• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

AHC: Bring Down the Coalition

iupius

Is it future, or is it past?
In May 2010, Britain's first coalition government since the Second World War was formed between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Your challenge is to topple the coalition at some point in the 2010-2015 parliamentary term. Particularly at the beginning of the Cameron-Clegg partnership, several doubted the arrangement would last the full five years. Indeed, the 2011 Fixed-Term Parliaments Act was tabled in part to prove these people wrong.

Prove them right!

For the sake of a good challenge, try to avoid the 'coalition amicably divorces during the 2014 conference season' route that seemed all the rage at the time.
 
I suppose an easy answer would be to engineer an EU Referendum during the 2010-2015 Parliament, but I suspect that'd have needed it to be on the Tory Manifesto (which'd need Cameron in a weaker position) or the LibDems to fight harder for it (unlikely even if the 'when there's a new treaty' is taken into account). Europe's probably the big thing that would make the LibDems end the coalition- and I think it'd have to be them to do it- barring Cameron being replaced by someone on the Leadsom/Fox end of the Right.

But something else would be to get rid of Nick Clegg and have his successor, whether it's Cable or Farron, demand a re-negotiation and the Tories to turn them down. 2014 EP elections had a squeaky-bum moment when it seemed like Cable might make a move, but it turned into a farce and the zeitgeist with the top-ranks was that toppling the leader/scrapping the coalition would just vindicate all the haters. IIRC, even Cable wanted to see it through to the end. Either way, I think 2014 is the best moment, whether it's by fall-out from the IndyRef with Cable as LibDem leader, or by the Tories in a slightly stronger position than OTL and exploiting it.
 
Europe's probably the big thing that would make the LibDems end the coalition- and I think it'd have to be them to do it- barring Cameron being replaced by someone on the Leadsom/Fox end of the Right.

This made me think of that recent BBC documentary about the buildup to the Brexit referendum, where Clegg said he confronted Cameron around the time he deployed the UK veto for the first time at the EU level in late-2011, and told him that ramping up euroscepticism in that way would make the coalition untenable. Could anything come from that?
 
Which, of course, was not in the Tory manifesto for 2010...but was in the Lib Dem one, hilariously in hindsight.

I think that's Blackadder's point - the Lib Dems made a big point of an in-out EU referendum in the late 2000s, it's possible (though not very likely) it somehow emerges in the Tories at that point, and then we have it in the coalition agreement, with a referendum taking place under the coalition. A Leave vote would almost certainly result in an early general election.
 
House of Lords reform being dropped is the most obvious one. All three parties had it in their manifesto, but the government abandoned it when it became clear Conservative backbenchers would rebel against it. Nick Clegg said the Conservatives had broken the coalition contract. But he kept the coalition going (because the Lib Dems were only sometimes getting up to 10% in polling?) for another three years.
 
House of Lords reform being dropped is the most obvious one. All three parties had it in their manifesto, but the government abandoned it when it became clear Conservative backbenchers would rebel against it. Nick Clegg said the Conservatives had broken the coalition contract. But he kept the coalition going (because the Lib Dems were only sometimes getting up to 10% in polling?) for another three years.
I think that last part is the key - for it to be something the Lib Dems would try to do, they need to be doing better in the polls. Which is arguably even harder, and would probably make a breakup less likely because the Lib Dems would be happier. Hm.
 
How about Tuition Fees? The coalition agreement said (IIRC) the the LDs could abstain; in reality some voted for, some against.

Perhaps a different clause, which kicks it into the long medium grass, and allows them to stick to their manifesto promise when the proposal comes through? Probably needs Vince not to be the minister in charge of it, mind you
 
One thing I'm wondering is if the initial arithmetic being tweaked slightly could produce some different effects- if the Lib Dems won every seat they were less than 1,000 behind IOTL that would give them an addition 12- not enough to really mean that anything other than Con+LDM is feasible, especially as it's some from both parties.

However it does mean that the Lib Dems have seen a net gain in seats yet again which might change the internal party dynamics and confidence where IOTL there was a very real sense that Clegg had just managed to stave off a hammering.
 
House of Lords reform being dropped is the most obvious one. All three parties had it in their manifesto, but the government abandoned it when it became clear Conservative backbenchers would rebel against it. Nick Clegg said the Conservatives had broken the coalition contract. But he kept the coalition going (because the Lib Dems were only sometimes getting up to 10% in polling?) for another three years.

If Clegg broke up the coalition over something as piddling and navel-gazing as Lords reform I think there would be enormous questions about his judgement. 'We need a coalition to deal with the economy and public finances, which are in ruins' [Shortly after] 'Shirley Williams can't be elected on a list? It's all over!!!!'

I think that Blackadder has basically won the thread because Europe is only going to be the issue that does it.
 
I tried outlining an alternative, but it felt very dependent on a certain set of events i.e. boundary changes being scheduled before Lords Reform so no quick retaliation, UKIP doing better, Yes winning the IndyRef, and Cameron and Clegg being replaced leading to a October-December 2014 election. Only problem was it felt convoluted and altered the dynamics of the Coalition a bit too much.

This made me think of that recent BBC documentary about the buildup to the Brexit referendum, where Clegg said he confronted Cameron around the time he deployed the UK veto for the first time at the EU level in late-2011, and told him that ramping up euroscepticism in that way would make the coalition untenable. Could anything come from that?
The problem Clegg would have in breaking it over an EU Referendum being held (as opposed to the result being Leave) is that every leaflet would mention the LibDem pledge, Labour would rip into the LibDems for everything else, and it's not a popular issue to end it on.

Vetogate certainly helped sour matters, but it was nothing that the AV Referendum hadn't already done. IIRC, it had the Tories gain a lead in the polls. Not the environment to force an election with. I suppose an even worse Euro crisis (Greece collapses out and the rumoured domino-effect looms) may create a state where an EU-wide solution/bailout gets blocked and Clegg does right by Brussels, but that in itself might just strengthen a "we must stay in to stop this madness, unlike Tory cocks and Labour cucks" mindset.
 
God this make me remember the eager cries of it'll never last at the time.

Arguably either Cameron or Glegg not getting along quite so well would be the kicker I guess.
 
One thing that everyone seems to have shrugged at - unlike tuition fees - is the Lib Dems' high-profile (during the campaign) opposition to nuclear power being quietly brushed aside. Could that have been a flashpoint? More people care about it than Lords reform at least.

A British Fukushima? Problem there I suppose is the government would probably stick together to fix it.
 
There’s a section in Iain Dale and Duncan Brack’s Prime Minister Boris ... and other things that never happened that sees the Lib Dems withdraw from the coalition after a bomb goes off at the Olympic Park before the games. Something about the Lib Dems being responsible for shorter detention periods, and Clegg feeling culpable. Never seemed particularly realistic (if you’re blamed, why bring down the government?) but this thread’s probably the best place to bring it up.
 
Back
Top