Maudling instead of Heath

MrHola

Banned
Suppose the Conservatives had chosen Reginald Maudling to succeed Alec Douglas-Home as party Leader in 1965? (Edward Heath's victory over Maudling was quite close in OTL.) Assuming that, like Heath, Maudling loses in 1966 but goes on to win a surprise victory in 1970, how would a Maudling government of the early 1970s differ from the Heath one of OTL? I know that Maudling was regarded as more of a "Euro-skeptic" (to use a later expression). What would the practical effects of this be, and what other policy differences were there?
 
Suppose the Conservatives had chosen Reginald Maudling to succeed Alec Douglas-Home as party Leader in 1965? (Edward Heath's victory over Maudling was quite close in OTL.) Assuming that, like Heath, Maudling loses in 1966 but goes on to win a surprise victory in 1970, how would a Maudling government of the early 1970s differ from the Heath one of OTL? I know that Maudling was regarded as more of a "Euro-skeptic" (to use a later expression). What would the practical effects of this be, and what other policy differences were there?

I guess anyone other than Heath would be better. He was probably the worst and most ineffective pompous buffoon who ever sat in Downing Street.

He failed with the economy, the unions, inflation, the pound, Northern Ireland, getting a good deal from Europe, alienating the Commonwealth, upsetting the Americans, failing over Rhodesia and South Africa, negotiating with terrorists and the 'Three Day Week'.

He was so bad that Harold Wilson was able to get back in and the Tories voted for a woamn to replace him.

The Downing Street cat would have been preferable to Heath.
 
While accurate, the OP remains unanswered.

From my limited knowledge of Maudling I do not think he would have entered the EEC, certainly not without a referendum before ratification. He would remain neutral in that campaign due to the deep divide in both parties rather than make it his pathological obsession like the Grocer did.

Foreign relations with both the Commonwealth and the US are a lot smoother than OTL without Heath's rabid Ameriphobia and distrust of the Commonwealth. No negotiating with terrorists in 1970. I don't see what could be done about SA: until the end the realist, anti-sanction view was taken. No idea about Rhodesia or domestic policy: One National methods were completely inadequate to those problems and Maudling was definitely one of them. Perhaps no 3-day week?

Tories winning in 1966 is borderline ASB even with zombie Churchill unless Wilson is "caught with a dead woman or live man", to use the cliched phrase, or some other catastrophe.
 

cumbria

Banned
POD is easy.
Enoch Powell does not stand in the leadership election for the Conservatives and his 15 votes go to Maudling.
With Maudling PM in 1970 it is possible that Britain stays out of the EEC and they wont be any moves towards Thatcherism.
If he wins in 1974 it is likely the Conservatives would lose in 1979 (he died that year anyway) and we would see Labour in power durring the Falklands war.
Maybe with Foot as PM.
If he loses in 1975 we may still end up with a Thather like figure or maybe some one further to the right winning the election in 1980.
 
Could he survived the Paulson scandal or would cause his downfall?

I would like to see a timeline on this...

The Paulson scandal looks pretty bad. Also his handling of Northern Ireland looks dodgy.

All in all Reginald Maudling looks like a Prime Minister we were lucky to avoid.
 

MrHola

Banned
IDK, can one be really worse then Heath? BTW, he may have been a crap Home Secretary but as Prime Minister, he may have appointed a better one.
 
Could he survived the Paulson scandal or would cause his downfall?

If Maudling becomes leader then Paulson is butterflied away. Maudling only became involved with Paulson (and a lot of other, equally dodgy ventures) after he lost the leadership as a way of raising the money to fund his ministerial lifestyle on a reduced budget in opposition. As leader of the opposition, he presumably wouldn't have the money problems or the opportunity.

Likewise with his death, which was liver-related and the massive drinking only really took off after defeat.

btw, the idea that Powell not standing equals Maudling winning is pretty questionable. Thatcher voted for Heath. Keith Joseph voted for Heath. Maudling was no doyenne of the right, not then, and certainly not later. A lot of Maudling's support came from the 'old' right, but that was quite different to the 'new' economic right as embodied by Powell, who Heath had much more basic appeal to.
 
Last edited:
Top