Jump to content
Hide Adverts
Malcolm Robinson

Ronnie Campbell

Recommended Posts

Ermm... have you seen the date on that one Malc?
 

'Why should we be ruled over by families descended from robber  barons, bandits and illegitimate heirs?

'Or, in the case of the current lot, fifth-generation Germans who changed their name from Battenberg to Windsor during the First World War.'

Mr Campbell also said the Queen had 'no right to lord it' over ordinary working-class people like him.

'I bend my knee to no one,' he continued. 'Without the Monarchy, there would be no aristocrats owning vast swathes of our green and pleasant land simply because their ancestors stole it from the previous occupants.'

 

But, in Ronnie's book it's absolutely OK to be "ruled over" by first generation Germans, including ex-Nazis and their descendants?  Also to pay them a net £50,000,000,000 over the last 4 1/2 years for the privilege of being so ruled over by them.

 

Terribly confused people these professed socialists!  Especially that after saying the above he adds that he doesn't want to abolish the monarchy.  It's almost as if Labour politicians can totally reverse their beliefs at the drop of a hat, depending on who their present audience is - but, we know that can't possibly be true! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GGG have you read the letter in the News Post Leader this week, if not I've attached it. This guy certainly puts the wonderfully misinformed Mr.  Campbell in his place. Best letter I've read in the News Post Labour.....OOPS I meant Leader, in a long time. He certainly knows his subject, and has crammed it full of genuine facts. Not like the 'Earl of Battenburg', Mr Campbell. sorry I couldn't resist that one,

 

Just goes to show though that the good people of Blyth have been represented by a doughnut for these past 27 years. Anyway, I think this letter puts him right where he belongs, in a wilderness with likeminded lying, ignorant, misinformed politicians.

post-3022-0-97527100-1417273524_thumb.jp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry GGG, that one hadn't scanned properly. The one below is the complete letter.

post-3022-0-23771100-1417274285_thumb.jp

Edited by willy j.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief and this man is an MP - he was  recently criticising in his column in the News Post Leader the fact that the Conservative Government was keeping nurses pay increases to 1 percent - conveniently forgetting of course that he and his band of fellow MPs have recently voted to accept, what is it, a 10 percent rise! Shame on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great letter but I'm surprised at the lack of responses from all the 'Maggie Thatcher bashers' on here.

I saw Lavery the MP on tv a few weeks ago shouting in the commons about mining related stuff. Wonder what he thinks of the letter.

No doubt one or both of our MPs will respond in their News Post Leader columns this week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't hold your breath on that one Reedy, there is no way they can 'Massage' the figures on that one. Well done Alan Henderson for wising a lot of people up.

 

If they do answer in the Leader it will be interesting. However, I would imagine that they will consult Labours 'Ministry of Misinformation' at Head Office before they attempt that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ThatchBasher Sym reporting for duty.   This thread has two strands:  1. Campbell as an effective MP; 2. Facts and figures. 

 

All political parties have their clowns, idiots, inarticulates and crooks.  Labour has in Campbell an inarticulate clown rapped inside an idiot;  I have NO evidence that he's bent.  Perhaps others might shed some light, say, on his expenses claims.

 

The facts and figures outlined in that letter have always been available and have NEVER been denied by those on the left.  Yep, they may have been spin but all side do that to score some advantage.  Just to clear one thing up (and I've made this point on numerous occasions here) the NUM were never against pit closures;  if the case was made that individual pits weren't economical to run then the Union would NEGOTIATE with the NCB for closure. 

 

None of this changes the evil legacy of Thatcher;  one man's God is another man's Devil.

 

There you have it .... a balanced opinion!

Edited by Symptoms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your balanced opinion Sym, I do agree with you that the NUM were always willing to negotiate when uneconomical pits were earmarked for closure. However, that was only ever their attitude under Joe Gormley. Under Scargill there was never any chance of sensible negotiations. Thatcher and Scargill went to war with each other, a war that they had both hoped would come, and it did because thatcher set a trap, and scargill took the bait.

 

The issue of the closure of 27 pit's was only a vehicle to create a conflict between them. A conflict the miners didn't want, the Northeast NUM voted against strike, and Nottingham refused to be bullied out of work by a firebrand like Scargill. Maintaining that they would only abide by a 'National Ballot', which was the law at the time.

 

Only Nottingham stood up against their crazy President, but Scargill got his war, and he lost. Instead of 'Negotiating' as you said, even if it meant losing the 27 pits in the mysterious document, he brought the whole industry down. And along with it, a lot of good men and their families. And for what, to see if he was tougher than Thatcher, which he wasn't. Well, was it worth it?

 

I have a different balanced opinion than you, in my opinion Scargill never really cared about the miners, what he really cared about was beating Thatcher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your balanced opinion Sym, I do agree with you that the NUM were always willing to negotiate when uneconomical pits were earmarked for closure. However, that was only ever their attitude under Joe Gormley. Under Scargill there was never any chance of sensible negotiations. Thatcher and Scargill went to war with each other, a war that they had both hoped would come, and it did because thatcher set a trap, and scargill took the bait.

 

The issue of the closure of 27 pit's was only a vehicle to create a conflict between them. A conflict the miners didn't want, the Northeast NUM voted against strike, and Nottingham refused to be bullied out of work by a firebrand like Scargill. Maintaining that they would only abide by a 'National Ballot', which was the law at the time.

 

Only Nottingham stood up against their crazy President, but Scargill got his war, and he lost. Instead of 'Negotiating' as you said, even if it meant losing the 27 pits in the mysterious document, he brought the whole industry down. And along with it, a lot of good men and their families. And for what, to see if he was tougher than Thatcher, which he wasn't. Well, was it worth it?

 

I have a different balanced opinion than you, in my opinion Scargill never really cared about the miners, what he really cared about was beating Thatcher.

Scargill was stupid and if he had given the members a national ballot he most likely would have gotten all the lads behind him as Joe Gormley did in 1981, but he chose to go up against thatcher without the support of his members, something which no trade union leader should ever do.

Joe Gormley was the NUM's best leader of the NUM by the accounts of Ex Miners I have spoken to and he himself admitted it was wrong of him to stay as leader till 1982 and let Scargill take over, He said he should have retired earlier and not let Scargill become President.

I can't remember the name of the bloke Joe Gormley did not want to become President of the NUM which is why he stayed on as President, you may be able to remember Willy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct Adam, all it would have taken would have been a 'National Ballot'.

 

And of course a sensible negotiator, which rules Arthur Scargill out.

 

I don't know who Gormley preferred as his successor, but with a little research it shouldn't be hard to find out. However, it doesn't really matter now as it's all in the past anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Willy, I don't hold a torch for Scargs and his naive battle tactics,  however, I do take a position on the much wider strategic views of both sides.  This position has been recently reinforced by the National Archive's publication of a whole raft of documents petaining to the dispute.  There was a concerted effort to dismantle the coal industry  whose deep mines couldn't compete economically with the huge glut of cheaper open-cast stuff from abroad, or even the deep mined stuff from overseas where cheap labour costs created an unfair advantage.  So Thatch and her vile henchmen (see, I just can't resist loading the arguement with a derogatory term) saw the economic excuse to pare down the industry;  oh, and a glorious by product for them was some payback on the NUM.

 

The NUM, and Scargs in particular, have been demonised over the years for CAUSING the destruction of the mining industry when the truth is much more complicated.  Yep, Scargs was stupid or blinkered in employing some of his methods but history has shown that the fate of the mining industry here was probably doomed even before the dispute began and can't all be laid at his door. Hardly suprising when most of the 100 + year old pits were coming to the end of their productive lives.  Some of the participants in the dispute on the workforce side have more blood on their hands than others:  NACODS and that Quisling UDM group of miners in Notts.

 

So who won?  It certainly wasn't the small mining communities up and down Blighty, now blighted ghost towns.  It certainly wasn't the industry crying-out for more modernisation and the resultant long-term  benefits that might bring.  It certainly wasn't the tens of thousands of pitmen who got a right royal stiffing,  No, the only winners were the coal importers and their City backers.  Heck, lets just call it globalisation, applaud and attempt to apportation all the blame on Scargs.

Edited by Symptoms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a reason why our deep mines couldn't compete with foreign coal though Symp. Most countries subsidised their coal industries on a grand scale, at the time of the strike Germany was subsidising their industry to the tune of £20 per ton. We all knew there was no way we could compete with that.

 

The product that was imported from farther afield, ie; South Africa, South America and Australia was much inferior to ours, but the price was king. Their coal was very dirty and high in ash content, the anthracite from SA was a million miles away from the anthracite produced in Wales for quality. But unfortunately, there was a concerted effort by the government, not so much to dismantle the coal industry, but to dismantle the NUM.

 

The only thing that was wrong with the deep mining industry was that it was seriously in need of modernising and streamlining to bring it into the 20th century and make it fit for purpose. But to compete with other countries, who were subsidising their coal industries, would have needed to be addressed. But the Tories were never going to support a 'working class' nationalised industry who had destroyed them once before.

 

Unfortunately something got in the way, and the Tories had planned for it ever since 1974, when the NUM brought down their Edward Heath Government. They were determined this would never happen again, and in Thatcher they had the perfect champion. Like her or not, she had more balls than the rest of the Tory party put together. They knew that with a firebrand like Scargill, this was their chance, and they took it.

 

It was never about dismantling the coal industry, that was only a bi-product, it was about dismantling the power of the NUM. And as far as Scargill is concerned, it was never about miners jobs, it was about beating Thatcher.

 

Your final question was 'who won'. Well, no one won, the miners lost their lively-hoods, and the country lost a vital energy recourse that to this day we have never recovered from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thinks... am I mistaken - but during 'the strike' did he not buy a new house and kept it quiet when folk couldn't feed their families??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I Heard that as well, Pilgrim.

"It was never about dismantling the coal industry, that was only a bi-Product, it was about dismantling the Power of the NUM. And as far as Scargill is concerned, it was never about miners jobs, it was about beating Thatcher".

Well said, Willy.J. There you have it in a nut-Shell!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well said Bedlingtonian - although would be a brave man to say that in the times - Scargill tried at Orgreave and wanted vengeance and used the NUM as a tool for his ego -- I think the man was summed up in the television clip of the time when he was arrested... I had a mate who was a 'heavy' on the first strike started by Scargill and he would have nowt to do with him after that.... anyway -- it seems he has been screwing the NUM to pay for his London accommodation for many years to the point where they have had to take him to court!! now that is  solidarity!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My past family suffered hardship as colliery workers. It is well documented that Scargill accelerated the demise of the coal mining industry because he refused to hold a national ballot, used illegal 'flying pickets' instead. Started a national 'energy' strike in the summer.  £1 million of hardship funds was hidden and never used for striking miners family's. The NUM continued to pay £34,000 annual rent on his London flat. Absolutely shocking to misrepresent and abuse hard working colliery workers.

Please read the facts......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Scargill

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/11/2014 at 16:05, willy j. said:

GGG have you read the letter in the News Post Leader this week, if not I've attached it. This guy certainly puts the wonderfully misinformed Mr.  Campbell in his place. Best letter I've read in the News Post Labour.....OOPS I meant Leader, in a long time. He certainly knows his subject, and has crammed it full of genuine facts. Not like the 'Earl of Battenburg', Mr Campbell. sorry I couldn't resist that one,

 

Just goes to show though that the good people of Blyth have been represented by a doughnut for these past 27 years. Anyway, I think this letter puts him right where he belongs, in a wilderness with likeminded lying, ignorant, misinformed politicians.

post-3022-0-97527100-1417273524_thumb.jp

Gosh, it's 10 years since I wrote that letter to the NPL. Since then Blyth has descended further, the town centre is a wasteland and public transport awful.

I live in Switzerland, in Thun (pronounced Toon, so somethings still sound familar) and from the airport to my Mum's via Metro and bus can take over 2.5 hours. 8 miles in a straight line!

I still think Ronnie has done better out of Westminister than Blyth Valley has. Apparently, he will retire soon, watch out for a Corbynite/Momentum replacement.

All the best to Bedlington, I have some good memories from there.

Alan

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...