UK will hold inquiry into violent Orgeave clash between police and miners during bitter 1984 strike
Some 120 miners and police were hurt when officers clashed with miners trying to stop trucks entering the Orgreave Coking Plant in northern England on June 18, 1984. It came three months into a nationwide strike over plans to close two dozen coal pits and lay of 20,000 miners.
The bitter dispute between the National Union of Mineworkers and the government was a decisive moment in Thatcher's bid to break the power of trade unions and remake the U.K. economy along free-market lines. The strike ended in defeat for the miners after a year and hastened the end of British coal mining, which employed 180,000 people at the start of the strike. Today, no coal mines remain.
Campaigners have long called for an inquiry into why police from across the country were sent to Orgreave and what their orders were. Images of mounted police in riot gear charging stone-throwing miners with truncheons and dogs shocked and divided the nation.
Some 95 picketers were arrested and charged with riot and violent disorder, but all charges were later dropped after evidence from the police was discredited.
The Home Office said the inquiry will be led by Pete Wilcox, the bishop of Sheffield, and start in the fall. It will have the power to compel witnesses to testify under oath.
Kate Flannery, secretary of the Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign, said the announcement of an inquiry was 'really positive news.' She said it must be given 'unrestricted access to all relevant information including government, police and media documents, photos and films.'
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the events at Orgreave 'cast a shadow over communities in Yorkshire and other mining areas.
'The violent scenes and subsequent prosecutions raised concerns that have been left unanswered for decades, and we must now establish what happened,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Republicans, Democrats alike exhort Trump: Keep security pact with Australia and UK alive
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. lawmakers from both parties are urging the Trump administration to maintain a three-way security partnership designed to supply Australia with nuclear-powered submarines — a plea that comes as the Pentagon reviews the agreement and considers the questions it has raised about the American industrial infrastructure's shipbuilding capabilities. Two weeks ago, the Defense Department announced it would review AUKUS, the 4-year-old pact signed by the Biden administration with Australia and the United Kingdom. The announcement means the Republican administration is looking closely at a partnership that many believe is critical to the U.S. strategy to push back China's influence in the Indo-Pacific. The review is expected to be completed in the fall. 'AUKUS is essential to strengthening deterrence in the Indo-Pacific and advancing the undersea capabilities that will be central to ensuring peace and stability," Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan and Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois wrote in a July 22 letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Moolenaar chairs the House panel on China and Krishnamoorthi is its top Democrat. The review comes as the Trump administration works to rebalance its global security concerns while struggling with a hollowed-out industrial base that has hamstrung U.S. capabilities to build enough warships. The review is being led by Elbridge Colby, the No. 3 Pentagon official, who has expressed skepticism about the partnership. 'If we can produce the attack submarines in sufficient number and sufficient speed, then great. But if we can't, that becomes a very difficult problem," Colby said during his confirmation hearing in March. 'This is getting back to restoring our defense industrial capacity so that we don't have to face these awful choices but rather can be in a position where we can produce not only for ourselves, but for our allies." US cannot build enough ships As part of the $269 billion AUKUS partnership, the United States will sell three to five Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to Australia, with the first delivery scheduled as soon as 2032. The U.S. and the U.K. would help Australia design and build another three to five attack submarines to form an eight-boat force for Australia. A March report by the Congressional Research Service warned that the lack of U.S. shipbuilding capacities, including workforce shortage and insufficient supply chains, is jeopardizing the much-celebrated partnership. If the U.S. should sell the vessels to Australia, the U.S. Navy would have a shortage of attack submarines for two decades, the report said. The Navy has been ordering two boats per year in the last decade, but U.S. shipyards have been only producing 1.2 Virginia-class subs a year since 2022, the report said. 'The delivery pace is not where it needs to be" to make good on the first pillar of AUKUS, Admiral Daryl Caudle, nominee for the Chief of Naval Operations, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last month. Australia has invested $1 billion in the U.S. submarine industrial base, with another $1 billion to be paid before the end of this year. It has agreed to contribute a total of $3 billion to uplift the U.S. submarine base, and it has sent both industry personnel to train at U.S. shipyards and naval personnel for submarine training in the United States. "Australia was clear that we would make a proportionate contribution to the United States industrial base,' an Australian defense spokesperson said in July. 'Australia's contribution is about accelerating U.S. production rates and maintenance to enable the delivery of Australia's future Virginia-class submarines.' The three nations have also jointly tested communication capabilities with underwater autonomous systems, Australia's defense ministry said on July 23. Per the partnership, the countries will co-develop other advanced technologies, from undersea to hypersonic capabilities. At the recent Aspen Security Forum, Kevin Rudd, the Australian ambassador to the United States, said his country is committed to increasing defense spending to support its first nuclear-powered sub program, which would also provide 'massively expensive full maintenance repair facilities" for the U.S. Indo-Pacific fleet based in Western Australia. Rudd expressed confidence that the two governments 'will work our way through this stuff.' AUKUS called 'crucial to American deterrence' Bruce Jones, senior fellow with the Strobe Talbott Center for Security, Strategy and Technology, told The Associated Press that the partnership, by positioning subs in Western Australia, is helping arm the undersea space that is 'really crucial to American deterrence and defense options in the Western Pacific.' 'The right answer is not to be content with the current pace of submarine building. It's to increase the pace," Jones said. Jennifer Parker, who has served more than 20 years with the Royal Australian Navy and founded Barrier Strategic Advisory, said it should not be a zero-sum game. 'You might sell one submarine to Australia, so you have one less submarine on paper. But in terms of the access, you have the theater of choice from operating from Australia, from being able to maintain your submarines from Australia," Parker said. 'This is not a deal that just benefits Australia." Defense policy is one of the few areas where Republican lawmakers have pushed back against the Trump administration, but their resolve is being tested with the Pentagon's review of AUKUS. So far, they have joined their Democratic colleagues in voicing support for the partnership. They said the U.S. submarine industry is rebounding with congressional appropriations totaling $10 billion since 2018 to ensure the U.S. will have enough ships to allow for sales to Australia. "There is a little bit of mystification about the analysis done at the Pentagon,' Kaine said, adding that 'maybe (what) the analysis will say is: We believe this is a good thing.'
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Olympic gold medalist ski jumpers charged in ‘equipment manipulation' cheating scandal at world championships
OBERHOFEN, Switzerland — Two Olympic gold medalist ski jumpers and three staffers on the powerful Norway men's team were charged with ethics violations Monday after an investigation into alleged tampering with ski suits at the world championships. The International Ski and Snowboard Federation said star ski jumpers Marius Lindvik and Johann André Forfang, two coaches and a member of the service staff were formally charged as part of an investigation into 'equipment manipulation' at the Nordic worlds Norway hosted in March. Illegally modified suits can help athletes fly further with more aerodynamic resistance. Advertisement 4 Norwegian ski jumpers Johann Andre Forfang (left) and Marius Lindvik (right) were charged with an ethics violation along with three staffers on the men's team over alleged 'equipment manipulation' at the world championships. AP Photo/Matthias Schrader, File The allegations — backed by video footage and quick confessions by team officials — shook the tight-knit communities of ski jumping and Norwegian sports when they emerged on the final weekend in Trondheim. No timetable was given for hearings or verdicts in a case that intensifies less than six months before the next Winter Olympics open in northern Italy. Advertisement Bans, fines and disqualification of results are on the slate of punishments open to the FIS Ethics Committee, the governing body said in a statement. Lindvik's gold medal in the men's normal hill event at the worlds held in Trondheim, plus Norway's bronze in the men's team event on the large hill are clearly at risk. FIS said the investigation conducted 38 witness interviews and examined 88 pieces of evidence, and that no one else will be charged in the case. 4 Forfang performing a jump at the Nordic World Ski Championships in Trondheim, Norway on March 2, 2025. AP Photo/Matthias Schrader, File Advertisement Lindvik and Forfang, who both were in the team that took bronze, denied involvement in March though were disqualified from the individual large hill event and suspended by FIS for the rest of the season. Their charges were signed off by the FIS ruling council, the governing body said. The 27-year-old Lindvik has been expected to defend his Olympic title next year in the men's large hill event at the Milan-Cortina d'Ampezzo Winter Games. Forfang, now 30, took team gold on the large hill and individual silver on the normal hill at the 2018 Olympics held in South Korea. Admissions of guilt were made in March by head coach Magnus Brevik and equipment manager Adrian Livelten, who said suits were altered only before the men's large hill event. 4 The Norwegian team allegedly tampered with ski suits worn at the Nordic World Ski Championships in March this year. AP Advertisement 'We regret it like dogs, and I'm terribly sorry that this happened,' Brevik said at the time. A third team staffer, Thomas Lobben, also is now charged. The manipulation was to increase the size of suits pre-approved and microchipped by FIS, and was captured on secretly filmed footage. It led to formal protests from the Austria, Slovenia and Poland teams. The alterations could be confirmed only by tearing apart the seams of the crotch area on the Norwegian ski suits. 4 Norway's Daniel Andre Tande, Andreas Stjernen, Robert Johansson and Johann Andre Forfang (left to right) celebrate after winning the gold medal in the men's large hill team ski jumping competition at the 2018 Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang, South Korea on Feb. 19, 2018. AP Photo/Matthias Schrader, File The case will be judged by three members of the ethics panel which must reach verdicts 'no later than 30 days after the hearing process is concluded,' FIS said. FIS has already tightened up its rules on ski jump suits, something which caused a spate of disqualifications when athletes gathered for the first competition of the new season Saturday. FIS said that was down to technical issues and it didn't suspect 'ill intent.'
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
US and China extend trade truce another 90 days, easing tension between world's largest economies
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump extended a trade truce with China for another 90 days Monday, at least delaying once again a dangerous showdown between the world's two biggest economies. Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he signed the executive order for the extension, and that 'all other elements of the Agreement will remain the same.' Beijing at the same time also announced the extension of the tariff pause via the official news agency Xinhua. The previous deadline was set to expire at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday. Had that happened the U.S. could have ratcheted up taxes on Chinese imports from an already high 30%, and Beijing could have responded by raising retaliatory levies on U.S. exports to China. The pause buys time for the two countries to work out some of their differences, perhaps clearing the way for a summit later this year between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, and it has been welcomed by the U.S. companies doing business with China. Sean Stein, president of the U.S.-China Business Council, said the extension is 'critical' to give the two governments time to negotiate a trade agreement that U.S. businesses hope would improve their market access in China and provide the certainty needed for companies to make medium- and long-term plans. 'Securing an agreement on fentanyl that leads to a reduction in U.S. tariffs and a rollback of China's retaliatory measures is acutely needed to restart U.S. agriculture and energy exports,' Stein said. Reaching a pact with China remains unfinished business for Trump, who has already upended the global trading system by slapping double-digit taxes – tariffs – on almost every country on earth. The European Union, Japan and other trading partners agreed to lopsided trade deals with Trump, accepting once unthinkably U.S. high tariffs (15% on Japanese and EU imports, for instance) to ward off something worse. Trump's trade policies have turned the United States from one of the most open economies in the world into a protectionist fortress. The average U.S. tariff has gone from around 2.5% at the start of the year to 18.6%, highest since 1933, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University. But China tested the limits of a U.S. trade policy built around using tariffs as a cudgel to beat concessions out of trading partners. Beijing had a cudgel of its own: cutting off or slowing access to its rare earths minerals and magnets – used in everything from electric vehicles to jet engines. In June, the two countries reached an agreement to ease tensions. The United States said it would pull back export restrictions on computer chip technology and ethane, a feedstock in petrochemical production. And China agreed to make it easier for U.S. firms to get access to rare earths. 'The U.S. has realized it does not have the upper hand,'' said Claire Reade, senior counsel at Arnold & Porter and former assistant U.S. trade representative for China affairs. In May, the U.S. and China had averted an economic catastrophe by reducing massive tariffs they'd slapped on each other's products, which had reached as high as 145% against China and 125% against the U.S. Those triple-digit tariffs threatened to effectively end trade between the United States and China and caused a frightening sell-off in financial markets. In a May meeting in Geneva they agreed to back off and keep talking: America's tariffs went back down to a still-high 30% and China's to 10%. Having demonstrated their ability to hurt each other, they've been talking ever since. 'By overestimating the ability of steep tariffs to induce economic concessions from China, the Trump administration has not only underscored the limits of unilateral U.S. leverage, but also given Beijing grounds for believing that it can indefinitely enjoy the upper hand in subsequent talks with Washington by threatening to curtail rare earth exports,' said Ali Wyne, a specialist in U.S.-China relations at the International Crisis Group. 'The administration's desire for a trade détente stems from the self-inflicted consequences of its earlier hubris.' It's unclear whether Washington and Beijing can reach a grand bargain over America's biggest grievances. Among these are lax Chinese protection of intellectual property rights and Beijing's subsidies and other industrial policies that, the Americans say, give Chinese firms an unfair advantage in world markets and have contributed to a massive U.S. trade deficit with China of $262 billion last year. Reade doesn't expect much beyond limited agreements such as the Chinese saying they will buy more American soybeans and promising to do more to stop the flow of chemicals used to make fentanyl and to allow the continued flow of rare-earth magnets. But the tougher issues will likely linger, and 'the trade war will continue grinding ahead for years into the future,'' said Jeff Moon, a former U.S. diplomat and trade official who now runs the China Moon Strategies consultancy.
