WI: UK Election, 2014

When the Fixed Term Parliaments Act was debated, Labour was pretty insistent on it being fixed to four years, not five. So, what if it had been? Suppose the Lib Dems insisted on it and somehow got their own way. Would the results of the 2014 general election have been enormously different from what they would have been one year later? I'd predict largely the same results for UKIP and the Lib Dems; the latter had already bottomed out by 2014, the European elections proved that. But for Labour and the Tories it's more difficult. There were the first whispers of an improving economy but would it have been going on long enough to seriously sway voters? And could Labour win much more support after only four years in opposition? And of course, the Scottish referendum hadn't yet happened so we likely wouldn't see any SNP landslide. So here's my personal prediction for the 2014 election:

Conservative: 284
Labour: 270
Liberal Democrat: 11
Scottish National: 7
UKIP: 2
Green: 1
 
When the Fixed Term Parliaments Act was debated, Labour was pretty insistent on it being fixed to four years, not five. So, what if it had been? Suppose the Lib Dems insisted on it and somehow got their own way. Would the results of the 2014 general election have been enormously different from what they would have been one year later? I'd predict largely the same results for UKIP and the Lib Dems; the latter had already bottomed out by 2014, the European elections proved that. But for Labour and the Tories it's more difficult. There were the first whispers of an improving economy but would it have been going on long enough to seriously sway voters? And could Labour win much more support after only four years in opposition? And of course, the Scottish referendum hadn't yet happened so we likely wouldn't see any SNP landslide. So here's my personal prediction for the 2014 election:

Conservative: 284
Labour: 270
Liberal Democrat: 11
Scottish National: 7
UKIP: 2
Green: 1

That isn't a bad set of seat predictions for a 'if Cameron had been able to call a snap election in May 2014 by magic' scenario (though in May 2014, UKIP didn't have any MPs at all and I don't think they'd pick up 2 - maybe Farage, actually, scratch that, they'd win 2 because it would also be the European elections and thus UKIP would get loads of airtime).

But in a four year fixed term parliament, the butterflies are huge. The Tories, we now know, played the timetable perfectly and got the unpopular out of the way as early as possible, while there was still time to 'run out the clock'. ITTL, they've got a year less to play with, so things could accelerate or actually change substantially. No SNP surge also means the Lib Dems probably don't collapse in the same way they did IOTL, as many of their deserting remaining voters were 'sorry guys, you're nice but a bit crap and you'll end up propping up the SNP and Ed Weirdo, so not this time' types. They might hold 22-25 seats. Might.

So this is harder than it looks, because it's a much bigger question than it first appears. Ask not how the election plays out, ask how all the players operate in a four year parliament in the first place, and how that plays out.
 
That isn't a bad set of seat predictions for a 'if Cameron had been able to call a snap election in May 2014 by magic' scenario (though in May 2014, UKIP didn't have any MPs at all and I don't think they'd pick up 2 - maybe Farage, actually, scratch that, they'd win 2 because it would also be the European elections and thus UKIP would get loads of airtime).

But in a four year fixed term parliament, the butterflies are huge. The Tories, we now know, played the timetable perfectly and got the unpopular out of the way as early as possible, while there was still time to 'run out the clock'. ITTL, they've got a year less to play with, so things could accelerate or actually change substantially. No SNP surge also means the Lib Dems probably don't collapse in the same way they did IOTL, as many of their deserting remaining voters were 'sorry guys, you're nice but a bit crap and you'll end up propping up the SNP and Ed Weirdo, so not this time' types. They might hold 22-25 seats. Might.

So this is harder than it looks, because it's a much bigger question than it first appears. Ask not how the election plays out, ask how all the players operate in a four year parliament in the first place, and how that plays out.

Just out of curiosity, is there any interest in modifying it to a four-year timeframe? By interest I mean either wider advocacy for it among politicians, academics, or within Labour? And do you think there's much change of it happening or would Labour likely just enjoy their five years when they return to government?
 
The main difference is going to be, as everyone's said, no Scottish referendum - that means no huge SNP surge that wipes out everyone else in Scotland and it means English (and Welsh) voters not going Tory to keep out a feared Labour-SNP coalition. If the Lib Dems retain some seats from that, that's to Labour's benefit as (IIRC from a recent study) turns out many of their lost votes went Tory.

Without the SNP to the Tory's advantage, that leaves the economy and welfare. Election surveys found people still blamed Labour for the crash (even if they didn't like the Tories) and many think they're too much in favour of "scroungers". An earlier election means less economic recovery so maybe the former factor isn't as pressing but it'll still press hard. So I can see Labour still losing but it'd be a lot closer. And if it's a close-run thing, that may mean Miliband survives (but I doubt it) and more likely means his approach is still seen as the best chance, no big swing to Corbyn. So we're looking at Burnham or Cooper as leader.

The big question is UKIP. Two ways I see this playing out:

a) They won't have had any by-elections yet. This means the oh-so-earthshaking Rise Of UKIP that fizzled out, now doesn't happen at all - Cameron will still have nobbled them by promising a referendum, and if Carswell and Reckless still defect they're now running in a general election which makes their job harder. UKIP fizzle harder.

b) The SNP's rise hasn't fully kicked in yet, so UKIP sympathisers who voted Tory to Keep The Jocks Out are still going to go UKIP. Carswell and Reckless win as in OTL and so do one or two other candidates, so now UKIP isn't winning two by-elections and then losing an MP - it's going from 0 to 3 or 4, that's a thing to pay attention to. And since I don't see Farage winning if he couldn't win OTL (even with "JOCKS!" playing a part, he's the damn party leader), his position is screwed: he won't have a seat and here's some people in his own party with more legitimacy than him. So UKIP gets a new leader, potentially one harder to dismiss as a braying loon or potentially one that isn't as populist.

And then the Scottish referendum happens.

And that's a biggie because: the Tories just won again and just now, making "LOOK TORIES" an easy propaganda tool in the SNP's arsenal. Now I don't see Scotland voting for independence because of this. I definitely see the vote being a lot closer than it was in OTL.

That's a big problem for Cameron. Our Dave got to use the aftershocks of the referendum and the England-Scotland tensions to win seats in an upcoming election. This Dave has only just won an election and almost breaks up the union in his first few months, millions saying "I'd rather stop being British than be under him". He won't look very strong and it'll rattle him. That gives Labour an opening.

Minor note, to run as an MP, Boris will have to do it when he's only halfway into his mayoral term. That would look bad. Would he do it anyway and hope he can recover?
 
Course, the more fun timeline would be to tweak a few things and say Scotland narrowly votes for independence because of the Tory victory.

That immediately means:

a) Burnham/Cooper's Labour shits itself. Now it needs to get at least two dozen new seats in England in 2018 on top of all the other ones it'd have needed: HOW? If it decides to do it by harking back to Blair, the harder left will rage (which is good for the Greens if they can pick the voters up)

b) Cameron's going to resign. You can't have a Prime Minister who just saw the union crack (and due to his unionism he might give up). Theresa May and George Osborn will campaign to take the top job - would somebody else fill in as PM until that's decided? - and Boris too if he's there.

c) UKIP now can point to the end of the union as a reason the Tories suck and you should vote them. Everything's coming up UKIP! If Carswell or Reckless replaced Farage, they'll be in hog's heaven (and Farage will weep bitter salty tears)

d) Plaid Cymru grin and plan

e) The UK's gonna break up soon and the newly-returned government is in a state of flux? The markets aren't going to like that. The economy will take a hit, probably a short one but enough to get noticed (this may cost Osborn and help May)
 
Top