A coalition in 1997?

I'm new here, so apologies if this has been done to death before - I did a search but nothing came up.

I've been reading some of the threads about an alt-2010 UK general election and it got me thinking about the 1997 one, specifically the idea that Tony Blair and Paddy Ashdown were keen on the idea of a Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition, but the sheer size of the Labour majority made it impossible. So, what changes and what PoD would be needed to make it happen?

My first thought was something around John Smith living, but IMO, that wouldn't have made much of a difference. The Tories were in trouble whoever the Labour leader happened to be, and I don't think Smith was into the 'realigning the left' idea as much as Blair anyway, so it would require a quite major change and Labour missing out on an overall majority to bring about a coalition.

So, can we make any changes to the Tories to make them more popular? Is there any way to change the leadership election in 1995 to get someone who'll be more popular than Major in place? Is there a plausible scenario whereby Portillo, Heseltine or AN Other can either defeat Major or profit in a contest after Redwood or someone else has forced him out? Perhaps a scenario where Portillo does stand against Major, it's a stalemate between the two of them and a unity candidate (though I'm not quite sure who could have unified the Tories at that point in time) comes through. He or she is moderately successful as a new face, Blair only gets a small majority and invites Ashdown aboard 'for stability' (and to scupper the Labour left, of course)

Even supposing we got to that situation, could Ashdown have brought his party along with him? There was a different mood towards the Labour party in the Lib Dems then, but was there enough for a deal? Of course, with a somewhat less battered Tory vote, Paddy might only be leading 25-35 MPs, not 46.

So, given all those hurdles, would it have been possible without ASB involvement, or was it destined to remain a pipe dream?
 

AndyC

Donor
Might link in with the "Save Tory Scotland" AHC.

Have Major hand in his resignation note over Black Wednesday (which, IIRC, he actually wrote) and take the heat away. Malcolm Rifkind as a compromise candidate would probably work - he's a good speaker, not too ideological either way on Europe (I believe), and a committed One Nation Tory.

As a new leader, he'd have more flex on Maastricht (Major considered himself bound by what he'd negotiated in good faith), so you could probably come up with a strategy to avoid the split on Maastricht - that would be one of the key killers avoided, if you could do it plausibly.

Instead of Major's "Back to Basics", have a Rifkind "One Nation" theme. The media would be a little less hostile - having got the scalp of Major as scapegoat, they'd be a bit mollified; "Back to Basics" wouldn't be a red rag to a bull, and if you can avoid the split party theme, you should minimise the meltdown (and have the Tories hold a number of Scottish seats due to the fact they've got a Scottish leader).

Would still be arguable if the Labour win would be small enough to get away with the Coalition. Maybe have Prescott lose his seat for some reason. If nothing else, it would be worth a laugh :) .
 
Sorry, missed the responses, but thanks for the ideas - the idea of Rifkind as PM is an interesting one, and a change round Black Wednesday makes sense. I was toying with the idea of him as a compromise candidate after Major forcing a challenge in 1995, but by that point the Tories were so low in the polls that I could see the safety of his seat being a weak point for him. Especially when compared to something as safe as, say, Enfield Southgate :)

Interesting points to mull over, and if the PoD comes in 1992, then there's the possibility of some interesting butterflies around when/if Smith dies. As for Prescott, it's always possible that the Punch comes 4 years earlier, when he might not get away with it so easily.
 
Variety of options but they all come down to reducing the Labour majority considerably (or even resulting in a hung parliament). They appear to be at least one of, or a mix of, the following PODs:

1. Have Smith live. Personally, Labour still win and win big so may need other PODs (leaving Smith in sort of breaks your 'Blair-Ashdown' requirement and you've touched upon it already).
2. Have Smith die, but Brown takes over (or anyone else)
3. Major is replaced by any other serious contender in 1995 except maybe Redwood.
4. Have a 1996 election
 
I've been pondering an idea like this. I wrote a draft list of prime ministers, chancellors etc.

In my idea, John Smith doesnt die, he merely steps down from politics due to ill health. This leads to Blair failing to completely galvanise/unify the Labour party under the new Labour banner. Thus they only achieve a minor majority. In an effort to keep the tories out (particularly if around the time of the 2000 fuel protests) they pass (with or without referendum) a switch from FPTP to some form of proportional representaiton.

This leads to a Lib dem/Labour coallition in 2001. Which doesn't make things easy when Blair tries to push an invasion of Iraq through parliament.

*And breathe*

I could possibly see a coallition in 1997, if so you'd see electoral reform (it was in the Labour manifesto, and Ed Milliband stated the main reason it didn't go through was due to them getting the landslide).
 
Last edited:
Obviously when trying to butterfly away Labour's 1997 landslide people do try and come up with ways of avoiding Black Wednesday. Certainly if perhaps Major goes for an ERM realignment in the aftermath of the GE then with his political capital so high he could have portrayed it as being necessary to reduce interest rates and give impetus to the economy. Also it would have quelled the eurosceptics as IOTL they felt Black Wednesday had vindicated their position, take that away and perhaps the passage of the Maastricht Bill isn't as fraught with all the associated negative headlines. The press also turned on the Government after Black Wednesday, without that they would stay sympathetic and perhaps the various sleaze stories don't gain as much traction.

But even if you avoid all that there's still 2 huge landmines waiting. IIRC the Tories did take a polling hit from Black Wednesday but during the winter of 1992/93 they did begin to recover and with an improving economy they may well have continued that trend. But in the 1993 Budget, the Tories broke an election promise and imposed VAT on fuel and that was when their poll ratings went off a cliff and never recovered. So you need to find some way of filling the hole in the budget without breaking that promise. The second landmine is the BSE Crisis, in itself that could have turned public opinion strongly against the government but IOTL people were already fed up with the Tories and it just added to the prevailing sense of anger and disillusionment.

Anyone of these 3 issues in themselves would probably result in a heavy Tory defeat in 1997, the fact that they all happened together resulted in a record breaking landslide. To change the outcome so that Labour are so dependent on the LD's, either in coalition or confidence and supply that they implement PR probably means you have to butterfly all three away or have Labour less electorally attractive. Even then the Prescott wing of Labour is going to be opposed to PR and will insist on a referendum.
 
Top