1992-1997 UK Update+ 1995 UK Elections
Churchill the Younger worked to finally whit away at the “Nationalized State”, partially the love child of Foreign Secretary, Margaret Thatcher, who would famously “crossover” into economic affairs. Crossman, while a Laborite, had already privatized British Telecoms and British Sugar in the early 1980’s. “Mad Mitchell” had privatized British Airways, in order to fund military spending, his only notable economic reform for a ministry defined by foreign affairs outside the country. Churchill wanted to establish an economic legacy that would be just as permanent as his father’s foreign legacy. So he finished the job those before him started.
Churchill would sell privatization as “building upon the immediate post-war success”. He said, “when times are good, one must prepare for bad times”. Moreover, inflation was a key issue in the post-war environment, as it was elsewhere, and privatization was seen as the key cure. The economy was still growing, but there was fear of it overheating.
Churchill would begin by ending British involvement in the lorry industry outside of key export subsidies, a compromise with the “one-nationers” he would regret in trade agreements later.
Unlike American Conservatives, Churchill would also focus on reducing taxation, especially the VAT by 5%. While the right wing of the party preferred the VAT, which taxed spending, over a tax on income, Churchill knew that the VAT was a “tax paid by everyone” and wanted to ensure, “everyone got a tax cut” as a way to get the moderates to agree to the “essential nature” of the tax cut, although income taxes would also be slashed by 15%. The budget looked to be a bit off kilter, and thus Churchill would then move undo what he called “The Big Two: Council Houses and Steel”.
Churchill wanted to build a culture of homeownership in the UK, resembling that of the United States. Moreover, he wanted the new neighborhoods built at great expense post-war to remain something the UK to proud of. He felt that through homeownership, a sense of community and self-worth would be instilled into middle income Britons. He also felt that if given something property and land to conserve and defend, more voters would pull for the Tories. Moreover, a recent report had found cases of corruption in the lower end of the council house business.
Churchill would pass the 1994 Housing Act. This act allowed tenants who owned their houses for two years to buy their houses at a 35% discount of market prices and a 45% discount for a flat. Tenants of over 15 years received a 51% discount. Moreover, council houses would now be the property of designated non-profit housing associations, not the government. These organizations were allowed to receive private financing. Their tenants would also be moved to the “right to buy” scheme. Certain standards would be set to set overcrowding as a criminal offense as many unscrupulous people had been abusing the system post-war.
These privatizations created a nation of shareholders and NGO’s (the housing associations) and credited for inspiring Bundy, though Bundy would point more towards Bob Dole.
Churchill discussing his economic reforms, and their relationship to Bundy’s policies, with ABC News
Churchill would continue by privatizing British Steel. British steel had been losing money steadily, and was approaching complete disaster. Churchill would sell all of the government’s steel holdings and move towards complete privatization. The unions, fearful for their jobs, would roar in protest with a series of marches. However, England had just watched America break down in labour strikes, leading to the start of a trade war. Churchill would pound that the UK “was better than the damned cowboys, gangsters, and hoodlums”. After a two days of protests, Churchill threatened to bring in new workers, even famously busing in the unemployed outside the gates to steel mills. While Labour Governments had whittled away at the early 70’s labour restrictions, labour still was not as powerful as in the past, and both sides knew they would lose with escalation.
The economy started to get going again, as demand for steel from the United States suddenly rose on the back of announced French export quotas leading to investors publicly announcing that if privatized, more furnaces would open. The steel unions, confident employment would be steady, called off the strikes as Churchill promised he would not “fight a stupid trade war” and would slow down liberalization for a while.
However, Churchill’s rapid moves scared some. When ideas of privatization of Petroleum, Railways, and Coal came, many moderates were fearful of further union unrest (which had been avoided outside for the steel strikes) and Churchill had to either move on or stand down on them in cabinet meetings. Churchill was forceful, but feared that if he did too much, all the gains would be lost.
When Canada abandoned the trade deal just negotiated a couple years previously by Churchill, under the NDP government, and an Indian trade agreement fell apart, Churchill looked in a bit of a rut, although he had secured access to Ukrainian wheat and beet sugar through an FTA. Churchill promised he would focus on trade, after selling off government control of all UK airports (most had been sold off by Crossman and Mitchell to fund military spending leaving a few northern airports) a minor move supported even by the liberal party.
Churchill would then travel to Japan to secure an FTA. He would personally greet the Emperor, in a moment of great fanfare. They would start the trip with a quiet dinner between the two leaders. Churchill hoped to seal a cultural bond between Japan and Great Britain, one that had been ruptured by the second world war, but could very much grow again between the two island nations.
[A/N: British commonwealth dominions are covered by these trade arrangements. Especially important in the far east with Japan. Reminder from earlier ITL.
· Hong Kong
· Singapore
· Honduras
· Aden
· Guiana
· Gambia
· Malta
· North Borneo
· Mauritius]
However, on the trip back to the UK Churchill fell ill, and after being bedridden for two weeks, announced he would call for another election later that year, and resign after the results. Many believed that the war and post-war recovery, while both excellent, had drained him. While popular, the old grandees and landowners of the One-Nation faction disliked him. They united around the candidacy of Foreign Minister Michael Heseltine. The Monday Club tories put up Margaret Thatcher, but she was getting long in the tooth. Churchill, acknowledging that winning another election would be difficult, decided against putting up much of a fight, after securing a promise (at the threat of a no-confidence vote), that a Heseltine government would not reverse any of Churchill’s more liberal (in the European sense of the term) economic initiatives (Heseltine was even an evangelist for the Right to Buy scheme, all the better).
While only PM for a short while, Churchill built a legacy worthy of the family name.
Meanwhile, Labour was relieved that they would not have to run against a Churchill.
Roy Mason would campaign as the defender of industry, labour, and the coal mines. Mason also wanted to exploit the recent North Sea oil discoveries [ITL WWIII delays north sea oil exploitation]. He also made an enemy out of India, a rising world power, specifically focusing on the Indian Scooters that had become ubiquitous in the richer neighborhoods of London, railing against cheap Indian labor flooding the market with knockoffs of British products. (This was part of a modernization initiative from India, and these industries helped advance a growing middle class).
His slogan went, “Mason, friend of the miners, tough on cheaters.”
The Liberals saw the anti-Indian and pro-industry focus of Labor, and the “Churchillite ”Liberty Conservative Imperialist” nature of the Conservatives, and saw an opening. They chose to “elect the defector”, Tony Blair. While many long-time liberals disliked the move, many saw his “immense electoral potential”.
Newly minted Liberal, Tony Blair saw that privatization was relatively popular amongst the wealthy, but socially progressive, liberal constituencies in certain areas. He would “walk the line” on privatization by defending the cuts already made, but rejecting further cuts that would ”lead to instability”. This balancing act would allow the liberals to remain competitive in Scotland, although Wales looked like a lost cause as Roy rallied the miners. Tony Blair campaigned against trident, for integration with Europe, social liberalism, and moderate economics. The liberals also stood for closer relations with Europe, as both Churchill and Roy Mason “distrusted the Continent”. Moreover, Blair was younger and had more “personality” than “Churchill the Younger” and “Uncle Roy”.
The New Face of the Liberal Party
A final twist to the election came on the night before the elections. Michael Heseltine was caught in a car accident in which he hit a cyclist. He had been speeding, apparently as he was to show up at an event that day and was running late. While he had already done a poor job of defending Churchill’s record, an increasingly strong economy (especially given world conditions) was thought to be the key to what many saw as a potential Tory upset, especially after (untrue) rumors came out that he had been drunk. However, these accusations, which would be proven to be wrong later on, wouldn’t primarily benefit the “rough and tumble” ex-coal miner Mason, but the young, handsome, and “goodie two shoes” Tony Blair.
[Wikibox: Roy Mason defeats Conservative Michael Heseltine
and Liberal Tony Blair but is forced to have an alliance with Blair.]
Previous 1992 results: Tories (Churchill) 326 Labour (Mason) 262 Liberals (Paddy Ashdown) 55
Results:
297 Labour (Roy Mason) 91 Liberals (Tony Blair) (Lab-Lib Coalition) 272 Tories (Michael Heseltine) 330 seats needed for a majority
When election night came, what everyone had come to fear, came to be. A hung parliament. Many believe that if there was no last minute surprise, Mason or Heseltine would have won outright, but we will never know.
Thankfully, Mason and Blair had been prepared to work together and a deal was hatched. The liberals would accept 4 appointments in the Cabinet, and a few key policy concessions.
The Tories, meanwhile, were shocked at the pre-election night surprise, but happy that even with such accusations they had forced a hung parliament, and moved on, with the exceptions of the One-Nation faction, who had lost a great leader, but the Josephites and Churchillites also needed help.
Firstly, no industries were to be re-nationalized. Blair did not "lust for privatization" like Thatcher or Churchill, but didn’t believe “going back would do any good” as far as other nationalizations Roy Mason might have had in mind.
Secondly, Roy Mason would continue negotiations with Germany and begin negotiations with the Kalmar Union, over trade and work towards an arrangement, regardless of his Euroscepticism.
Thirdly, The Scots would receive greater autonomy regarding “social laws”.
The Liberals would agree not to “interfere” in much else. Roy Mason, seeing that maybe this would be the way forward, agreed.
Roy Mason accepted that major new nationalization would not occur. However, he decided instead to “double down” on the nationalized energy industries. He wanted to make them modern and competitive. He asked for massive increases in state-controlled research in these industries, to make them more useful and successful long term. British coal transport became safer and swifter under Mason’s leadership. Moreover, wages for workers would increase by 10% and pensions by 5%, as the unions demanded. Both would occur. Moreover, the various mines and nuclear plants would be established into the Ministry of Coal and Nuclear Power. This centralization would streamline the bureaucracy without “cutting into the working stiff”. Moreover, more pits would be opened up and new nuclear plants built, which would decrease energy costs. These new expenses would be paid for by devaluing the pound sterling by printing more money and increases to the inheritance tax. France, Japan, and the US would protest this currency manipulation but refused to start a currency war, especially as they wanted to focus on punishing India for its long-time poor behavior.
Roy Mason forced the UK become the exclusive outside coal supplier for the Nordic Union, thanks to promises of good worker treatment, in return for opening up fish markets in the UK and increased immigration and education rights. In addition, British Petroleum gained rights to previously unknown North Sea oil, even in Norwegian territory, in return for a cheap deal on forty British-made cargo ships (there being a shortage post-war), eight submarines (two for each member of the union), and other military equipment (small arms and ammunition).
The Miners with “Uncle Roy”, their best friend
British Coal Mines experienced a renaissance thanks to “their good friend Roy”. Meanwhile, the “North Sea Swindle” as it would be termed in the Norway, lead to a Northern Oil Boom. However, those industries that Labour had “avoided”-British Telecoms, Airways and Steel, had also benefited, and voters disliked the idea of nationalizing them as well, especially in such good times. Moreover, some would criticize Labour for turning the United Kingdom into a commodity focused economy and even a “PetroState”. Fees would be cut, nationalized industries support (e.g. new rail tracks would be laid), and welfare payment of the disabled raised, thanks to money from the Nationalized Oil Industry. Tories and Laborites would fight on who had achieved more, and on where to go, which would make for great television, while the liberals would take credit for “keeping both sides in line”.
Roy Mason would also attack India as a currency manipulator. India had been steadily devaluing their currency, even during their economic growth rapid economic growth. Combined with subsidies, cheap Indian products had begun to food the British markets while British products and services were denied entry by the Indian Government. Churchill had tried to negotiate a fair trade agreement with India that would grant greater access to British firms, but failed miserably.
Roy Mason would work with his fellow Commonwealth leaders in 1997, and officially announce a united 5% tariff on all Indian goods that would be in retaliation for their currency manipulation. Mason was even able to get the tariff-hating Bundy regime to follow this policy. Sanjay Gandhi's India would be increasingly squeezed and punished for its “bad behavior”. This made Sanjay very unhappy, but didn't hurt relations too much and Mason was also credited for preserving British Jobs. Eventually, by the end of the year India would allow their currency to increase in value over the following months to a natural level. Mason had "kept India from breaking the rules” and won a massive moral victory in favor of the British Spirit and economic victory in favor of the common laborer. While the Liberals disliked the tariffs, Mason's embrace of the Kalmar Union, unusual for a Euroskeptic like himself, won Tony Blair (a Europhile) over.
Roy Mason, leader of the British Empire, admiring an air show at what looked like the height of his power.