What if Neil Kinnock had won the 1992 UK election and defeated John Major and the Conservatives? Let's say that the result is this(I got this using Electoral Calculus)
1992 UK election results
Neil Kinnock-Labour: 337+108 39.2%
John Major-Conservative: 264-112 37.6%
Paddy Ashdown-LibDem: 24+2 17.3%
651 seats
326 seats for majority

That result would be in line with the polling, which showed a close race but Labour getting a slight edge. How could this be achieved? I'm not a buyer of the theory that the Sheffield Rally or events in the campaign were the main contributors to Labour's shock defeat. Perhaps if Labour hadn't had Smith's 'shadow budget' and had better handled the tax issue they might have won. What do you think? If Labour had won, how would they do in government? 1992 may have been a poisoned chalice election with the recession and Black Wednesday. How would Labour handle those challenges? How would Labour handle the Maastricht Treaty? Would they be the ones to face a Eurosceptic rebellion in their ranks? What would they do in government? What would be the longer term effects of a Labour government in the 1990s that is not yet New Labour instead of the conservatives? On that subject, what would happen to New Labour? how would Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's careers go? On the Conservative side, what would happen to the party after the 1992 defeat? Major's gone, who would replace him? Ken Clarke? Lamont? Heseltine? Would the party still be Eurosceptic without its experience in the 1990s or would it go differently on that issue? Most likely, the party would be in better health with the 1992 defeat instead of having the election they were supposed to lose and then suffering the landslide 1997 defeat. Would the Tories win the 1997 election? If so, how would they do leading the UK into the 21st century? Would the Tories go to war in Iraq? Would they be saddled with the financial crisis or not? How would a Labour victory in 1992 effect British politics in the long term? What if?
 
On that subject, what would happen to New Labour? how would Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's careers go?

One of the reasons New Labour happened was because 'old' Labour was considered unelectable - and that won't be the case if Labour have just been elected. Blair and those like him will likely still be reformists but not to the same extent, and Kinnock will be the one seen as having 'transformed' Labour. Blair and Brown themselves are going to be Cabinet men (Employment and Trade & Industry respectively) so their reforming plans will be focused on ministries and law and the country as a whole. By the time Labour's out of power, whenever that is, Blair and Brown will be the prominent figures in the party and thus the older establishment that the new wave of reformists are kicking against. (Someone else will probably seize on the name "New Labour")
 
The ERM fiasco might have destroyed Brown's political capital early on; from what I've read weren't he (and John Smith) pretty gung ho about it?
 
Heseltine is unlikely to be Tory leader, after he challenged Thatcher, he was toxic to too many Tory MPs. I am not sure the strength of euroscepticism with the Tories at that point. If they are willing to elect someone from the Tory left, then maybe Clarke could pull it off, if not, Lamont would be favourite, but he would be damaged goods after a poor economy helped to get the Tories kicked out of office. Is 1992 too early for someone a bit younger, like Howard or Lilley for instance?

Either way, I imagine it would be a difficult few years for the Tories in opposition, seeing as Maastricht still needs to be passed, and whichever way they are whipped to vote, there is going to be some considerable backlash against the leader, particularly as Labour are likely to pass it in full, with the social chapter. But that said, if Black Wednesday still happens, Labour would be too discredited on the economy to win again, so it is likely the Tories win a majority in 1997, but the fact that Labour managed to get into government would remove the need for excessive modernization in the eyes of Labour members, so maybe Brown and Blair are passed over in favour of someone a bit more to the left, maybe Cook, Blunkett, or Harman?
 
Cook seems likely.

On the economy, Labour would be hit over Black Wednesday but they'll also have (unless they crap the bed) an improved economy nearer the 1997 election. That could keep them in power, if they play their cards right during the campaign. Worst case scenario they stay in power but as part of a Lib Dem coalition formed on "screw Tories".

One probable liability in the election would be Kinnock's been Labour leader for fourteen years and might start to look 'old'. Then again he might not want to do another four years.
 
Top