About you
3. What is your name?
Name
James Reid
Questions on the Bill
9. What are your views on Section 1 of the Bill, which limits the pardon to picketing or demonstration and connected travel?
Please provide your response in the box provided.
I think it could/should go further. There are a number verified instances where miners were accused of assaulting police when, in fact, it was the other way round. Miners should be given the benefit of the doubt where they claim to have been 'fitted up' and found guilty of spurious charges.
10. What are your views on Section 2 of the Bill, which details the range of offences which are covered by the pardon?
Please provide your response in the box provided.
See above.
11. Do you think previous or subsequent convictions should disqualify a miner from receiving a pardon?
Please provide your response in the box provided.
The bill considers a specific period of time and in particular circumstances. Convictions before or after the strike are irrelevant.
12. Please share any other comments you have regarding the Bill
Please provide your response in the box provided.
The bill itself doesn't tell the story of why this investigation took place in the first place and why the pardons are considered fair and necessary. It may be that a preamble is intended, but I see nothing that gives that impression. My view is that the bill should include a preamble giving the background to the miners' strike action to defend their jobs, their families and their communities against the actions of the government which no one can doubt was overtly political. It may be too much to ask but I believe the fact that the Police and sections of the the Armed Forces were used as a political tool by the Government also deserves a mention.