WI: Heath/Thorpe Coalition in Feb 1974

He was gonna resign after the winter of discontent. If the election is in February 1979 it’s still gonna happen
I still so not think that Callaghan would resign over the Winter of Discontent as he could blame it on the conservative/liberal coalition before him as it is the ramifications of there economic policy.
 
If this leads to Labour, rather than the Conservatives, reaping the benefits of the late '70s/early '80s economic turmoil, would Britain have perhaps dodged neoliberalism to a greater extent than most Western countries? Or would the government have ended up going the route of Hawke/Keating Australian Labor or Lange/Douglas New Zealand Labour?
 
I don't think it was even so much a question of cuts but of deregulating the economy and, at least in NZ's case, some privatization (I think they called it "asset sales") as well. What's interesting is that in both AUS and NZ, this happened under Labo(u)r governments. I know that in Australia, they also negotiated a wage-restraint agreement with unions and established universal health care.
 
I think something that needs to be mentioned is the IMF crisis. Labour went through it competently, and I dont think the same would go for Heath. Wilson left 1970 with a surplus and relatively low inflation (for the time). Heath created huge inflation and destroyed the surplus from 70-74. If he was PM during the crisis the UK would come out a lot worse.
 
Well in this timeline Callaghan I think Callaghan would plan to resign in 1982, but due to the Falklands war he stays to finish that off. He would succeed as he was not unused to sending in the army to deal with others, for example in Northern Ireland in our timeline. This then would lead to a patriotic boom, like in our timeline, and Callaghan would call a 1983 election, to bank off this boost in popularity. But at this point he would be 71 so he would resign soon after the election and labour leadership election between members like Peter Shore or Denis Healey (in my opinion the two biggest players, maybe Tony Benn)
 
No Heath and the liberals would just not have a referendum because they are in power. Most center left leaders would support a referendum but would be neutral and not officially campaign for leave but shore would campaign hard
I wasn't saying that Heath would hav a referendum, but that Labour would have one upon returning to power under Callaghan or someone, before Shore would have a chance to become leader, if he ever did.
If this leads to Labour, rather than the Conservatives, reaping the benefits of the late '70s/early '80s economic turmoil, would Britain have perhaps dodged neoliberalism to a greater extent than most Western countries? Or would the government have ended up going the route of Hawke/Keating Australian Labor or Lange/Douglas New Zealand Labour?
Maybe. There would still probably need to some form of monetarist reforms (as was already happening under Callaghan), but I'd imagine that Labour would also keep the trade unions fairly strong as well. Perhaps it would be more like France than Australia or NZ. Alternatively, Labour fails to get to grip with any of it, and is kicked out of office after five years.
Well in this timeline Callaghan I think Callaghan would plan to resign in 1982, but due to the Falklands war he stays to finish that off. He would succeed as he was not unused to sending in the army to deal with others, for example in Northern Ireland in our timeline. This then would lead to a patriotic boom, like in our timeline, and Callaghan would call a 1983 election, to bank off this boost in popularity. But at this point he would be 71 so he would resign soon after the election and labour leadership election between members like Peter Shore or Denis Healey (in my opinion the two biggest players, maybe Tony Benn)
Shore was disadvantaged by not being strongly identified with the left. If someone with stronger Bevanite credentials, such as Foot and Kinnock came forward, then they would probably take him out of the top two. He'd only win if the left had nowhere else to go, and Healy ran as a poor a campaign he did IOTL, which me might not especially if someone like Hattersley ran on a platform that was more firmly anti-left.

Also, the Falklands very likely wouldn't happen in this situation. Even if the Heath-Thorpe coalition didn't butterfly it away, the consensus seems to be that Labour would have maintained a stronger RN presence there in the run up to war (which Thatcher withdrew IOTL) and therefore would have deterred Argentina from ever invading in the first place.
 
I wasn't saying that Heath would hav a referendum, but that Labour would have one upon returning to power under Callaghan or someone, before Shore would have a chance to become leader, if he ever did.
It's not a sure thing Callaghan gets elected leader
 
Also, the Falklands very likely wouldn't happen in this situation. Even if the Heath-Thorpe coalition didn't butterfly it away, the consensus seems to be that Labour would have maintained a stronger RN presence there in the run up to war (which Thatcher withdrew IOTL) and therefore would have deterred Argentina from ever invading in the first place.
Ok then so maybe no Falklands war so in 1982 he does reign. The reason I said Denis Healey I think that Callaghan would of groomed Healey or Hattersley as successor. I picked Healey as his personality would of made him more of an imposing figure in upcoming elections. With either Healey or Hattersley or Shore or any other labour leader labour would win in 1983/4.
 
It's not a sure thing Callaghan gets elected leader
If he runs with Shore as his main opponent, it is. Callaghan could rely on the backing of most of the PLP and the major unions. The only way Shore would have won would be if both Callaghan and Foot didn't run. I'm not even sure how prominent he was in Labour around that time anyway. He didn't even hold a shadow portfolio at the time of the 1974 General Election.
 
If he runs with Shore as his main opponent, it is. Callaghan could rely on the backing of most of the PLP and the major unions. The only way Shore would have won would be if both Callaghan and Foot didn't run. I'm not even sure how prominent he was in Labour around that time anyway. He didn't even hold a shadow portfolio at the time of the 1974 General Election.
I think he could beat Roy Jenkins, who was way too right wing for the majority of the PLP.
 
So this is the labour leadership election in 1982, lets vote on who will win, not personal preference but logical preference. This person will succeed Callaghan, accept if later on sufficient evidence is found for them not to win.
Denis Healey, Roy Hattersley, Roy Jenkins, Peter Shore and Michael Foot.

Should I add any more candidates (or even remove)? If not let the election begin.
 
I think he could beat Roy Jenkins, who was way too right wing for the majority of the PLP.
The trouble with that is that the 'old right' faction would be almost certainly look for a candidate of its own rather than back Jenkins. If it's not Callaghan, it would be Healy or someone else, who would be better positioned to win than in 1980 because of the higher number of MPs sitting in marginals (who were generally from the right) and the presence of Jenkins would compel them to reach out to moderate MPs rather than count on them having 'nowhere else to go. And remember that Shore probably would have done worse even if he had got to the second round in 1980. Foot only stood because it was believed that he had more appeal than Shore.
 
So this is the labour leadership election in 1982, lets vote on who will win, not personal preference but logical preference. This person will succeed Callaghan, accept if later on sufficient evidence is found for them not to win.
Denis Healey, Roy Hattersley, Roy Jenkins, Peter Shore and Michael Foot.

Should I add any more candidates (or even remove)? If not let the election begin.
What is the electoral system? Does the electoral college exist, is it still weighted toward the unions or does the POP have a stronger voice?
 
Then Healy beats Foot in the second round.

She would be 72 and not in parliament. Even if you overlook those things, In Place of Strife killed her chances. Shirley Williams might have won, but it would take some considerable changes to her personal life for her to want it.
She stayed active in European Parliament until 1989. She didn’t run in 79 because of disagreements with Callaghan in the cabinet in 76
 
She stayed active in European Parliament until 1989. She didn’t run in 79 because of disagreements with Callaghan in the cabinet in 76
But would she win anyway. But lets add her to the line up.
Denis Healey, Roy Hattersley, Roy Jenkins, Peter Shore, Michael Foot and Barbara Castle.
 
Top