|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 21, 2014 20:42:47 GMT
What happens if Wilson wins a clear majority in 1964?
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 22, 2014 0:02:26 GMT
What happens if Wilson wins a clear majority in 1964? We get dragged back to a difficult period in a time warp by use of the present tense. |
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Oct 22, 2014 6:35:26 GMT
That's actually an interesting one that I haven't seen explored. Having to go in 68/69 might be dicey, but I expect we still get the Grocer.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,780 
|
Post by john07 on Oct 22, 2014 9:07:22 GMT
That's actually an interesting one that I haven't seen explored. Having to go in 68/69 might be dicey, but I expect we still get the Grocer. Any election held in 1968 or early 1969 would have returned a clear Conservative majority. That would have saved Heath and Barber with the problem of dealing with the over-valued pound and the balance of trade crisis assuming that devalution still took place in 1967. I assume that things would have panned out much as they did unless Heath was able to call and win a general election before the Middle East exploded and the energy crisis was upon us. Barber's economic policy in the early 1970s was a disaster (the dash for growth, the Barber boom) and was already in collapse before the Yom Kippur war. On balance I think it would much as you were. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 22, 2014 13:06:28 GMT
What happens if Wilson wins a clear majority in 1964? We get dragged back to a difficult period in a time warp by use of the present tense. Theatrical present tense, old chap. Looks odd but perfectly reasonable. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 22, 2014 13:11:40 GMT
That's actually an interesting one that I haven't seen explored. Having to go in 68/69 might be dicey, but I expect we still get the Grocer. Any election held in 1968 or early 1969 would have returned a clear Conservative majority. That would have saved Heath and Barber with the problem of dealing with the over-valued pound and the balance of trade crisis assuming that devalution still took place in 1967. I assume that things would have panned out much as they did unless Heath was able to call and win a general election before the Middle East exploded and the energy crisis was upon us. Barber's economic policy in the early 1970s was a disaster (the dash for growth, the Barber boom) and was already in collapse before the Yom Kippur war. On balance I think it would much as you were. I like your suggestions. I suppose that MacLeod would be Chancellor in 68/69 in such a scenario- even if he does still die early as in real life, I wonder if Barber ends up eclipsed by someone else in the meantime. Another query on the same lines then- in such a scenario, does Grimond stay on to fight the 68/69 election? |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 22, 2014 13:14:23 GMT
We get dragged back to a difficult period in a time warp by use of the present tense. Theatrical present tense, old chap. Looks odd but perfectly reasonable. It was late and I have no other excuse! The Italians use the present tense in a much more deliberate manner to suit various purposes and I know that. Sorry! Fact is, I don't know what the effect would have been? Possibly some more very trades union oriented legislation of such blatant nature as to galvanize the proto-Thatcherite revolution 5-years earlier. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 22, 2014 13:17:15 GMT
Theatrical present tense, old chap. Looks odd but perfectly reasonable. It was late and I have no other excuse! The Italians use the present tense in a much more deliberate manner to suit various purposes and I know that. Sorry! Fact is, I don't know what the effect would have been? Possibly some more very trades union oriented legislation of such blatant nature as to galvanize the proto-Thatcherite revolution 5-years earlier. No offence taken! I tend to agree with John's quite sober analysis above. The only difference might be that it kills off Wilson's career earlier. |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,780
|
Post by john07 on Oct 22, 2014 13:23:57 GMT
Any election held in 1968 or early 1969 would have returned a clear Conservative majority. That would have saved Heath and Barber with the problem of dealing with the over-valued pound and the balance of trade crisis assuming that devalution still took place in 1967. I assume that things would have panned out much as they did unless Heath was able to call and win a general election before the Middle East exploded and the energy crisis was upon us. Barber's economic policy in the early 1970s was a disaster (the dash for growth, the Barber boom) and was already in collapse before the Yom Kippur war. On balance I think it would much as you were. I like your suggestions. I suppose that MacLeod would be Chancellor in 68/69 in such a scenario- even if he does still die early as in real life, I wonder if Barber ends up eclipsed by someone else in the meantime. The Heath Government could have panned out quite differently had MacLeod been Chancellor rather than Barber. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 22, 2014 13:32:15 GMT
It was late and I have no other excuse! The Italians use the present tense in a much more deliberate manner to suit various purposes and I know that. Sorry! Fact is, I don't know what the effect would have been? Possibly some more very trades union oriented legislation of such blatant nature as to galvanize the proto-Thatcherite revolution 5-years earlier. No offence taken! I tend to agree with John's quite sober analysis above. The only difference might be that it kills off Wilson's career earlier. So did I. It is all so long ago, but I recall an increasing tendency to enact legislation that was virtually drafted by the major unions? Remember the extension of Dockers' closed shop to inland river ports and warehousing, Frank Cousins in the Cabinet, etc.? This was starting to cause quite a reaction. If Wilson had the added imprimatur of a solid initial win, I think he would have been pushed considerably further left more quickly. He was quite a weak man and in thrall to union votes and cash. He might have acted or been forced to act in such a manner as to hasten the internal split within Labour and that might have triggered one within the Conservatives?None of us living through all that saw that the outcome would be a new consensus that for want of anything better one might style Blairite Modernism, leaving the public largely alienated from both parties and much of what they stand for. All that turmoil to end up with a concensus that suits politicians but not the public. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 22, 2014 13:44:35 GMT
Your assessment of Wilson as "weak" and in thrall to unions was once widely shared - but, interestingly, less so as his legacy has been reassessed. It wasn't he but Callaghan who torpedoed In Place Of Strife, remember - ironic indeed given what happened a decade later  |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 22, 2014 13:54:20 GMT
Your assessment of Wilson as "weak" and in thrall to unions was once widely shared - but, interestingly, less so as his legacy has been reassessed. It wasn't he but Callaghan who torpedoed In Place Of Strife, remember - ironic indeed given what happened a decade later Ah!! Hindsight and revisionism. We who were there at the time remain convinced he was a weak man. Whereas the 30-something revisionists weren't there but feel the need for an interesting angle for a book, article or dissertation. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 22, 2014 13:54:39 GMT
Your assessment of Wilson as "weak" and in thrall to unions was once widely shared - but, interestingly, less so as his legacy has been reassessed. It wasn't he but Callaghan who torpedoed In Place Of Strife, remember - ironic indeed given what happened a decade later Did the Castle-Callaghan feud come from IPoS, or did it exist beforehand? |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,780
|
Post by john07 on Oct 22, 2014 13:59:46 GMT
It is all so long ago, but I recall an increasing tendency to enact legislation that was virtually drafted by the major unions? Remember the extension of Dockers' closed shop to inland river ports and warehousing, Frank Cousins in the Cabinet, etc.? I do not recall the dock registration scheme being extended anywhere. The dock registration scheme was introduced in the 1940s in an attempt to decasualise the docks. It only applied to major ports such as Liverpool and London. That left a large number of unregistered wharfs such as Felixstowe who were considered too small to include. As the containers were introduced, this was opposed by the dock unions and consequentially the container operators opted to use unregistered ports such as Felixstowe. What the dock unions were after was to ensure that the 'stuffing and stripping' of containers should be carried out by registered dockers even if this was carried out miles from the port. That was the issue of a major dock strike in 1972. Unsurprisingly they failed in this attempt. Felixstowe, never part of the Dock Registration Scheme, is now the biggest container port in the UK (sixth in Europe) and carries 40% of all container traffic in the UK. |
|
slon
Non-Aligned
Posts: 13,322
|
Post by slon on Oct 22, 2014 14:35:16 GMT
To figure this one out I think it is necessary to examine attitudes of the time, and note these attitudes ware shared by politicians and public alike.
"Japanese were good at copying things but could never make anything new of complicated like cars or motorbikes, total stupidity to imagine Koreans could make ships, etc, etc, etc."
It was an article of faith that key industries were world leaders and had to be successful at whatever cost because they personified all that was Great about Britain
The fact was British manufacturing industry was complacent and increasingly uncompetitive and it ended in a vicious circle of confrontation between bosses and workers .... bosses ware losing money and could not afford to invest, workers were being forced to work harder for less money ..... and everyone still of the opinion that they were the best in the world and these foreign cars and ships and steel were just rubbish anyway.
Wilson, Brown, Home, Heath ..... it would not have made a scrap of difference
actually there is a good "what if" ..... what if George Brawn had been labour leader in place of Wilson
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 22, 2014 15:13:52 GMT
It is all so long ago, but I recall an increasing tendency to enact legislation that was virtually drafted by the major unions? Remember the extension of Dockers' closed shop to inland river ports and warehousing, Frank Cousins in the Cabinet, etc.? I do not recall the dock registration scheme being extended anywhere. The dock registration scheme was introduced in the 1940s in an attempt to decasualise the docks. It only applied to major ports such as Liverpool and London. That left a large number of unregistered wharfs such as Felixstowe who were considered too small to include. As the containers were introduced, this was opposed by the dock unions and consequentially the container operators opted to use unregistered ports such as Felixstowe. What the dock unions were after was to ensure that the 'stuffing and stripping' of containers should be carried out by registered dockers even if this was carried out miles from the port. That was the issue of a major dock strike in 1972. Unsurprisingly they failed in this attempt. Felixstowe, never part of the Dock Registration Scheme, is now the biggest container port in the UK (sixth in Europe) and carries 40% of all container traffic in the UK. Thanks for that John. Poorly expressed and only half remembered by me. And just one example from that period. In itself a near perfect example of the amazing damage powerful unions can do to the long-term prospects of both industry and members. A legitimate desire to undo the admitted horrors of casual work leading to destruction of near an entire industry that went off to Benelux. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 22, 2014 15:19:24 GMT
To figure this one out I think it is necessary to examine attitudes of the time, and note these attitudes ware shared by politicians and public alike. "Japanese were good at copying things but could never make anything new of complicated like cars or motorbikes, total stupidity to imagine Koreans could make ships, etc, etc, etc." It was an article of faith that key industries were world leaders and had to be successful at whatever cost because they personified all that was Great about Britain The fact was British manufacturing industry was complacent and increasingly uncompetitive and it ended in a vicious circle of confrontation between bosses and workers .... bosses ware losing money and could not afford to invest, workers were being forced to work harder for less money ..... and everyone still of the opinion that they were the best in the world and these foreign cars and ships and steel were just rubbish anyway. Wilson, Brown, Home, Heath ..... it would not have made a scrap of difference actually there is a good "what if" ..... what if George Brawn had been labour leader in place of Wilson We would have had 'Strictly' years earlier with an Archbishop sequence. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 22, 2014 15:50:12 GMT
john07- what do you think would have happened to Northern Ireland? Would Wilson have been willing to make a move against the Unionists with a majority, and would Jenkins have been able to enforce the Abortion Act on NI as well?
|
|
slon
Non-Aligned
Posts: 13,322
|
Post by slon on Oct 22, 2014 16:52:34 GMT
john07- what do you think would have happened to Northern Ireland? Would Wilson have been willing to make a move against the Unionists with a majority, and would Jenkins have been able to enforce the Abortion Act on NI as well? Don't think the small majority would have been a problem in relation to the Northern Ireland situation ...... could have been over Rhodesia (another situation where Wilson sat on the fence until the fence had caught fire) |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 22, 2014 16:57:46 GMT
john07- what do you think would have happened to Northern Ireland? Would Wilson have been willing to make a move against the Unionists with a majority, and would Jenkins have been able to enforce the Abortion Act on NI as well? Don't think the small majority would have been a problem in relation to the Northern Ireland situation ...... could have been over Rhodesia (another situation where Wilson sat on the fence until the fence had caught fire) Good point on Rhodesia...on NI, I was thinking more of whether they Wilson would take more deliberative action as the late 60s progressed. My suspicion is no- but then he'd possibly have been willing to confront the UUP, unlike Heath. |
|
