"A Very British Transition" - A Post-Junta Britain TL
- Thread starter powerab
- Start date
Chapter 109: Split Decisions
Bell's momentum had finally stalled
“UPA Leader Bell Ribeiro-Addy has failed to secure the votes required to form a government after a coalition deal was rejected. Ribeiro-Addy needed the backing of the SDP, but its MPs abstained in Thursday's vote, describing the deal as "unacceptable". The People's Alliance gained the most seats in May's election, but fell short of a majority. She now has two more weeks to find a solution or face a general election. It would be Britain's fourth in four years. Speaking ahead of Thursday's vote, Ms Ribeiro-Addy said he was "sorry" that a coalition deal could not be reached with the Social Democrats. "We have demonstrated a noble willingness to reach a deal," she said, adding that her party's proposals had been rejected "one after another". The SDP said its ministers had only been offered "nonexistent or empty" roles within the government.” - Ribeiro-Addy loses vote to form government, BBC News Bulletin (2019)
Bell’s gamble did not go to plan, not only did the Social Democrats abstain, but they were joined by over 30 People’s Alliance MPs who abstained in protest of not allowing Social Democrats into the Cabinet. With 169 votes to 221 Bell’s Confidence vote had been roundly defeated. Even Tom Tugendhat smiled for the first time in months, coming alive in the Commons chamber he called the result a “shameful spectacle”, blaming the “vanity” of the two parties of the left for Britain's ongoing political standoff. Both parties blamed each other, with Ribeiro-Addy telling journalists Khan had demanded control of departments that covered 80% of Britain’s spending - adding “I want to be Prime Minister but not at any price”.
The 36 rebel UPA MPs were expelled from the party, among those were senior figures like Paul Mason, Laura Parker, and even a few Social Democrats like Alex Sobel. The newly independent grouping of soft-left MPs announced they would be forming a new “Parliamentary Group” called the Green Left Movement, with Mason as leader. Mason told journalists the grouping goal was not to divide the left, but to act as a bridge between the radicals of the UPA and the moderates in the Social Democrats, calling for an electoral alliance of the three parties should a snap election go ahead. Ecology announced its MPs would be joining the Green Left Grouping, meaning the faction had 42 MPs, just one behind the Centrists.
As the far-right gained in Parliament, their paramilitaries went dormant for now
Mason had been one of the party’s founders and the party’s press guru in its early days. Mason’s loss especially was an embarrassment to the People’s Alliance, as he was generally popular with the electorate, one of the party’s few leading figures from a working class background - and with a rare northern accent. In a party stereotyped for being dominated by middle class London hippies, the loss of figures like Mason didn't help. The UPA’s entire political pitch was to be above the petty squabbling and manoeuvres of traditional parties, the Green Left showed the Alliance could split all the same. The biggest winners of course were the right, with National already rebounding in the polls - and the Centrists creeping up.
“Of course, The Centrists also had a helping hand from the corruption of the political elite. National, a catch-all party for people on the right, has suffered from recent corruption scandals. The Centrists have a similarly libertarian agenda — it wants lower taxes and a smaller, less bureaucratic state. Its Trumpian-type language has proved attractive to wealthy voters and to rural entrepreneurs. For the moment, The Centrists' support still comes from the middle and upper classes. The average British worker wants better public services and is more likely to vote for parties on the left. But the fear among Britain's political mainstream is that the Centrists may try to broaden their base by tailoring to the working classes. That would mean reaching across the ideological divide that has governed politics for decades. If that happens, Britain may see yet another set of long-held beliefs go up in smoke.” - What’s next for the British far right?, Paul Taylor, Politico (2019)
Another election was all but guaranteed, with the Green Left split exacerbating already strong tensions on the left. Ribeiro-Addy was unable to contain her rage, calling Mason’s split a “betrayal”, there would be no deal with the Green Left, which meant there would be no deal with the Social Democrats either. From that point negotiations were entirely for show, as the UPA made half-hearted outreaches to National or Unity as political elites ran out the clock. Exchanges in Parliament were especially acrimonious as bitter personal relationships between the three left wing leaders came out. Ribeiro-Addy accused Khan and Mason of “pushing the country into an election” and “opening the door for the far-right”.
Time would tell if the Green Left Movement would survive a snap election
Behind the scenes the People’s Alliance were confident they could grow their majority in a snap election, they still had a considerable lead in the polls - and with smart campaigning they could squeeze SDP and Green Left votes back into the fold. Party strategists believed the Alliance could not only grow their majority, but teach a lesson to the Social Democrats - forcing them to the negotiating table. Ribeiro-Addy was a formidable campaigner and the party had twice as many members as the next nearest party. Still history was littered with those who gambled with a snap election and failed, a few miles away was Italy - where Prime Minister Matteo Renzi had banked his career on a constitutional referendum in 2016, and lost.
The hourglass emptied as the deadline passed and King Charles dissolved Parliament. Ribeiro-Addy was taking a big risk, election fatigue had worked for William Hague back in 2016, but that was a very different pitch; National was the natural party of government - the People’s Alliance were still mistrusted by many voters, especially older ones. There was also the issue of turnout, May had seen record turnout, mostly young left wing voters turning out to back the UPA, polls showed lots of these voters were growing frustrated at the deadlock, possibly deciding not to vote in a snap election. If the UPA were no better than the corrupt squabbling politicians they claimed to be against - why should anyone vote for them?
“The abstention rate is likely to be a deciding factor in the results of a repeated election. Disenchanted voters could punish those parties that have been unable to reach an agreement through a lower voter turnout. This could pose a risk for the leftist parties (SDP and UPA) and could translate into a rise of the centre-right. In general, two scenarios can be foreseen for the next elections. Based on the latest polls, the most likely outcome will be a situation like the last general election, but with a stronger National and a weaker Unity. In this scenario, the UPA would need to reach an agreement with other parties: either with the left or with the right (which would be exceptional). A less likely scenario, would be a rise of support of the three centre-right parties, allowing them to govern together” - Britain Goes Back to the Ballot Box, FTI Consulting Briefing (2019)
In four years Charles had dissolved parliament early as many times as his mother had over 60 years
Last edited:
mortonofski
Donor
Good Lord, your House is making the OTL Knesset look stable! Fascinating to watch.
This is turning into the Judean People's Front vs. The People's Front of Judea.
In all seriousness, while my initial reaction to yet another split was along the lines of, "Again?!" I suppose it's realistic for the party systems to go through a lot of upheavals when a previously authoritarian country becomes a democracy. Are there any former Warsaw Pact countries that *do* have roughly the same party structures and divisions now that they had when they first transitioned from communist dictatorships? If there are, I can't think of who it would be - I'm pretty sure Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania don't, and Czechoslovakia and East Germany no longer exist as such.
Indeed it is a trend for parties in new democracies to have pretty unstable parties that are prone to split, often on personality/ego lines rather ideological!
In this timeline, I'm more than willing to bet that clip of the women going on about yet another election is thrown around a lot here. Seriously though I can see without a shadow of a doubt that people might start looking at the Junta with rose-tinted glasses as sure we had no freedoms but we didn't have to have elections every 6 months. It kinda reminds me of The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer where at the end he had the country voting on everything he did which in turn made them so pissed off they said fuck it and gave him dictatorial power.
What's the current sentiment of the British public towards the EU? I assume a lot of people resent austerity, but do they still see the EU as a net positive at the moment? Because I'd have to think that a new Junta taking over would get the UK expelled. I know the OTL EU tolerates what has increasingly turned into one-party rule in Hungary, but an actual military dictatorship might be a bridge too far.
I doubt it. At this point anytime I read a chapter I have Abide by Me playing in my head cause the last few chapters have made the sinking of the Titanic look like a well-organised evacuation in comparison.
Britain is a heavily pro-European society for several reasons, pressure from the EU was one of the biggest contributing factors to the Junta's downfall, EU membership gave the UK a huge economic boon, and Britain is a net-emigration society, with many Brits living in Europe.
Current EU approval rating among British voters is 66%.
Wikibox: Green Left
The platform was announced on 3 October 2019 and was launched on 8 October. The Movement was created to prevent voter dissatisfaction over the 2019 government formation failure. During the party's launch, Mason announced that it would avoid running in the smaller constituencies to avoid vote splitting with other left parties.
On 9 October, it was revealed the platform had reached a tentative agreement with Ecology to form a Parliamentary Group and run jointly in the December 2019 snap election.
The Green Left Movement is a political party in the United Kingdom. It was an electoral platform formed by Paul Mason with other rebels from the People's Alliance and Social Democratic Party frustrated at the lack of cooperation between their parties. It is positioned on the left-wing of the political spectrum. It promotes alter-globalisation, green politics, progressivism and participatory democracy
The platform was announced on 3 October 2019 and was launched on 8 October. The Movement was created to prevent voter dissatisfaction over the 2019 government formation failure. During the party's launch, Mason announced that it would avoid running in the smaller constituencies to avoid vote splitting with other left parties.
On 9 October, it was revealed the platform had reached a tentative agreement with Ecology to form a Parliamentary Group and run jointly in the December 2019 snap election.
I don't know that much about how parliamentary systems work (although this timeline has been helpful in explaining how things operate), so I'm confused why the Ecology Party felt the need to subsume itself into this brand-new grouping. Was there a lot of wheeling and dealing going on behind the scenes to make this happen? Frankly, I don't really get what Ecology would have to offer them besides the tentative legitimacy of a minor party and a few more votes.
Ecology has always struggled a bit in the UK political scene. Whilst the electoral system is proportional, constituencies tend to be rather small with 10-12 MPs on average, this means smaller parties struggle to break through as the effective electoral threshold is 10% of the vote. Whilst Ecology has managed to get a few MPs through strong support in Surrey and Gloucestershire it has never broken double digits in term of MPs.
These small constituencies make Britain fairly susceptible to vote splitting, and since Ecology MPs just make it into Parliament over this threshold, if they ran against the GLM, who have more MPs and a larger profile - there is a strong risk the party could lose all of it's seats, even if only a handful of it's supporters switch to the GLM. The GLM are als very anxious about vote spiting, with the GLM hovering at 8-9% in the polls, a few more votes could make them a major political player - a few less and they risk being wiped out.
For the GLM their whole pitch has been for more pluralism on the left as both the SDP and UPA are quite sectarian towards each other. By joining up with Ecology they prove themselves to be a sensible party able to cooperate with others - rather than just a vanity project for Mason.
Thanks, that makes a lot more sense. I was also curious whether their choice of the name "Green Left Movement" meant they would be more focused on environmental issues, but I suppose with Ecology on board from the start, it provides continuity and helps to avoid the brand confusion of a "Judean People's Front/People's Front of Judea" situation. Of course, that only matters if they actually cement some level of relevance! Even then, my concern is that rather than being a bridge to unite the left, they run into the same issue of that one xkcd comic, but only time will tell....
Nope. It doesn't help that even if they did, their demands are so contradictory, they're never gonna work.
^ implying that real TL politics are better because there are fewer major parties