I'm really impressed by this but my tears are soaking my tweed jacket,tank top, corduroys and desert boots at the long slow demise of the liberals( I suppose us old beardies will now all join the greens
)
)TLIAD: The Quiet Death of Liberal England
- Thread starter Agent Boot
- Start date
Thande
Donor
I'm wondering if there is any political niche here the Liberals would be capable of exploiting. I suppose they're the only unilateral disarmament party left if the Labour Right have slain that dragon.
I suppose in-universe historiography will say that the Liberals "should" have died out in the 50s (indeed wasn't the offer made to Grimond to wind up the party and join the Conservatives in return for a cabinet seat?) but were kept going by the local pacts you mention, briefly rallied in the 1970s due to discontent with both main parties (which also helped the rise of the SNP etc.) and finally inevitably died out when those pacts were withdrawn.
Though it does make me wonder what will happen to Orkney and Shetland, which I have a feeling would continue voting Liberal even if the Liberals were reduced to being an Orkney and Shetland nationalist movement.
I suppose in-universe historiography will say that the Liberals "should" have died out in the 50s (indeed wasn't the offer made to Grimond to wind up the party and join the Conservatives in return for a cabinet seat?) but were kept going by the local pacts you mention, briefly rallied in the 1970s due to discontent with both main parties (which also helped the rise of the SNP etc.) and finally inevitably died out when those pacts were withdrawn.
Though it does make me wonder what will happen to Orkney and Shetland, which I have a feeling would continue voting Liberal even if the Liberals were reduced to being an Orkney and Shetland nationalist movement.
Comments...
@Lindseyman - Thank you, and sorry. Maybe one day I'll do a UK equivelent of Fear, Loathing and Gumbo which shatters the two party system forever. That will at last give the Liberals their true place in the sun. I did have a rough outline to that effect, but working out STV seat totals and a plausible AND non-cliched development of "permenant coalition Britain" proved tricky.
@Thande - Very good points. In terms of niches - looking at the OTL history of the party and its successor there are a few I can identify, though whether they'd even exist here remains to be seen (butterflys, etc.) Looking at the OTL Lib Dems and their biggest period of success, their niche appears to have been "We're not the Tories" in Labour-averse southern England, followed by "We're more left wing than Labour" under Kennedy (specifically with reference to tuition fees and Iraq, though also on "Guardianista" issues like drugs and civil liberties.) With an inferred POD in the late '70s its quite possible that none of these opportunities exist. I've probably written myself into a corner with the TL premise, but there's always scope for false hope.
In-universe historiography is something I quite like touching on - whether for post-facto justification or pseudointellectual wankery. I imagine that the Grimond-Thorpe era Liberal Party would be seen as a UK equivelent to New Zealand's Social Credit Party - an alternative to the main two and a repository for protest votes from those who neither harbour strong partisan support or have deep understanding of the parties ideology.
OTL, to this day the continuity Liberal Party and SDP stand candidates in local elections. That at least probably rules out the party's complete extinction.
Orkney and Shetland is probably the closest the Liberals of the post-war period had to a safe seat (gained in the electoral nadir year of 1950 no less). Uniform swing makes it fall sooner than would probably be the case in reality. Interestingly, looking at the constituency results for post-1979, there are a lot of occassions when the opposition votes are in excess of 50% but very evenly divided, and its only in the past decade or so (2005 onwards) that the seat becomes ultra-safe. With a new candidate in 1983, and the political circumstances of that year much altered, its possible that the trend towards "ultra-safeness" is halted early.
@Lindseyman - Thank you, and sorry. Maybe one day I'll do a UK equivelent of Fear, Loathing and Gumbo which shatters the two party system forever. That will at last give the Liberals their true place in the sun. I did have a rough outline to that effect, but working out STV seat totals and a plausible AND non-cliched development of "permenant coalition Britain" proved tricky.
@Thande - Very good points. In terms of niches - looking at the OTL history of the party and its successor there are a few I can identify, though whether they'd even exist here remains to be seen (butterflys, etc.) Looking at the OTL Lib Dems and their biggest period of success, their niche appears to have been "We're not the Tories" in Labour-averse southern England, followed by "We're more left wing than Labour" under Kennedy (specifically with reference to tuition fees and Iraq, though also on "Guardianista" issues like drugs and civil liberties.) With an inferred POD in the late '70s its quite possible that none of these opportunities exist. I've probably written myself into a corner with the TL premise, but there's always scope for false hope
.In-universe historiography is something I quite like touching on - whether for post-facto justification or pseudointellectual wankery. I imagine that the Grimond-Thorpe era Liberal Party would be seen as a UK equivelent to New Zealand's Social Credit Party - an alternative to the main two and a repository for protest votes from those who neither harbour strong partisan support or have deep understanding of the parties ideology.
OTL, to this day the continuity Liberal Party and SDP stand candidates in local elections. That at least probably rules out the party's complete extinction.
Orkney and Shetland is probably the closest the Liberals of the post-war period had to a safe seat (gained in the electoral nadir year of 1950 no less). Uniform swing makes it fall sooner than would probably be the case in reality. Interestingly, looking at the constituency results for post-1979, there are a lot of occassions when the opposition votes are in excess of 50% but very evenly divided, and its only in the past decade or so (2005 onwards) that the seat becomes ultra-safe. With a new candidate in 1983, and the political circumstances of that year much altered, its possible that the trend towards "ultra-safeness" is halted early.
Can I introduce you to AndyC's The Fourth Lectern and its sequel The Horse Will Learn to Sing/The Fifth Lectern? You may find it interesting and get some ideas there.
As the nineties began, the “Hurd Boom” began to slow. Labour began to gain on the MacGregor government. Interventions in the Persian Gulf, while ultimately successful, provided no Falklands Factor. As shadow Trade and Industry spokesman Gordon Brown was to declare on election night in 1992, “Its the economy, you know...”
Lab 341 (45%), Con 286 (42%), Lib 1 (8%)
Labour majority 31
Labour returned to government after 13 years in opposition. MacGregor immediately resigned as Conservative leader, to be replaced by his former Chancellor. With the Liberal parliamentary party now effectively wiped out, even in their Scottish and Welsh hinterlands, Alan Beith would continue as parliamentary leader by default. Fragments of the Liberal tradition would be preserved elsewhere, by the Orkney and Shetland Movement and by the Parti Livrel Kernowyon (PLK), but it was the beginning of the end for a united national party. In mainland Scotland and Wales young Liberals became subsumed into nationalist parties, or else into the nascent Green Party.
First elected MP for Llanelli in 1970, Denzil Davies served as a junior Treasury Minister in the Callaghan government. A firm multilateralist, he was to rise swiftly though the opposition ranks in the early 80's, being made Shadow Defence Minister under Healey, and subsequently Shadow Foreign Secretary from 1987. Trusted by Healey for his consistent political moderation against the Left, Davies finally received the nod when his mentor retired.
Davies led his party through the twilight years of the Thatcher and MacGregor governments – with events doing much of the work of opposition for him. And so it was that after four years as party leader he rode a wave of popular and largely uncritical support into Downing Street.
The wider world was changing. Eastern Europe had freed itself from the yoke of communism, and the USSR was soon to dissolve. The two Germanies had reunited. One Europe seemed to be to mood of the moment.
But Davies was having none of it. Though of the Labour Right, he had long held true to a tradition of Euroscepticism running contrary to that of colleagues like Roy Jenkins and David Owen. Now that both Jenkins and Owen out the picture, and with the Left more than happy to go along with it, the government's policy was one of strict Euroscepticism. Both Thatcher and MacGregor had resisted the lure of monetary union, Davies maintained this aversion. It was a decision vindicated when the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, or ERM, collapsed in early 1993. Chancellor John Smith, a supporter of the ERM, was later to resign on health grounds. Many insiders at the time suspected that the true cause of Smith's resignation was an unproductive working relationship with his boss. Smith would retire at the next election.
Subsequent rejection of the Maastrict Treaty of European Integration led to the UK's ultimate departure from the new “European Union” in favour of a looser Free Trade Area. It was a consequence derided in political circles, yet popular among the wider electorate. It even won the supposed endorsement of recently-enobled Baroness Thatcher.
At home a growing economy and a “peace dividend” left a growing surplus to be directed at social spending. Per capita expenditure on health and education was significantly increased, though Davies was cautious to avoid the old “tax and spend” label by keeping direct tax rates stable.
Foreseeing the eventual decline of North Sea oil and gas reserves, Davies directed new funds towards the modernisation of Britain's remaining coal mines. Though many marginal pits had declined and closed throughout the 1980's, those still operated by the National Coal Board benefited significantly from the new investment. Britain would remain a net exporter of energy through into the 2010's.
On the opposition benches, the new Conservative leader made hard work of rallying his MPs. The loose discipline of government had been replaced by all-out in-fighting and struggles for factional supremacy. The “One Nation” adherents, overshadowed but nether fully supplanted, began to grow once again in numbers. Divided and inward-looking, the party struggled to maintain any public and media attention throughout the 1992-1996 period – a period retrospectively dubbed the “Davies Dictatorship” in light of the apparent single party dominance.
King had filled numerous Cabinet roles under Thatcher, before being made Chancellor under MacGregor. Tarred, unfairly perhaps, with being at the helm as a boom slipped into a recession, King had succeeded to the leadership more by default than though any great enthusiasm. Lampooned in TV satire as “Mr. Grey” (and by Private Eye as “The Invisible Man”), King was the wrong man at the wrong time to lead the 90's Conservatives.
In 1994 a Sunday Times article carried the confessions of an anonymous KGB defector. Among them was the allegation that King had been a long-standing Soviet informant by the name of “Agent Tsar”. King sued for libel and the allegations were swiftly retracted. It was the single most interesting thing to happen under King's leadership.
Lab 341 (45%), Con 286 (42%), Lib 1 (8%)
Labour majority 31
Labour returned to government after 13 years in opposition. MacGregor immediately resigned as Conservative leader, to be replaced by his former Chancellor. With the Liberal parliamentary party now effectively wiped out, even in their Scottish and Welsh hinterlands, Alan Beith would continue as parliamentary leader by default. Fragments of the Liberal tradition would be preserved elsewhere, by the Orkney and Shetland Movement and by the Parti Livrel Kernowyon (PLK), but it was the beginning of the end for a united national party. In mainland Scotland and Wales young Liberals became subsumed into nationalist parties, or else into the nascent Green Party.
Denzil Davies
First elected MP for Llanelli in 1970, Denzil Davies served as a junior Treasury Minister in the Callaghan government. A firm multilateralist, he was to rise swiftly though the opposition ranks in the early 80's, being made Shadow Defence Minister under Healey, and subsequently Shadow Foreign Secretary from 1987. Trusted by Healey for his consistent political moderation against the Left, Davies finally received the nod when his mentor retired.
Davies led his party through the twilight years of the Thatcher and MacGregor governments – with events doing much of the work of opposition for him. And so it was that after four years as party leader he rode a wave of popular and largely uncritical support into Downing Street.
The wider world was changing. Eastern Europe had freed itself from the yoke of communism, and the USSR was soon to dissolve. The two Germanies had reunited. One Europe seemed to be to mood of the moment.
But Davies was having none of it. Though of the Labour Right, he had long held true to a tradition of Euroscepticism running contrary to that of colleagues like Roy Jenkins and David Owen. Now that both Jenkins and Owen out the picture, and with the Left more than happy to go along with it, the government's policy was one of strict Euroscepticism. Both Thatcher and MacGregor had resisted the lure of monetary union, Davies maintained this aversion. It was a decision vindicated when the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, or ERM, collapsed in early 1993. Chancellor John Smith, a supporter of the ERM, was later to resign on health grounds. Many insiders at the time suspected that the true cause of Smith's resignation was an unproductive working relationship with his boss. Smith would retire at the next election.
Subsequent rejection of the Maastrict Treaty of European Integration led to the UK's ultimate departure from the new “European Union” in favour of a looser Free Trade Area. It was a consequence derided in political circles, yet popular among the wider electorate. It even won the supposed endorsement of recently-enobled Baroness Thatcher.
At home a growing economy and a “peace dividend” left a growing surplus to be directed at social spending. Per capita expenditure on health and education was significantly increased, though Davies was cautious to avoid the old “tax and spend” label by keeping direct tax rates stable.
Foreseeing the eventual decline of North Sea oil and gas reserves, Davies directed new funds towards the modernisation of Britain's remaining coal mines. Though many marginal pits had declined and closed throughout the 1980's, those still operated by the National Coal Board benefited significantly from the new investment. Britain would remain a net exporter of energy through into the 2010's.
On the opposition benches, the new Conservative leader made hard work of rallying his MPs. The loose discipline of government had been replaced by all-out in-fighting and struggles for factional supremacy. The “One Nation” adherents, overshadowed but nether fully supplanted, began to grow once again in numbers. Divided and inward-looking, the party struggled to maintain any public and media attention throughout the 1992-1996 period – a period retrospectively dubbed the “Davies Dictatorship” in light of the apparent single party dominance.
Tom King
King had filled numerous Cabinet roles under Thatcher, before being made Chancellor under MacGregor. Tarred, unfairly perhaps, with being at the helm as a boom slipped into a recession, King had succeeded to the leadership more by default than though any great enthusiasm. Lampooned in TV satire as “Mr. Grey” (and by Private Eye as “The Invisible Man”), King was the wrong man at the wrong time to lead the 90's Conservatives.
In 1994 a Sunday Times article carried the confessions of an anonymous KGB defector. Among them was the allegation that King had been a long-standing Soviet informant by the name of “Agent Tsar”. King sued for libel and the allegations were swiftly retracted. It was the single most interesting thing to happen under King's leadership.
@Turquoise Blue - Thanks. I believe I started reading those when they were still works in progress, clearly I'm long overdue a catchup. I also very much enjoyedthe excellent Were You Still Up For Balls with its minute by minute coverage of Alt-2010 (and knowledge of Birmingham politics). I've had my own Alt-2010 timeline on the backburner for about a year now. It was several thousand words in before I'd even gotten to coalition negotiations, and I got rather bogged down in endless research and pseudo-scientific second guessing of plausibility - the perils of trying to write a "Hard AH" timeline in the stye of EdT. I may go back to it yet, and on that basis I'm tried to avoid other 2010 timelines for fear of being unduly influenced at the cost of originality.
@The Red - Thank you. On a forum filled with great writers and experts in probably all time periods and locale, its very easy to get intimidated. Your praise means a lot.
@The Red - Thank you. On a forum filled with great writers and experts in probably all time periods and locale, its very easy to get intimidated. Your praise means a lot.
Thande
Donor
Mm, good point - one shouldn't confuse consistent wins with a safe seat, because the wins could be close ones.
Bolt451
Gone Fishin'
Every time I see it I shed a tear, Meadow.
Great stuff so far Boot
shame you didn't stop lurking sooner.With the 90's boom in full effect, and the government generally popular, a confident Davies opted for an early election in May 1996. Though the Labour vote would fall slightly on four years earlier, the Conservative vote slipped further still (the seemingly direction-less King leadership to blame). The declining Liberal vote was again squeezed, defying earlier hopes of a revival. Limited “mid-term” local election success, most notably in Home Counties marginal seats, could not be sustained. The end result was the biggest Labour landslide since 1945.
Lab 381 (43%), Con 248 (38%), Lib 1 (3%)
Labour majority 103
King's resignation was announced by the Conservative Press Secretary the morning after the election. King himself only learned of it through a breakfast news broadcast. The ensuing leadership election would mark a shift in the party's dominant ideology. Chris Patten, part of a new generation of post-Thatcher Conservative leaders, would be elected on the third ballot.
Davies' second term as Prime Minister would prove to be much as his first. Prosperity at home combined with peace abroad led to general good feeling. The fatherly figure of Davies commanded respect among much of the electorate. Nineties Britain, comfortable with itself and with its place in the world, was a far cry from the chaotic Callaghan years and the polarisation of Thatcher. The government continued to attend to “bread and butter” issues, all while the economy seemed to take care of itself. Chancellor Cook avoided any public hubris, but was privately pleased to be shredding the old stereotypes about Labour's economic competence.
While the left became agitated that not all of Thatcher's reforms were reversed – although British Rail was fully restored as a National public service, and the Government once again became majority shareholders in British Petroleum – Davies held to a quietly centrist course. Others further to the right – self-styled “modernisers” - wanted him to push further, adopting more of traditional Tory ground. Again Davies rejected their calls. As a twice election winner, what did they know that he didn't?
Davies further defied some within his party (and especially within the Welsh Labour Party) in opposing any moves towards devolution. The old Labour folk memories of the failed attempts in 1979, and of being held to ransom by Scottish Nationalists still lingered. As time put distance between the present day and the governments of the '80s, support for devolution had gradually subsided into fringe irrelevance. Only in the highlands of Scotland and the isolated communities of north Wales did that torch still burn.
Likewise many on Labour's liberal left harboured ideas of constitutional and electoral reform. A sharp drop in turnout at the '96 election to just 61% of the electorate seemed to vindicate the desire for change. Proposals on changing the electoral system for elections to the European Parliament, to local councils, and possibly even to Westminster itself were pitched in a series of Guardian and Independent opinion pieces. Naturally these proposals won the support of the lonely Member for Berwick and his increasingly decentralised party. Ultimately, against the opposition of the unions, the old Labour right, and the Official Opposition, they went nowhere. What enthusiasm for reform had existed in opposition strangely vanished in government. Davies' personal indifference only confirmed the inevitable. The House of Lords was also left intact. With no clear consensus on what should replace it, and with the provisions of the 1911 Parliament Act sufficient to allow passage of the government's 1992 and 1996 election platforms, there was no great hurry towards abolition.
Chris Patten
Chris Patten, the MP for Bath since 1979, represented a new breed of Conservative. In the previous decade he could have been labelled a “wet”. With Margaret long gone, and with the political centre ground realigned under Davies, there was clear scope for a party shift. Though Patten had been a junior Minister in the Thatcher and MacGregor governments, among the wider electorate he wasn't associated with either, and could thus claim to be part of a new generation.
Early changes were mostly cosmetic or procedural. The party logo was updated. Leadership elections were reformed to allow for greater membership input. In 1998 Patten intervened to shut down an affiliated Conservative youth group. The Federation of Conservative Students had been formed after the older Young Conservative network had fractured along factional lines in the early 1980's. The Federation was home to the most virulently right-wing in both economic and social views, and was a perennial source of embarrassment to the party. From time to time the Federation was linked to remnant chapters of the National Front among other far-right bodies. After a Federation social event – a fancy dress party where guests had dressed as highly offensive Chinese racial caricatures, ostensibly in celebration of the peaceful transfer of Hong Kong – Patten had to act. The Federation was disbanded, and its members barred from the party for life.
Over four years Patten began to shift his party's policy stances. Official policy became more pro-Europe, in line with Patten's own views. Following the Davies renationalisations, Patten sought a new consensus whereby privatisation would only be carried out on solid economic grounds. There was, he argued, a rationale behind keeping certain natural monopolies in public ownership. Further he argued that there should be a clear distinction between a business which was naturally more efficient in the private sector, and a service which was to be kept public. As a concession to the right, Patten also pledged a review of the BBC license fee.
The crunch came in 1999 when Baroness Thatcher made a number of explicit remarks condemning Patten. Had the Conservatives been in government this might have been problematic for Patten. In opposition it was a gift. For every disgruntled backbench MP who agreed with the Iron Lady, there were hundreds of Northern, Scottish, and Welsh voters who now looked on Patten more warmly.
Lab 381 (43%), Con 248 (38%), Lib 1 (3%)
Labour majority 103
King's resignation was announced by the Conservative Press Secretary the morning after the election. King himself only learned of it through a breakfast news broadcast. The ensuing leadership election would mark a shift in the party's dominant ideology. Chris Patten, part of a new generation of post-Thatcher Conservative leaders, would be elected on the third ballot.
Davies' second term as Prime Minister would prove to be much as his first. Prosperity at home combined with peace abroad led to general good feeling. The fatherly figure of Davies commanded respect among much of the electorate. Nineties Britain, comfortable with itself and with its place in the world, was a far cry from the chaotic Callaghan years and the polarisation of Thatcher. The government continued to attend to “bread and butter” issues, all while the economy seemed to take care of itself. Chancellor Cook avoided any public hubris, but was privately pleased to be shredding the old stereotypes about Labour's economic competence.
While the left became agitated that not all of Thatcher's reforms were reversed – although British Rail was fully restored as a National public service, and the Government once again became majority shareholders in British Petroleum – Davies held to a quietly centrist course. Others further to the right – self-styled “modernisers” - wanted him to push further, adopting more of traditional Tory ground. Again Davies rejected their calls. As a twice election winner, what did they know that he didn't?
Davies further defied some within his party (and especially within the Welsh Labour Party) in opposing any moves towards devolution. The old Labour folk memories of the failed attempts in 1979, and of being held to ransom by Scottish Nationalists still lingered. As time put distance between the present day and the governments of the '80s, support for devolution had gradually subsided into fringe irrelevance. Only in the highlands of Scotland and the isolated communities of north Wales did that torch still burn.
Likewise many on Labour's liberal left harboured ideas of constitutional and electoral reform. A sharp drop in turnout at the '96 election to just 61% of the electorate seemed to vindicate the desire for change. Proposals on changing the electoral system for elections to the European Parliament, to local councils, and possibly even to Westminster itself were pitched in a series of Guardian and Independent opinion pieces. Naturally these proposals won the support of the lonely Member for Berwick and his increasingly decentralised party. Ultimately, against the opposition of the unions, the old Labour right, and the Official Opposition, they went nowhere. What enthusiasm for reform had existed in opposition strangely vanished in government. Davies' personal indifference only confirmed the inevitable. The House of Lords was also left intact. With no clear consensus on what should replace it, and with the provisions of the 1911 Parliament Act sufficient to allow passage of the government's 1992 and 1996 election platforms, there was no great hurry towards abolition.
Chris Patten
Chris Patten, the MP for Bath since 1979, represented a new breed of Conservative. In the previous decade he could have been labelled a “wet”. With Margaret long gone, and with the political centre ground realigned under Davies, there was clear scope for a party shift. Though Patten had been a junior Minister in the Thatcher and MacGregor governments, among the wider electorate he wasn't associated with either, and could thus claim to be part of a new generation.
Early changes were mostly cosmetic or procedural. The party logo was updated. Leadership elections were reformed to allow for greater membership input. In 1998 Patten intervened to shut down an affiliated Conservative youth group. The Federation of Conservative Students had been formed after the older Young Conservative network had fractured along factional lines in the early 1980's. The Federation was home to the most virulently right-wing in both economic and social views, and was a perennial source of embarrassment to the party. From time to time the Federation was linked to remnant chapters of the National Front among other far-right bodies. After a Federation social event – a fancy dress party where guests had dressed as highly offensive Chinese racial caricatures, ostensibly in celebration of the peaceful transfer of Hong Kong – Patten had to act. The Federation was disbanded, and its members barred from the party for life.
Over four years Patten began to shift his party's policy stances. Official policy became more pro-Europe, in line with Patten's own views. Following the Davies renationalisations, Patten sought a new consensus whereby privatisation would only be carried out on solid economic grounds. There was, he argued, a rationale behind keeping certain natural monopolies in public ownership. Further he argued that there should be a clear distinction between a business which was naturally more efficient in the private sector, and a service which was to be kept public. As a concession to the right, Patten also pledged a review of the BBC license fee.
The crunch came in 1999 when Baroness Thatcher made a number of explicit remarks condemning Patten. Had the Conservatives been in government this might have been problematic for Patten. In opposition it was a gift. For every disgruntled backbench MP who agreed with the Iron Lady, there were hundreds of Northern, Scottish, and Welsh voters who now looked on Patten more warmly.
A really excellent update. I particularly liked the AAH.com conversation. Better than most of the DBWIs around here, to be honest.
So Davies is a new addition to our Hipster PMs List. But longtime stalwart Chris Patten has arrived too. Feels like the Pattenator will be in government by 2001, and that means we've a way to go yet. Good on you for your interesting choices, and this is rapidly becoming one of my favourite TLIADs. A simple experiment in shutting out the Liberals, and what that forces the two broad churches to become. Lovely.
So Davies is a new addition to our Hipster PMs List. But longtime stalwart Chris Patten has arrived too. Feels like the Pattenator will be in government by 2001, and that means we've a way to go yet. Good on you for your interesting choices, and this is rapidly becoming one of my favourite TLIADs. A simple experiment in shutting out the Liberals, and what that forces the two broad churches to become. Lovely.
I second the praise of others; this is a rather delightful story, and an interesting take on a Liberal demise. Welcome aboard!
I disagree with the idea that devolution could just become a fringe issue, there were too much issues tied with Scottish and Welsh nationalism, and especially NI!
Apart from that, everything else looks good.
Apart from that, everything else looks good.
Last edited:
This has been an interestingly different take. If there are any other TLs that involve a total Liberal extinction at Westminster while still being somewhat recognisable I can't think of them off the top of my head. With today being the start of the President of Ireland's state visit I am wondering how events have gone in that part of the world. Probably much the same, I would guess.
Stop trying to make threads about you.
I do agree that the handwaving of devolution raised an eyebrow, however. I'm not sure the different 1980s we saw ITTL would do much to make it go away as an issue. Perhaps there's a storytelling reason for it to have disappeared, but I'm not yet convinced.
What's the overall makeup of Parliament like now, Boot? The Tories and Labour haven't quite got all the seats between them.
Isn't it something of a tradition within itself that TLIAD's get to have a few whacky handwaves? Removing the popularity of devolution is a stretch but I've seen sillier stuff.
Presumably Northern Ireland still has its own parties, even if the SNP and Plaid have declined.
Re: Devolution
Granted, "fringe irrelevence" is probably too strong a term. What I intended was that the only parties persistantly advocating devolution in Westminster ITTL would be the Scottish and Welsh nationalist parties
My reasoning for a weaker devolutionist movement is as follows:
1) Davies is a staunch opponent of devolution, as were many Labour politicians of his generation (including originally Neil Kinnock). IOTL we had Smith, who played a key role in the parliamentary efforts to introduce devolution in the 1970s and who as Labour leader committed the party to introducing a Scottish Parliament. Instead of Smith's support (and Blair's later passive support), the movement here has a Prime Minister who actively opposes it.
Whatever support exists for devolution in the wider country, it won't go anywhere until devolution legislation is introduced in Westminster. That won't happen so long as a Davies-led Labour Party holds a three-figure majority. Davies of course faces internal party opposition - from senior figures like Donald Dewar and in the form of perennial conference resolutions - but for the time being that's kept in check.
2) Unlike in OTL, the Conservative Party here retains significant support north of the border, enough to retain a number of Scottish Tory MPs. With a less "extreme" Thatcherism, the averted implementation of the poll tax, and the Conservatives not being viewed as an exclusively "English" party, that specifically anti-Tory strain of Scottish Nationalism is weakened. The SNP here would likely end up as slightly less of a Scandinavian-style Social Democratic alternative to Labour than in OTL, and closer to the old "Tartan Tories" label.
So overall devolutionist sentiment is only slightly weakened as compared to OTL. In parliament however the political leadership remains firmly unionist. The result of this is that the devolutionist movement, while probably more powerful in-universe than it had ever been before, remains locked out of the political mainstream as exemplified by the Westminster bubble.
Incidently ITTL the SNP will probably become the 3rd party in terms of seats, albeit a very distant 3rd.
Granted, "fringe irrelevence" is probably too strong a term. What I intended was that the only parties persistantly advocating devolution in Westminster ITTL would be the Scottish and Welsh nationalist parties
My reasoning for a weaker devolutionist movement is as follows:
1) Davies is a staunch opponent of devolution, as were many Labour politicians of his generation (including originally Neil Kinnock). IOTL we had Smith, who played a key role in the parliamentary efforts to introduce devolution in the 1970s and who as Labour leader committed the party to introducing a Scottish Parliament. Instead of Smith's support (and Blair's later passive support), the movement here has a Prime Minister who actively opposes it.
Whatever support exists for devolution in the wider country, it won't go anywhere until devolution legislation is introduced in Westminster. That won't happen so long as a Davies-led Labour Party holds a three-figure majority. Davies of course faces internal party opposition - from senior figures like Donald Dewar and in the form of perennial conference resolutions - but for the time being that's kept in check.
2) Unlike in OTL, the Conservative Party here retains significant support north of the border, enough to retain a number of Scottish Tory MPs. With a less "extreme" Thatcherism, the averted implementation of the poll tax, and the Conservatives not being viewed as an exclusively "English" party, that specifically anti-Tory strain of Scottish Nationalism is weakened. The SNP here would likely end up as slightly less of a Scandinavian-style Social Democratic alternative to Labour than in OTL, and closer to the old "Tartan Tories" label.
So overall devolutionist sentiment is only slightly weakened as compared to OTL. In parliament however the political leadership remains firmly unionist. The result of this is that the devolutionist movement, while probably more powerful in-universe than it had ever been before, remains locked out of the political mainstream as exemplified by the Westminster bubble.
Incidently ITTL the SNP will probably become the 3rd party in terms of seats, albeit a very distant 3rd.