Clems vision.

PS: Why is it the Liberals haven't suffered their utter collapse of OTL? I forget... less early '30s involvement in the National Government?
They moved into opposition following the 1940 election when they moved into opposition with Labour, with whom they had a pact at the 1945 election in a bid to introduce the welfare state. As a result in the '45 election they did far better than expected, although the overall vote is not terribly higher than iotl when they won nearly three million votes as opposed to eleven million for Labour.

The continuation of the three party system is going to be a big thing ittl.
 
They moved into opposition following the 1940 election when they moved into opposition with Labour, with whom they had a pact at the 1945 election in a bid to introduce the welfare state. As a result in the '45 election they did far better than expected, although the overall vote is not terribly higher than iotl when they won nearly three million votes as opposed to eleven million for Labour.

The continuation of the three party system is going to be a big thing ittl.
Ah yes, of course... Halifax talked about it towards the end of his PM-ship.

*slaps forehead*

Fair enough, given the previous Lib-Lab pacts it makes some sense.
 
The Labour Government of 1945 took office amidst a backdrop of various events outside their control ongoing. As such, the honeymoon period was never going to be a long one for Mr Attlee and his party, but let us begin the tale on day one.

The victory of Clement Attlee in the General Election led to a number of towering characters coming to the fore. Amongst the leading figures were Herbert Morrison, Aneurin Bevan, Ernest Bevin and Hugh Dalton to name but a few. They came from differing sections of the party and keeping them together was to be a major task on the part of the new Prime Minister throughout his time in office.

As the day went on, more announcements were made until three in the afternoon when the official cabinet list was given. There were no major shocks in the list. Herbert Morrison was given the position of Home Secretary, Ernie Bevin was given the Foreign Office, Sir Stafford Cripps was given the post of Chancellor. Hugh Dalton was given the position of President of the Board of Trade. Viscount Stansgate was made Lord Chancellor. James Ede became Secretary of State for War.

The promise of the new government following the years which the focus tended to be on foreign affairs was a return to the domestic agenda. The promise was that that the social agenda of the party would help deliver the poor from poverty and that socialism would enhance the land.

All the while, the Conservatives were in a state of chaos. The defeat had hurt them badly, losing many of the stars of the Halifax government. From the chaos, the only clear leader was Anthony Eden, who became the new leader of the opposition within a fortnight of the defeat. Upon becoming leader, he acknowledged the fact stated he would do everything possible to regain power for the Conservatives.

The Liberals had as much reason as Labour to celebrate the result. They had avoided being totally marginalised in what was clearly a struggle between the Conservatives and the Labour Party for government. Sir Archibald Sinclair was clear in the point that he would support much of the governments’ policy in creating the welfare state, but where necessary he would oppose them.

The economy was by now recovering from the war. It was made clear that any attempts at nationalisation would be met with fierce resistance. As such the ground was set for the new government to take office.

The first action was, however on issues regarding the security of the Empire in India. One of the first acts of the India Secretary, George Isaacs was to call a new Imperial Conference in London for May 23rd. In addition to this, he announced plans to end the powers of the Indian Princes to have Private Militias and stated that the government also agreed with the principle of universal suffrage for the Indian people.

He also made pleas for the violence to stop, whilst announcing that should groups refrain from violent acts, they would gain a seat in the conference. This had success, albeit raising the expectations of the Indian people. The Viceroy, Winston Churchill could barely contain his fury that he had been essentially by-passed in the first major act by the new government regarding the sub-continent.
 
The conference on Indian governance (1945) was hardly the most decisive conference in the history of the British Empire. The day after the major Indian leaders, from Nehru to Jinnah to Ghandi were in London to open talks with the British government on the future of the sub-continent, violence erupted in Bengal.

Responsibility for the rioting was claimed by the Indian Communist Party, who in organised moves, took over several colonial government buildings in the city of Dhaka. Somanth Lahiri openly took charge of the rebellion stating that whilst the other Indian leaders were bowing to the imperialist overlords, the Communists would lead India to freedom and Socialism. Two days later, despite reported desertions, the Indian Army retook the city, the Communist leaders going into hiding. On the streets the situation was akin to a tinderbox.

This caused alarm bells to ring throughout the sub-continent. Churchill urgently sent a message to Attlee asking for more troops of the British Army to help keep the situation under control as he was worried over the loyalty of the Indian Army, given the circumstances. Attlee, who had by now openly dismissed the idea of the private militias and well aware that if he ignored Churchill could be left open to the accusation of shirking responsibility for the situation agreed. As a result of this, 50,000 British service personnel were to be moved over the following month to the sub-continent from Germany, which albeit still tense was calmer than previously.

At the conference, the disagreement between the Indian leaders present was obvious. Whilst all by this stage were calling for independence, Jinnah was demanding a two state solution, Nehru was demanding that India follow its current system as an independent state and Ghandi wanted a united India. All the while the streets of Calcutta were cut off due to a state of martial law being in place. India was not in a safe state.

The conference continued for a fortnight without agreement. Following the end of it, Herbert Morrison claimed it was akin to “debating religion with a devout atheist and a priest”. Winston Churchill at this point enflamed the situation by sending a letter to the Times stating that Attlee, whilst helping with the troops which were coming from Germany, urged for a rethink on the issue of the Indian Private militias. He stated that as he could not use these, his hands were tied with regard the rising in Bengal.

It was at this point that in an off the cuff remark, Archibald Sinclair made a remark about being reminded of a headline of the magazine Punch during the 19th century, when the French were lampooned for their position in Italy.

The new leader of the Conservatives openly stated that the government had made a huge mistake early on by creating chaos in India. Attlee stated quickly that the chaos was created by Lord Halifax who had forced the new government into the position of a fireman attempting to control a blaze. Such terminology was ill-advised though as made it look as if the government had no answer to the Indian question, which in reality they didn’t.

In a far more secret move than his letter, Churchill told Ernie Bevin that it was his opinion that if things were not brought to hand and quickly, India would descend into a state of civil war, Bevin was inclined to agree.
 
Last edited:
Looking forward to seeing how this story progresses, and it looks like it could be even more interesting than the last.

The conference on Indian governance (1945) was hardly the most decisive conference in the history of the British Empire.


Thought it had the potential to be it, though.

It was at this point that in an off the cuff remark, Archibald Sinclair made an off the cuff remark about...
Nitpick.
 

Moglwi

Monthly Donor
I hope that that India dose not decendied into chaos. What would happen if they gave each state independance so it is not one big country?
 
Im looking foward to seeing how this all turns out.
i hope you continue it.
No worries on that score. All sorts of stuff involving Europe, which I gave a clue about in Halifax and nationalisation to come.

The next installment will actually involve Europe, but will be a wee while. I'm not quite happy with the draft at present.
 
The new Government faced its first European Confederation conference amidst much attention from the British political classes. The Labour Party whilst in opposition had opposed the creation of the Confederation and set its stall out for taking Britain out of the European group. Thus-far, the government had been silent on the issue, with the Indian question taking the priority for Attlee in the early days. The conference in Brussels brought the issue of Europe back to the fore however.

As Attlee and Bevin attended the meeting, there was the feeling of isolation in the air. They made their opposite numbers from across the Confederation plain their position that for Britain to remain inside the group, it must be accepted that the EC should adopt a position of neutrality in the planned nationalisation of British industry. This was met with a feeling of trepidation by several of the continental governments; although the French remained fairly positive throughout that a deal could be reached.

Following the meeting, a deal was struck accepting that the British would be allowed to nationalise areas of their economy, something which Halifax had at the time opined that the Confederation would prevent. As such, the first major obstacle to the nationalisation of British industry was removed.

Aside from these issues, the Dutch made the boldest move the Confederation had ever put forward. They proposed that the Dominions and Colonies of the European powers, whilst not gaining full membership of the EC, should be given full trading rights. This was met with enthusiasm by both the British and French as a way to retain their Empires, and was even expanded to include League of Nations protectorates. Over the next few months, India, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa alongside the other European colonies signed up to the deal, ensuring investment into Africa and Asia was secured. As another move, Jewish Madagascar and Ethiopia were also given the same rights.

The issue of the future of Germany was also up for discussion. It was planned in the British and French sectors of Germany that in September, the first democratic German local elections be held since the era of the Weimar regimes. It was noted that this was also planned in the American sector. As such, the building blocks for a new German state were emerging. The major omission however was the Soviet Sector, which was developing in a markedly different fashion. Austria was developing in a similar fashion.

The new Government was attacked by both the left and the right over the conference for performing what was seen, quite correctly as a volte face over the issue of the Confederation. Attlee made the point in the Commons, however that when the reasons for opposition change, so must the position of the government.

The ground was set for the first major bill to be put towards the Commons by the Government.
 
As the government prepared for its first major move in terms of policy since taking office, the nationalisation of the remaining shipyards under private ownership, the situation with regards India was once more becoming an issue.

The Indian Chief Minister, Nehru, was demanding further powers to be handed over to the Indian Government, including a full veto over control over the Indian Army. Such a move would be tantamount to Indian Independence and was strongly opposed by The Viceroy and the India Office, as well as the Conservatives. Upon hearing of this, Nehru threatened to resign his position, and that he would be followed by the entire INC unless Churchill was removed in his post.

This put Attlee in an impossible situation. Should he back Nehru, he would in effect be granting the Indians independence, but should he back Churchill he would throw the sub-continent back into chaos which was only just resolved. It was against this background that the decision was made to do neither. It was announced that from January 1st 1946, Winston Churchill would be removed from his post as the Viceroy of India, to be replaced by Viscount Stansgate, a former India Secretary. It was also agreed that his mandate would be clear. He would be given 18 months to resolve the Indian Question. He was to be replaced as Lord Chancellor by Lord Jowitt.

This created uproar in the Commons, with Eden accusing Attlee of caving into pressure from “a few Indian lawyers and a seditious kaffir.” Attlee replied that the government was intent on solving issues created by Eden and the previous administration. The situation in the house was notably tense.

As such, the following day when the Commons met for the first reading of the Nationalisation of the Shipyards bill, the atmosphere was tense. Eden pointed to a signed letter by over twenty Clydeside Shipyard Barons who opposed the nationalisation, to the increase in employment in the private yards as opposed to the Government run shipyards. Attlee made the statement that this was due to the private shipyards undercutting their rivals leading to a worsening of conditions for the workers therein.

As it was, it was clear the bill would pass. The partisanship of the Commons was seriously noted. On the issue however, the Liberal and Labour pact fell apart, with the Liberals supporting the Conservatives, stating that such a move risked future investment in Britain.
 
What do you have against Africa especially? If independence was granted now, without any of the preparations that occurred OTL then there's going to be an even greater mess.

Steve

I'm pro British empire. Soon it shall be over a third of the world in the Confederation and we shall take over ze vorld MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :p:p:p:p:p
 
I'm pro British empire. Soon it shall be over a third of the world in the Confederation and we shall take over ze vorld MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :p:p:p:p:p
I wouldn't get your hopes up. I turned Churchill into a failed politician, Lord Halifax into a great war leader. Why now turn things into a Brit-wank?
 
The new Government faced its first European Confederation conference amidst much attention from the British political classes. The Labour Party whilst in opposition had opposed the creation of the Confederation and set its stall out for taking Britain out of the European group. Thus-far, the government had been silent on the issue, with the Indian question taking the priority for Attlee in the early days. The conference in Brussels brought the issue of Europe back to the fore however.

As Attlee and Bevin attended the meeting, there was the feeling of isolation in the air. They made their opposite numbers from across the Confederation plain their position that for Britain to remain inside the group, it must be accepted that the EC should adopt a position of neutrality in the planned nationalisation of British industry. This was met with a feeling of trepidation by several of the continental governments; although the French remained fairly positive throughout that a deal could be reached.

Following the meeting, a deal was struck accepting that the British would be allowed to nationalise areas of their economy, something which Halifax had at the time opined that the Confederation would prevent. As such, the first major obstacle to the nationalisation of British industry was removed.

Aside from these issues, the Dutch made the boldest move the Confederation had ever put forward. They proposed that the Dominions and Colonies of the European powers, whilst not gaining full membership of the EC, should be given full trading rights. This was met with enthusiasm by both the British and French as a way to retain their Empires, and was even expanded to include League of Nations protectorates. Over the next few months, India, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa alongside the other European colonies signed up to the deal, ensuring investment into Africa and Asia was secured. As another move, Jewish Madagascar and Ethiopia were also given the same rights.

I can think of certain States that are United not being happy.
 
Top