AHC: have Ireland get home rule

samcster94

Banned
This may be borderline, but in OTL, Ireland pushed for Home Rule many times, but it got blocked in the House of Lords. It almost passed once, but WWI stopped it, and a more radical result came. What would happen if it happened?? Bonus points if it happens before 1900 and no "Billy Boy or Orangemen" types kill anyone over it.
 
AIR, there were attempts following elections in 1885 and 1892; the former failed in the Commons, forcing another election, while the latter was blocked by the House of Lords. Years back, in my first TL attempt, I imagined 1874 going worse for the Tories, which led to the first attempt at a Home Rule bill being pushed while Disareali is leader of the opposition; it still goes as poorly as 1885 OTL, but that means the next attempt at a Liberal-Home Rule bill is also earlier, at a calmer time for the empire (aftermath of Berlin Conference), leading to Home Rule in the lifetime of Charles Stewart Parnell.
 
Honestly, the best approach (sorry to say) is to go back further - to the Act of Union for England and Scotland - rather than have them unify as a single Parliament, have them agree to two equal Parliaments under the King (or some other political body). This way, the idea exists that well - The King is King of Scotland, England, and Ireland - but only England and Scotland have Parliaments (conveniently ignoring Wales). - This at least creates the premise for seperate Parliaments (even if they operate under common rules). No need to write new rules, simply push for "We want the Irish to have a Parliament under our King" Nothing more complex than that. No special negotiations of conditions and powers, just "We would like our own Parliament please".

Assuming that this dual-parliament system functions with more or less the same result as the unified one, this also opens the door during the troubles with America. There is a model already in place. You want to solve the problem with Americans leaving the area within the Proclamation Line by offering that as the territory of an "American Parliament", or a series of smaller ones defined by that line. Having American territories pushing for it would give the Irish more leverage too.
 

samcster94

Banned
1798 is one way to do it as well, and had Napoleon been more interested, may have been doable even if unlikely.
 
Honestly, the best approach (sorry to say) is to go back further - to the Act of Union for England and Scotland - rather than have them unify as a single Parliament, have them agree to two equal Parliaments under the King (or some other political body). This way, the idea exists that well - The King is King of Scotland, England, and Ireland - but only England and Scotland have Parliaments (conveniently ignoring Wales). - This at least creates the premise for seperate Parliaments (even if they operate under common rules). No need to write new rules, simply push for "We want the Irish to have a Parliament under our King" Nothing more complex than that. No special negotiations of conditions and powers, just "We would like our own Parliament please".

Assuming that this dual-parliament system functions with more or less the same result as the unified one, this also opens the door during the troubles with America. There is a model already in place. You want to solve the problem with Americans leaving the area within the Proclamation Line by offering that as the territory of an "American Parliament", or a series of smaller ones defined by that line. Having American territories pushing for it would give the Irish more leverage too.

How's this different to a personal union?
 
How's this different to a personal union?

Formally one government structure rather than two. (I might have benefited from making that clear).

But it doesn't have to be just the King who is the political body - it could be a joint cabinet, or combined Privy Council. But at the very least it is formal. That and there are some powers reserved for the 'superior political body' - i.e. declaring war, etc.
 
So single privy council but certain matters are devolved to English or Scottish MPs only? Probably with set joint sessions on occasion.
Similar to my internal devolution idea.
 
If you had one government but three parliaments, what happens when a government loses the support of one of them?
 
If you had one government but three parliaments, what happens when a government loses the support of one of them?

It entirely depends on whether the works on the basis of total control - or that it has particular interest besides. *shrug* I'm spitballin' not writing the alt-treaty, but if you've got a "Universal Policy" or whatever the heck it is, that needs cross-parliament approval, it might be as simple as "Can I get the numbers of the leaders, just, and then use an overwhelming number of MPs to run it through" - I mean, heck - it could work on majority vote of the 'First Ministers' of each Parliament - in which case, throw in promises and you get your way.
 
Top