Heath agree's to Liberal demands for PR

cumbria

Banned
What would be the result of Edward Heath agreeing to the Liberals demands to introduce proportional representation by the single transferable vote for future elections in 1974 and forming a coalition government?
 
Neither he nor Thorpe would be able to sell it to their respective parties, and most of the Conservative Party would revolt, especially the right. Besides even between them they could not form a majority government in the Commons. While like 2010 the result was inconclusive, it was clear who lost: Heath.
 

cumbria

Banned
Neither he nor Thorpe would be able to sell it to their respective parties, and most of the Conservative Party would revolt, especially the right. Besides even between them they could not form a majority government in the Commons. While like 2010 the result was inconclusive, it was clear who lost: Heath.

Thorpe could sell it with PR.
For Heath it would be more difficult but possible.
 
It will still be a minority Government unless Heath can also bring in the SNP or the Ulster Unionists (the former might sit better with the Liberals).

Such a coalition would be a nightmare and Labour would surely win the next election and go into coalition with the Liberals or maybe the Nationalists if the Liberals suffer the same way that they are now for going into coaliiton with the Tories.
 
It will still be a minority Government unless Heath can also bring in the SNP or the Ulster Unionists (the former might sit better with the Liberals).

Either or both might be possible at that time. The UU's would find a coalition dominated by the Tories attractive given the state of the terrorist problems at the time.

Such a coalition would be a nightmare and Labour would surely win the next election and go into coalition with the Liberals or maybe the Nationalists if the Liberals suffer the same way that they are now for going into coaliiton with the Tories.

It would be difficult but the Tories had more votes, even without coalition partners. If it lasted long enough to get PR pasted it would also mean neither big party would 'win' the next election in terms of getting a majority of MPs. Hence there would be the change of forcing more moderation rather than the extremist politics that became so dominant, especially after 79. That could be a huge long term bonus to Britain.

Steve
 

cumbria

Banned
It will still be a minority Government unless Heath can also bring in the SNP or the Ulster Unionists (the former might sit better with the Liberals).

Such a coalition would be a nightmare and Labour would surely win the next election and go into coalition with the Liberals or maybe the Nationalists if the Liberals suffer the same way that they are now for going into coaliiton with the Tories.

The SNP and Plaid could be brought on board with a promise of a devolution referendum which both the Liberals and Conservatives supported at the time.
 
But then Heath runs into the same problem that Callaghan did in 1979: he could cobble something together until the Parliament expired in the summer of 1975 (no way it lasts that long) but at what cost? The entire party would revolt and strongly pressure him to resign, especially the backbenches. Despite the inconclusive outcome, Heath had clearly lost the election, just as Brown did 7 months ago.
 

cumbria

Banned
But then Heath runs into the same problem that Callaghan did in 1979: he could cobble something together until the Parliament expired in the summer of 1975 (no way it lasts that long) but at what cost? The entire party would revolt and strongly pressure him to resign, especially the backbenches. Despite the inconclusive outcome, Heath had clearly lost the election, just as Brown did 7 months ago.

The Parliament would not expire until 1979.
The 1974 February election gave the Conservatives 297 seats and 37.9% of the vote compared to Labour's 301 sears and 37.2% of the vote.
The Liberals had 14 MP's and 19.3% of the vote.
 
How does that prevent a rebellion within the Conservative Party that will see Heath deposed or overthrown by a massive pressure campaign? Thatcher, among others, makes clear in her memoirs that she would not have accepted. Would Heath be so stupid so as to want 4 more years in No 10 at the expense of Conservative majority governments going the way of the dodo and permanent Lib-Lab pacts? I don't think so, and the party wouldn't let him be that stupid.
 

cumbria

Banned
How does that prevent a rebellion within the Conservative Party that will see Heath deposed or overthrown by a massive pressure campaign? Thatcher, among others, makes clear in her memoirs that she would not have accepted. Would Heath be so stupid so as to want 4 more years in No 10 at the expense of Conservative majority governments going the way of the dodo and permanent Lib-Lab pacts? I don't think so, and the party wouldn't let him be that stupid.

They may well not be any future Lib-Lab pacts but instead continuted Lib-Con governments as we have now.
 

cumbria

Banned
How does that prevent a rebellion within the Conservative Party that will see Heath deposed or overthrown by a massive pressure campaign? Thatcher, among others, makes clear in her memoirs that she would not have accepted. Would Heath be so stupid so as to want 4 more years in No 10 at the expense of Conservative majority governments going the way of the dodo and permanent Lib-Lab pacts? I don't think so, and the party wouldn't let him be that stupid.

On the point on Thatcher I think she may well have challenged him over this but if she did so it would mean 5 years of Labour government so it could be quite divisive.
She may well not have the support she had in OTL in a leadership challenge.
 
The Conservative Party wouldn't have accepted PR. By this time backbenchers were already organising themselves against Heath; there's no way that Heath could have whipped it through the Commons. Labour would be sure to line up against, along with the Ulster Unionists given PR would spell the end of Unionist hegemony at Westminster - it would take a very small number of Tory rebels to sink the whole project, a rebellion which would almost certainly be forthcoming and probably rather large in scope.
 
The party would not have let him. There is a limit which no leader can go beyond before being rejected by their party. Even so domineering a PM as Margaret Thatcher could not and found out the hard way. Heath wasn't as Imperial (i.e. "presidential" to use the Blair-era criticism) a PM as Thatcher was (though fairly close) was and he would meet the same fate.
 
Top