Thatcherism

  • Conservative ministers and supportive newspapers could present the same councils as wasteful or extreme

How divisive was Thatcherism for British society?

• This question is about whether Thatcherism created new divisions, or whether it mainly deepened divisions that already existed before 1979

  • Some key evidence for each side is highlighted below

Evidence that Thatcherism increased social division

• The miners' strike of 1984–1985 created particularly bitter divisions

  • Mining communities split between strikers and those who continued working

  • The creation of the UDM made the split more permanent

  • Divisions continued after the strike itself had ended

• Changes to trade union law and defeats such as the miners' strike and Wapping shifted power towards employers

  • Unions had fewer legal options

  • Some workforces lost bargaining power that they had held during the 1970s

• Economic change affected different parts of Britain very unevenly

  • Former industrial areas suffered unemployment, pit closures and urban decline

  • The South benefited more from the growth of services and finance

  • Existing regional differences, therefore, became more visible

• The Community Charge (poll tax) also created conflict over fairness

  • Almost every adult would pay a flat-rate charge

  • Critics argued that people on very different incomes could face the same basic charge

  • Organised resistance had begun before the tax was actually collected

• Riots in Brixton, Toxteth and Handsworth exposed tensions over:

  • deprivation

  • race

  • policing

• Opposition also spread beyond Parliament

  • The Church of England, universities and figures in the arts publicly criticised aspects of Thatcherite policy

Evidence that many divisions already existed

• Many of Britain's economic problems were already developing before 1979

  • Traditional industry was declining

  • Unemployment was rising

  • Some inner cities were already experiencing deprivation and urban decay

• Trade union conflict also had a much longer history

  • Major industrial disputes had already challenged governments in 1972, 1974 and 1978–1979

  • The NUM itself was divided by Scargill's refusal to hold a national ballot in 1984

• Racial tension and urban disorder also predated Thatcher

  • Earlier examples included the Notting Hill disturbances of 1958

  • Thatcherism, therefore, did not create racial division from nothing

• The government continued to win substantial electoral support

  • The Conservatives won general elections in 1979, 1983 and 1987

  • Thatcher's policies, therefore, divided opinion, but they were also supported by millions of voters

• Some policies widened opportunities for sections of the working class

  • Council-house sales increased home ownership

  • Wider share ownership allowed more people to hold financial assets

• The government did not confront every group in the same way

  • Some disputes, especially in the health service, ended with concessions

  • Conflict was, therefore, not the government's only response