Callaghan calls an election in 1978

[johnr]

Its widely regarded that if Jim Callaghan had called an election in October 1978, he would have done better than in May 1979 - possibly even winning.

My What If is not specifically around that, but about one particular result. Edinburgh South. The Labour candidate in May 1979 managed to reduce the Tory majority there in 1979, much against the swing in the country as a whole. Perhaps he could have won had the national picture been better?

That Labour candidate was Gordon Brown. What would have happened had he got to parliament 5 years earlier?

[john07]

Dec 2, 2014 10:50:08 GMT johnr said:

Its widely regarded that if Jim Callaghan had called an election in October 1978, he would have done better than in May 1979 - possibly even winning.

My What If is not specifically around that, but about one particular result. Edinburgh South. The Labour candidate in May 1979 managed to reduce the Tory majority there in 1979, much against the swing in the country as a whole. Perhaps he could have won had the national picture been better?

That Labour candidate was Gordon Brown. What would have happened had he got to parliament 5 years earlier?

If so he would almost certainly have lost in 1983 when I think Labour finished third in Edinburgh South. That would have set him back five years as he would have been looking for a seat for 1987.

That all assumes that the early election did not affect other issues such as the win by Thatcher and the split off of the SDP.

[Zardoz]

To widen out the debate beyond Edinburgh South - if Callaghan had gone to the polls in 1978 (I remember it well!), then it would have been before the 'winter of discontent'. He would have had a chance of winning - or, at least, avoiding a clear overall majority for Thatcher. A subsequent leadership contest would have been more likely to have resulted in a centre right candidate taking the leadership - my money would have been on Denis Healey. This would probably have avoided the formation of the SDP and Roy Jenkins might well have gone to the Liberals instead (it is rumoured that this would have been his first choice anyway but was persuaded to do otherwise by David Steel who wanted to bring about a split of social democrats from Labour). The knock-on effect could have led to a very different outcome in the 1983 GE. However, this would have depended on at least two major factors - both of which would have militated against a Labour victory. Firstly, after the 'Winter of Discontent', the new Labour leader would have needed to have negotiated a new settlement with the trade unions. This would have been very difficult - as Harold Wilson found in the late 1960's with 'In Place of Strife'. Secondly, the response of a Labour government to the Falklands invasion would have been crucial. My fear is that they would not have sought to recover the islands by military means (the only realistic option) and the electorate would have punished them heavily for this - leading to a spectacular Conservative landslide in 1983. The Liberals would probably have also been marginalised in this as I think they would have supported Labour over the Falklands.

[chorleyboy]

Healey must be one of the most arrogant politicians of all time. If he had of been elected Labour leader, he would of crowed to those people who Thatcher demonised, such as the unemployed, miners etc., that you have to vote for me as you have nowhere else to go and the SDP would of got 35% in 1983.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

He would have cracked down on people who don't know the difference between 'of' and 'have', that you can be sure of.

[La Fontaine]

I spent a day working in the Berwick and E Lothian by election in October 1978. We canvassed in Duns and found not much support, as could be expected. We were pleasantly surprised when the seat was held. I was astonished when Jim C failed to call the election which I thought he would win.

One anecdote is that we knocked on an old lady's door in a small council estate. When asked if she was Labour she replied "aye, but I don't think he is" pointing at John Home Robertson's leaflet. "I used to work at the hoose and they weren't Labour then!"

Another oddity was that the East Lothian Co-op stores all had "Vote Labour" posters in them. I worked for the NE Co-op at the time and we certainly would not do that.

[johnr]

Dec 24, 2014 6:43:05 GMT Zardoz said:

Secondly, the response of a Labour government to the Falklands invasion would have been crucial. My fear is that they would not have sought to recover the islands by military means (the only realistic option) and the electorate would have punished them heavily for this - leading to a spectacular Conservative landslide in 1983. The Liberals would probably have also been marginalised in this as I think they would have supported Labour over the Falklands.

Since even the virtual pacifist Michael Foot was hugely supportive of regaining the islands by military force, I suspect any leader to the right of him would be as well.

[john07]

The Falklands invasion only happened because of the cuts to naval patrols in the South Atlantic gave the nudge to the Argentinian junta that they may get away with a quick occupation.

The Argentinians would have probably settled for a long term leaseback anyway.

[Richard Allen]

Dec 24, 2014 20:29:54 GMT johnr said:

Dec 24, 2014 6:43:05 GMT Zardoz said:

Secondly, the response of a Labour government to the Falklands invasion would have been crucial. My fear is that they would not have sought to recover the islands by military means (the only realistic option) and the electorate would have punished them heavily for this - leading to a spectacular Conservative landslide in 1983. The Liberals would probably have also been marginalised in this as I think they would have supported Labour over the Falklands.

Since even the virtual pacifist Michael Foot was hugely supportive of regaining the islands by military force, I suspect any leader to the right of him would be as well.

Foot was smart enough to know that he had to be supportive of the government at a time of war. Had he been PM himself things might well have been very different.

[Zardoz]

Dec 24, 2014 20:29:54 GMT johnr said:

Dec 24, 2014 6:43:05 GMT Zardoz said:

Secondly, the response of a Labour government to the Falklands invasion would have been crucial. My fear is that they would not have sought to recover the islands by military means (the only realistic option) and the electorate would have punished them heavily for this - leading to a spectacular Conservative landslide in 1983. The Liberals would probably have also been marginalised in this as I think they would have supported Labour over the Falklands.

Since even the virtual pacifist Michael Foot was hugely supportive of regaining the islands by military force, I suspect any leader to the right of him would be as well.

But would they have had the balls in the face of overwhelming pressure to settle the matter peaceably? Or would they have the same skill as Thatcher did in avoiding another diplomatic disaster like Suez? I recall the situation - Thatcher had to walk a very perilous tightrope to keep world opinion on our side.

[Richard Allen]

Dec 24, 2014 21:08:46 GMT Zardoz said:

Dec 24, 2014 20:29:54 GMT johnr said:

Since even the virtual pacifist Michael Foot was hugely supportive of regaining the islands by military force, I suspect any leader to the right of him would be as well.

But would they have had the balls in the face of overwhelming pressure to settle the matter peaceably? Or would they have the same skill as Thatcher did in avoiding another diplomatic disaster like Suez? I recall the situation - Thatcher had to walk a very perilous tightrope to keep world opinion on our side.

And as we now know the cabinet was hardly united in support of her position.

[The Bishop]

Let's not indulge in too much revisionism here, eh?

Callaghan scared off the Argies with a show of force in the late 70s when they tried sniffing around the place. Thatcher then withdrew much of our military presence and the likes of Ridley were quite open to the idea of the future of the Falklands being "up for discussion" (especially since - of course - we needed their bloodstained junta in the much more important cause of "anti-communism") And the gung-ho attitude of Foot when the invasion actually happened has already been noted.

[Richard Allen]

Dec 26, 2014 11:13:40 GMT The Bishop said:

Let's not indulge in too much revisionism here, eh?

Callaghan scared off the Argies with a show of force in the late 70s when they tried sniffing around the place. Thatcher then withdrew much of our military presence and the likes of Ridley were quite open to the idea of the future of the Falklands being "up for discussion" (especially since - of course - we needed their bloodstained junta in the much more important cause of "anti-communism") And the gung-ho attitude of Foot when the invasion actually happened has already been noted.

I don't think anyone is being overly revisionist. It is quite possible that a Labour government, or a Tory government led by someone other than Thatcher, would have decided that Falkland Islands weren't worth fighting for.

[Deleted]

Dec 26, 2014 11:13:40 GMT The Bishop said:

Let's not indulge in too much revisionism here, eh?

Did I miss the point of this board or something?

[Richard Cromwell]

Dec 27, 2014 9:22:22 GMT @davedare said:

Dec 26, 2014 11:13:40 GMT The Bishop said:

Let's not indulge in too much revisionism here, eh?

Did I miss the point of this board or something?

No comment.

[john07]

Dec 27, 2014 9:22:22 GMT @davedare said:

Dec 26, 2014 11:13:40 GMT The Bishop said:

Let's not indulge in too much revisionism here, eh?

Did I miss the point of this board or something?

Obviously yes.