"A Very British Transition" - A Post-Junta Britain TL

Chapter 31: Splitters!
1628694283828.png

Transition parties tended to be focused around big personalities rather than policy

“The predominance of leadership is reflected in personalised networks around party leaders. Indeed, a high level of intraparty instability is typical for new parties in a new democracy. This stands in contrast to established democracies, where the number of splits and mergers has generally been limited. Newer democracies tend to see weaker party loyalties and lower party institutionalization. The personalisation of party politics is confounded in newer democracies as parties spring up around established resistance figures. This leads to a great deal of party instability where splits are common. The cost of entry for a new party in young democracies is a lot lower in established democracies.”
- Party formation and adaptation in new democracies, Lecture by Ingrid van Biezen, University of Birmingham (2008)

Britain had all the things a hot new democracy needed, freedom of the press, a representative parliament, a slightly dodgy armed forces and the reek of corruption. But Britain lacked the one thing that made new democracies pop, unstable political parties. The new Britain had gone nearly two years without an old fashioned party split. This was until Sarah Brown entered the stage. Sarah Brown was an SDP MP and the widow of Gordon Brown, a University of Edinburgh Academic who had been accidentally killed by the SNLA in a bombing attack targeting Michael Ancram. The experience had shifted Brown solidly to the right, in 2005 she was elected to Parliament for the Social Democrats and became a loud voice calling for a stronger line against Scottish separatism and a crackdown on terror.

1628694713481.png

Some on the SDP's right believed Johnson had been too soft on SNLA dissidents

Generally liked and respected across the political aisle, Brown would be the perfect figurehead. Brown had been approached by two fellow Scottish women, Ruth Davidson and Joanne Rowling. Davidson was the chair of the Terrorism Victims Defence Assocation (TVDA) a pressure group for the victims of paramilitary violence, Rowling was the bestselling author of the global hit “Harry Potter” books and one of the richest women in Britain. Supporters of National and the Social Democrats respectively, both women had become disillusioned with their parties, Davidson for National’s lack of support for further EU integration, and Rowling due to the Social Democrats soft line of Scottish separatism.

1628694764340.png

Rowling's wealth and personal brand was a formidable asset

In a University of Edinburgh coffee shop on drizzly April morning they made the pitch to Brown: a new centrist, pro-European, unionist and anti-paramilitary political party. Davidson would provide the extra-parliamentary support, Rowling would provide the fundraising and Brown would act as the party’s figurehead. What could possibly go wrong? After some convincing Brown was in, they got to work launching their new party, holding discussions with politicians from both parties. Brown managed to recruit three other MPs and one MEP to sign onto the new party, from the Social Democrats she recruited Vince Cable, another figure from the right of the party and MEP David Aaronovitch. From National she recruited John Bercow and Stephen Dorrell, both ardant pro-European Nationalists. Her greatest prize would have been Shadow Chancellor Nick Clegg, who according to his memoirs “strongly considered defecting” but ultimately “declined but wished Sarah well”.

“After the new party launched, National HQ was in a panic. I had already told Sarah [Brown] no, but Tim [Collins] and William [Hague] saw fit to lock me in a room for several hours until I pinky promised not to defect. If I'm being honest, if Sarah's new party had been remotely plausible I would have jumped ship, but I didn't see the benefit in leaving National to the hardliners. All Reform did was attract moderate party members and MPs away from the established parties, instead they went charging off a cliff ruining their careers. Sarah and the others could've done a lot more good if they'd stayed in their parties making the case for moderate, pro-European liberal politics. The Cardiff Accords system was designed not to benefit new insurgent parties - and for good reason.” - Excerpt from Nick Clegg’s Memoirs“Between the Extremes” (2016)

At the University of Edinburgh, on the four year anniversary of Brown’s death, Brown, Davidson and Rowling unveiling their new party, it was a slick launch, three young women Scots coming together from across different parties to start a new movement, it was a compelling image. The Reform Party was here, initial YouGov projects conducted directly after it’s launch showed the party winning as many as 10 seats. More noticeably, some polls in Scotland showed Reform eclipsing National and the Social Democrats as the party of Scottish Unionism, whilst Scottish loyalists were a minority they were strongly attracted to this new party.

1628694140717.png

The Reform Party hoped to be the main voice of British Unionism

Reform sent alarm bells ringing around both major parties as party leaders and their whips rushed to stem the bleeding. Nick Clegg and David Laws were held in Norman Shaw North for nearly three hours as Collins begged them not to jump ship. Over in Downing Street, Chief Whip Hilary Benn and Comms Director Bron Madson were dispatched to squash this story as quickly as possible. Their mission was as much stopping other factions from “getting ideas” as it was trying to stop direct Reform directions, with party elites fearing if Reform was a success the entire two party system could quickly collapse. Both National and the Social Democrats were big tent parties, filled with people who hated each other and cobbled together with duct tape. The small constituencies agreed under the Cardiff Accords encouraged two party dominance but this could only get them so far. In the days after Reform’s launch no new parties launched and no other MPs jumped ship, the establishment was safe for now but a precedent had been set. In a leaked internal memo to Johnson, Benn warned a “snowball of splits” in the future was a distinct possibility.

“Vertical organisation is necessary for voters as they seek to find channels to represent their interests. It shows the instability of linkages among members, voters and parties in new democracies. Such weak party institutionalisation might worsen political institutionalisation in new democracies. In most new democracies, party politics was established overnight and thus they have not experienced spontaneous party evolution. Thus, the unstable organisational changes have a tendency only to make parties a tag for MPs to take part in elections. Split and merger of MPs without partisan support can damage the functionality of parties. Political institutionalisation can only be achieved when parties maintain party stability.” - Party Mergers and Splits in New Democracies, Kyungmee Park, Cambridge University Press (2013)

1628694583288.png

Brown had shaken Britain's fragile party system, but it remained standing
 
Last edited:
How did people in Britain and elsewhere comment on George Orwell's most famous work during its namesake year?
I'm guessing you mean 1984? It was banned by the censors but obviously had been in strong circulation for years before the Junta showed up. Some marches were organised during 1984 but the political impact of the date was relatively limited, Britain had just won the Falkands War so the Junta was relatively popular.
 
Chapter 32: The Boys in Blue
1628782305376.png

Theresa May's stock had fallen somewhat in Collins' inner circle

“Theresa May today rallied National to prepare for an election, declaring the party is "hungry for victory". With National trailing in the polls, May used her address to urge delegates to show "confidence" ahead of a possible snap election. The Deputy Leader took the stage to declare the party was "ready" for the battle to govern the country. Mrs May said: "The circumstances of this conference mean it may be one of the most crucial of our times. The willingness of our country to vote for change depends on our ability to show that we are ready to fight back, to win, and to govern." This morning Shadow Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke told the BBC's Peter Snow that Alan Johnson should seek a fresh mandate. "It is the interest of the country to have an early election," said Mr Clarke.”
- National ready for election, says May, Hélène Mulholland, The Guardian (2007)

National’s backbenchers weren’t happy, now National’s backbenchers are rarely happy, the further back you go the less happy they usually are. The party had been through a lot in the last few months. The referendum had split the party, with nearly a third of it’s MPs running off with Kilroy-Silk and the No Campaign, who had subsequently been crushed. Collins had taken this opportunity to try and detoxify his party, Kilroyites who came crawling back after the referendum had found their Shadow Cabinet jobs filled by Collins loyalists, with senior figures like David Bannerman, Chris Grayling and even old Kilroy himself cast to the backbenches to grumble and scheme.

Tim Collins Shadow Cabinet 2007-
  • Leader of the Opposition - Tim Collins
  • Deputy Leader of the Opposition - Theresa May
  • Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer - Nick Clegg
  • Shadow Foreign Secretary - David Davis
  • Shadow Justice Secretary - Kenneth Clarke
  • Shadow Defence Secretary - Vacant (Non-Political)
  • Shadow Home Secretary - Ian Blair
  • Development Secretary - David Willetts
  • Shadow Education Secretary - Liam Fox
  • Shadow Industry, Tourism and Trade Secretary - David Laws
  • Shadow Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Secretary - Caroline Spelman
  • Shadow Public Administrations Secretary - Nicholas Soames
  • Shadow Culture Secretary - Oliver Letwin
  • Shadow Health Secretary - Mark Oaten
  • Shadow Environment Secretary - David Richards
  • Shadow Housing Secretary - Malcolm Pearson
1628782485309.png

The balance of power in the Shadow Cabinet had shifted after the referendum, with reformists like David Willetts replacing hardliners like Kilroy

National’s following victories in the European Elections and gentle uptick in the opinion polls seemed to vindicate Collins’ strategy as the prospect of returning to power drew ever nearer. This wasn’t to say all was well within the National camp, whilst Collins wasn’t a raging hardliner, he wasn’t a reformist either, frequently clashing with his more liberal colleagues, especially Shadow Chancellor Nick Clegg. Collins increasingly began to rely on his inner circle of allies, including Deputy Theresa May, Shadow Foreign Secretary David Davis and Shadow Home Secretary Ian Blair. There was one figure in particular however who became invaluable to Collins and that was his Chief Whip William Hague.

“An exponent of the almost lost art of Parliamentary wit, Mr Hague is an accomplished public speaker. He is one of the few speakers in modern politics that journalists and other politicians can listen to expecting a few good jokes. But his bruising experience as Industry Secretary from 1996 to 2002 added a sense of gravitas to his public persona. His modest background has provided a valuable counterpoint to the public school backgrounds of much of National's top team. William Jefferson Hague was born in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, on 26 March 1961. His parents ran a soft drinks company - Hague's Dandelion and Burdock and Lemonade were two local favourites. The young Hague used to help out with deliveries to shops and pubs during university holidays.” - Profile William Hague, BBC News Bulletin (2007)

1628782208935.png

Hague was mirroring Ted Heath's meteoric rise via the whip's office

In the name of party unity, Chief Whip Hague was excused from Collins’ three-line whip enforcement for National MPs to vote Yes, Hague’s referendum vote remained a mystery. This allowed him to deftly cross the tearooms and smoking balconies of Westminster, quelling rebellions and defections wherever they arose. Hague had become invaluable. Hague’s star only rose with the formation of the Reform Party, whilst he couldn’t stop two National MPs jumping on ship, as many as a dozen National MPs had considered defection with Hague credited with keeping them inside the tent. Collin’s project of detoxifying the party couldn’t have been done without Hague’s support.

Collin’s reforms would be put to the test when Nigel Hastilow, the National Party’s chairman gave an interview to the Telegraph where he defended Michael Hanley, the brutal head of the Security Services from 1968 to 1980 who had overseen crackdowns against separatists, leftist and other undesirables during his time in power. Creating institutions such as the Civil Guard who were now being disbanded for human rights violations. Hanley had become a hate figure for democracy campaigners and somewhat of a hero amongst reactionary Mountbattenites. Hastilow’s comments couldn’t have come at a worse time, with Reform just out the gate, National’s leaders worried the party’s right would follow suit, creating their own splinter party or joining the NNP, yet not acting against Hastilow would ruin all of Collins’ hard work detoxifying the party. A show of strength was needed in order to quash dissent and drag the hardliners back to heel. Collins announced Hastilow would have the whip removed and be expelled from the party.

It was a risky move but it appeared to pay off, the backbenches were silent, no one wanting to follow Hastilow into the great unknown. Whilst there had been grumblings on National’s right there was no clear plan for a new party, or a clear leader with Kilroy-Silk’s star faded. Collins acted swiftly and ruthlessly to quash Hastilow, keeping his backbenchers off-guard and the political momentum on his side. Whilst the incident led to a small dip in National’s polling, a protracted fight would’ve been much worse for National’s electoral prospects. For the second time in a few short weeks National had been shaken, but it had survived. Maybe the big tent wasn’t so fragile after all.

“Last week Tim Collins removed the whip from party chair Nigel Hastilow. Our polling elsewhere found public support for Hasitlow's removal but what of the effect on perceptions of party unity? During the referendum National was divided over Europe. There is the risk that expulsions such as these will once again lead to perceptions of National as a divided party. The week following the scandal, we asked whether people saw National and the SDP as united or divided. 60% of people now see the National party as divided, compared to 22% who see them as united. This is the most divided the National party has been since YouGov started asking the question. Down from a peak in 2005 when 52% saw the party as united.”
- Parties Divided, Anthony Wells, YouGov (2007)

1628782406249.png

Collins had kept his party together for now
 
Don't think you can quite line up Rowling still having her books and being a billionaire in this same scenario, surely? Given the state of the economy, is it at all likely she'd be able to get a publishing deal? And that's leaving aside the rather random nature by which she came upon the idea of Harry Potter (daydreaming on a train).
 
Don't think you can quite line up Rowling still having her books and being a billionaire in this same scenario, surely? Given the state of the economy, is it at all likely she'd be able to get a publishing deal? And that's leaving aside the rather random nature by which she came upon the idea of Harry Potter (daydreaming on a train).
This is fair but also since the British arts sector is a lot less weaker due to censorship and established writers fleeing abroad, she would face much less competition for publishing deals. Of course the coup could butterfly her daydream away but there's no way to know for sure.
 
It is also worth noting that Rowling was a single parent at the time. She divorced her abusive partner in Portugual soon after the birth of her daughter. I can't imagine this Junta would be happy to let a single parent and divorcee accumulate such wealth. Unless things turn out differently in this tl.
 
It is also worth noting that Rowling was a single parent at the time. She divorced her abusive partner in Portugual soon after the birth of her daughter. I can't imagine this Junta would be happy to let a single parent and divorcee accumulate such wealth. Unless things turn out differently in this tl.
Would see move back to the UK at all then during the Junta years? Seems like a lot less to go back to.
 
It is also worth noting that Rowling was a single parent at the time. She divorced her abusive partner in Portugual soon after the birth of her daughter. I can't imagine this Junta would be happy to let a single parent and divorcee accumulate such wealth. Unless things turn out differently in this tl.
Would see move back to the UK at all then during the Junta years? Seems like a lot less to go back to.
Junta Britain isn't Francoist Spain, whilst its more conservative than OTL Britain, things like divorce and abortion are still legal. Rowling's divorce came well into the 90s where the Junta was liberalising. In fact Rowling's writing of Harry Potter would come at a perfect time for the Junta as it was trying to liberalise it's image abroad, a young Scottish single mother writing a wildly successful (relatively non-political) cultural export.

As for returning to Britain I don't she'd have much choice, I doubt she'd want remain in Portugal with her abusive husband. You also have to remember Britain isn't in the EU at this point so she'd have no right to stay in Portugal without Portuguese citizenship.
 
Junta Britain isn't Francoist Spain, whilst its more conservative than OTL Britain, things like divorce and abortion are still legal. Rowling's divorce came well into the 90s where the Junta was liberalising. In fact Rowling's writing of Harry Potter would come at a perfect time for the Junta as it was trying to liberalise it's image abroad, a young Scottish single mother writing a wildly successful (relatively non-political) cultural export.
There's going to be at least some differences in the plot, though (even if only related to the Muggle world).

I bet the Dursleys are massive National supporters, for one.
 
Does McDonald's exist within this TL, and is fast food as popular as in OTL?
McDonalds does exist, it came to Britain in the 90s rather than the 70s, it's less popular due to the brand being less established and Brits having less disposal income but it's skyrocketing as living standards improve.
 
Was the junta ever seriously affected by any sort of interservice rivalry?
As in did the Army and RAF ever seriously resent the fact that the country was run by naval officers?

All nations armed forces have a degree of interservice rivalry to a greater or lesser extent. In Britain this is never anything more than a bit of friendly banter with the exceptions being emotions and tempers running high on budget allocation day and outright violence at the annual Army v Navy rugby match at Twickenham.

However it is fairly common within military dictatorships for the different services to distrust or even actually fight each other as they attempt to gain or hold onto power. For example in Japan in the 1940s and Argentina during the Falklands.

Also it's already been mentioned that Britain took part in the Iraq War. Did the UK also get involved in Afghanistan?
 
Was the junta ever seriously affected by any sort of interservice rivalry?
As in did the Army and RAF ever seriously resent the fact that the country was run by naval officers?

All nations armed forces have a degree of interservice rivalry to a greater or lesser extent. In Britain this is never anything more than a bit of friendly banter with the exceptions being emotions and tempers running high on budget allocation day and outright violence at the annual Army v Navy rugby match at Twickenham.

However it is fairly common within military dictatorships for the different services to distrust or even actually fight each other as they attempt to gain or hold onto power. For example in Japan in the 1940s and Argentina during the Falklands.

Also it's already been mentioned that Britain took part in the Iraq War. Did the UK also get involved in Afghanistan?
Yes, the navy was clearly dominant of the three branches of the military, receiving extra funds and many of Junta's senior leaders, Mountbatten, Hill-Norton, William Staveley were all navy officers. The army, being fairly irreplaceable with insurgencies across the country, was generally treated well, probably better than OTL. The main losers were the Air Force, as Britain declined globally the Air Force was increasingly sidelined, you couldn't bomb the IRA or SNLA. There was nothing extreme as inner service violence, apart from incredibly rare incidents, but there was generally distrust and political maneuvering.

Yes the UK got involved in Afghanistan, and unlike Iraq British soldiers stayed in Afghanistan after the fall of the Junta.
 
Sorry it's been nearly two weeks since the last update. My works sending us back to the office so now I'm facing the hellscape that is London flat hunting, there will be hopefully be an update today!
 
Last edited:
Chapter 33: Get This Bread
1629904552286.png

The rapid modernisation of Britain's infrastructure also provided plenty of opportunities for money laundering

“Britain provides a compelling case in which to consider the social consequences of corruption. To begin with, it is a new democracy, memories of a turbulent modern history make Brits well equipped to distinguish abuses of power. The devolution of authority to empowered provinces became a key feature of Britain's federal arrangement. The country joined the European Union in 2006, and it adopted the euro as its currency around the same time. During this period, Britain experienced rapid modernisation and economic growth. This included a boom in infrastructure spending, real estate development, and property prices. It was this rapid growth in urban development and property values that set the stage for an outbreak of public sector corruption. Particularly at the regional levels of government, where public officials enjoyed new autonomy.”
- Social and Political Consequences of Administrative Corruption, Gregg Van Ryzin (2012)

One unfortunate side effect of new democracies is corruption. All these young new civil servants and politicians finding themselves with easy access to public coffers, without the civil society restraints a mature democracy would have. Corruption was a particularly difficult issue for Prime Minister Johnson as he’d thoroughly pissed off the Security Services by balkanising them and harshly reducing their powers. The now neutered but thoroughly annoyed Security Services made turfing out political corruption a top priority, if this crusade hurt the SDP even better. Johnson had already lost two senior Cabinet members - Tony Blair and Jack Straw to sting operations and he had made sure to keep his Cabinet on it's best behaviour.

1629905075010.png

Johnson had lost several close allies to corruption

Unfortunately for him he couldn’t be everywhere at once, and there were several figures lower down on the SDP’s pecking order. This is where our story takes us to the province of Inner East London. Stretching from Haringey to Lewisham the Inner East was a stronghold for the British left, with the SDP’s Provincial President Harriet Harman ruling with a massive majority. Unfortunately Harman’s administration seemed to have missed the “don’t be corrupt” memo, this corruption would emerge in the most British possible. Kingsmill, famous for making bland bread, and the occasional Northern Irish massacre, was a major player in East London, with factories on the docks and thousands of employees.

Kingsmill was failing financially since the fall of the Junta, unable to compete with cheaper produce coming from the breadbaskets of Eastern Europe. So the Provincial Government stepped in to provide financial aid to Kingsmill, including grants for severance packages and subsidies early retirement pensions. So far so good. Unfortunately for Harman the The Centre for Organised Crime and Terrorism Intelligence or COCTI, successor to MI5 decided to dig a bit deeper, they found several payments made to people who were not actually Kingsmill employees, as well as vast payouts to trade union officials and company directors. Several leading local politicians, including Harman, had used the money to contribute to a slush fund.

“Of particular note have been the revelations of endemic corruption surrounding the city of Bolton. This led to a series of 100 high profile arrests in 2006 following Operation Bolton, including the mayor and the chief of police. The mayor at the time, Ruth Kelly, headed a coalition administration that included National and the Social Democrats. The Bolton scandal in turn sparked revelations of real estate-related corruption throughout Britain. Another major scandal that surfaced in 2008 revealed that Andrew Lothian, a former judge of the High Court of Eastern Scotland. Lothian was sentenced to lengthy jail terms. As a direct consequence of these scandals Alan Johnson announced plans to introduce a code of conduct in public life.” - Corruption in Transition Britain, Lecture by Paul Haywood, University of Cambridge (2021)

1629904440875.png

It would take more than a code of conduct to undo years of corruption culture

Finally and most damning of all, leaked emails found that Public Administrations Secretary Peter Hain, who oversaw Provincial Administrations, had known about the corruption but turned a blind eye. Provisional President Harman stepped down from her position, as did her Vice-President and Finance Minister. Hain too was sacked from the Cabinet, with Susan Kramer taking his place as Public Administrations Secretary and Junior Minister Eddie Izzard appointed to Health Secretary to fill the empty seat around the Cabinet. This would be reshuffle number four of Johnson’s three year old administration.

Johnson Cabinet 2007-
  • Prime Minister - Alan Johnson (SDP)
  • Deputy Prime Minister - Alan Milburn (SDP)
  • Chancellor of the Exchequer - Simon Hughes (SDP)
  • Foreign Secretary - Rosie Boycott (SDP)
  • Justice Secretary - David Miliband (SDP)
  • Defence Secretary - Field Marshal Charles Guthrie (Military)
  • Home Secretary - Charlie Falconer (SDP)
  • Development Secretary - Chris Huhne (SDP)
  • Education Secretary - John Reid (SDP)
  • Industry, Tourism and Trade Secretary - Patricia Hewitt (SDP)
  • Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Secretary - Glenda Jackson (SDP)
  • Public Administrations Secretary - Susan Kramer (SDP)
  • Culture Secretary - Charles Kennedy (SDP)
  • Health Secretary - Eddie Izzard (SDP)
  • Environment Secretary - Valerie Amos (SDP)
  • Housing Secretary - Polly Toynbee (SDP)
Corruption investigations also targeted the SNP and RISE up in Scotland as it found Stewart Hosie, Eastern Scotland’s Tourism Minister under the SNP/RISE coalition had embezzled over 3 million euros during the construction of Perth Concert Hall. He had also received over 6 million euros in undisclosed donations from the Tarmac Group, a giant construction company heavily involved with several public construction projects across Eastern Scotland. COCTI argued these donations had influenced Hoise’s decisions when awarding and the Tarmac Group had used Perth Concert Hall as a front for false invoicing.

Hain, Harman and Hosie were just the three most notable names caught up in the regional corruption scandal, in left-wing and separatist run provincial authorities local politicians were being done for all sorts of crimes, even the most banal, from taking bribes all the way down to smoking cannabis on their own time. Whilst some of these local politicians certainly were corrupt they saw heavy handed investigations from the authorities, with wiretaps and even undercover police officers used as part of these investigations. The investigations were also highly politicised, mysteriously no National politician was caught doing anything untoward. Luckily for National only it’s enemies were caught with their hands in the wrong pockets.

“Citizens in full democracies are antagonistic to government corruption. The more corrupt the citizens perceive the incumbents to be, the more likely they are to punish the incumbent government in elections. Cross-national studies also show that political corruption erodes trust in political institutions and increases the likely-hood of protest. When leaders fight corruption they hope to signal their responsiveness to the public, and thus to garner more public support. As Alan Johnson said in a speech in 2008: “We must be determined to fight against corruption to win support from the people.” - Money, Corruption and Political Competition in Emerging Democracies, Jonathan Mendilow (2012)

1629904739105.png

Local elections were due in a few weeks, and National elections in just over a year
 
Last edited:
Is the National party exempt of corruption or the COCTI is just not looking at them ?
The later, I'd bet. Which is a abd idea, because again, people can put 2 and 2 together.
Knightmare is right. All the parties are corrupt to an extent, which is fairly typical in new democracies. But because the security services lean strongly to the right they're only targeting left leaning and separatist parties
 
View attachment 675587
The rapid modernisation of Britain's infrastructure also provided plenty of opportunities for money laundering

“Britain provides a compelling case in which to consider the social consequences of corruption. To begin with, it is a new democracy, memories of a turbulent modern history make Brits well equipped to distinguish abuses of power. The devolution of authority to empowered provinces became a key feature of Britain's federal arrangement. The country joined the European Union in 1986, and it adopted the euro as its currency in 2002. During this period, Britain experienced rapid modernisation and economic growth. This included a boom in infrastructure spending, real estate development, and property prices. It was this rapid growth in urban development and property values that set the stage for an outbreak of public sector corruption. Particularly at the regional levels of government, where public officials enjoyed new autonomy.”
- Social and Political Consequences of Administrative Corruption, Gregg Van Ryzin (2012)

One unfortunate side effect of new democracies is corruption. All these young new civil servants and politicians finding themselves with easy access to public coffers, without the civil society restraints a mature democracy would have. Corruption was a particularly difficult issue for Prime Minister Johnson as he’d thoroughly pissed off the Security Services by balkanising them and harshly reducing their powers. The now neutered but thoroughly annoyed Security Services made turfing out political corruption a top priority, if this crusade hurt the SDP even better. Johnson had already lost two senior Cabinet members - Tony Blair and Jack Straw to sting operations and he had made sure to keep his Cabinet on it's best behaviour.

View attachment 675592
Johnson had lost several close allies to corruption

Unfortunately for him he couldn’t be everywhere at once, and there were several figures lower down on the SDP’s pecking order. This is where our story takes us to the province of Inner East London. Stretching from Haringey to Lewisham the Inner East was a stronghold for the British left, with the SDP’s Provincial President Harriet Harman ruling with a massive majority. Unfortunately Harman’s administration seemed to have missed the “don’t be corrupt” memo, this corruption would emerge in the most British possible. Kingsmill, famous for making bland bread, and the occasional Northern Irish massacre, was a major player in East London, with factories on the docks and thousands of employees.

Kingsmill was failing financially since the fall of the Junta, unable to compete with cheaper produce coming from the breadbaskets of Eastern Europe. So the Provincial Government stepped in to provide financial aid to Kingsmill, including grants for severance packages and subsidies early retirement pensions. So far so good. Unfortunately for Harman the The Centre for Organised Crime and Terrorism Intelligence or COCTI, successor to MI5 decided to dig a bit deeper, they found several payments made to people who were not actually Kingsmill employees, as well as vast payouts to trade union officials and company directors. Several leading local politicians, including Harman, had used the money to contribute to a slush fund.

“Of particular note have been the revelations of endemic corruption surrounding the city of Bolton. This led to a series of 100 high profile arrests in 2006 following Operation Bolton, including the mayor and the chief of police. The mayor at the time, Ruth Kelly, headed a coalition administration that included National and the Social Democrats. The Bolton scandal in turn sparked revelations of real estate-related corruption throughout Britain. Another major scandal that surfaced in 2008 revealed that Andrew Lothian, a former judge of the High Court of Eastern Scotland. Lothian was sentenced to lengthy jail terms. As a direct consequence of these scandals Alan Johnson announced plans to introduce a code of conduct in public life.” - Corruption in Transition Britain, Lecture by Paul Haywood, University of Cambridge (2021)

View attachment 675586
It would take more than a code of conduct to undo years of corruption culture

Finally and most damning of all, leaked emails found that Public Administrations Secretary Peter Hain, who oversaw Provincial Administrations, had known about the corruption but turned a blind eye. Provisional President Harman stepped down from her position, as did her Vice-President and Finance Minister. Hain too was sacked from the Cabinet, with Susan Kramer taking his place as Public Administrations Secretary and Junior Minister Eddie Izzard appointed to Health Secretary to fill the empty seat around the Cabinet. This would be reshuffle number four of Johnson’s three year old administration.

Johnson Cabinet 2007-
  • Prime Minister - Alan Johnson (SDP)
  • Deputy Prime Minister - Alan Milburn (SDP)
  • Chancellor of the Exchequer - Simon Hughes (SDP)
  • Foreign Secretary - Rosie Boycott (SDP)
  • Justice Secretary - David Miliband (SDP)
  • Defence Secretary - Field Marshal Charles Guthrie (Military)
  • Home Secretary - Charlie Falconer (SDP)
  • Development Secretary - Chris Huhne (SDP)
  • Education Secretary - John Reid (SDP)
  • Industry, Tourism and Trade Secretary - Patricia Hewitt (SDP)
  • Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Secretary - Glenda Jackson (SDP)
  • Public Administrations Secretary - Susan Kramer (SDP)
  • Culture Secretary - Charles Kennedy (SDP)
  • Health Secretary - Eddie Izzard (SDP)
  • Environment Secretary - Valerie Amos (SDP)
  • Housing Secretary - Polly Toynbee (SDP)
Corruption investigations also targeted the SNP and RISE up in Scotland as it found Stewart Hosie, Eastern Scotland’s Tourism Minister under the SNP/RISE coalition had embezzled over 3 million euros during the construction of Perth Concert Hall. He had also received over 6 million euros in undisclosed donations from the Tarmac Group, a giant construction company heavily involved with several public construction projects across Eastern Scotland. COCTI argued these donations had influenced Hoise’s decisions when awarding and the Tarmac Group had used Perth Concert Hall as a front for false invoicing.

Hain, Harman and Hosie were just the three most notable names caught up in the regional corruption scandal, in left-wing and separatist run provincial authorities local politicians were being done for all sorts of crimes, even the most banal, from taking bribes all the way down to smoking cannabis on their own time. Whilst some of these local politicians certainly were corrupt they saw heavy handed investigations from the authorities, with wiretaps and even undercover police officers used as part of these investigations. The investigations were also highly politicised, mysteriously no National politician was caught doing anything untoward. Luckily for National only it’s enemies were caught with their hands in the wrong pockets.

“Citizens in full democracies are antagonistic to government corruption. The more corrupt the citizens perceive the incumbents to be, the more likely they are to punish the incumbent government in elections. Cross-national studies also show that political corruption erodes trust in political institutions and increases the likely-hood of protest. When leaders fight corruption they hope to signal their responsiveness to the public, and thus to garner more public support. As Alan Johnson said in a speech in 2008: “We must be determined to fight against corruption to win support from the people.” - Money, Corruption and Political Competition in Emerging Democracies, Jonathan Mendilow (2012)

View attachment 675588
Local elections were due in a few weeks, and National elections in just over a year
Glad to see a new update, I was missing them! Also shame on the Junta boys and their dirty tricks.

The country joined the European Union in 1986
Did not UK join the EU club in 2006?
National elections in just over a year
That’s interesting, I remember the last Election was in 2004, do you mean the Commons have a four-years term instead the current five-years one?
Also I’m wondering if this dysfunctional democracy and all the spreading kleptocracy/corruption could produce some populist anti-elite anti-traditional parties media-figure as in other post-authoritarian new democracies like Volodymir Zelenksy in Ukraine, Szymon Holownia in Poland, Andrej Babis in Czech Republic and Slavi Trifonov in Bulgaria and what British figura could fill a such role.
 
Top