Wi The UK Votes To Leave The Common Market In 1975?

[Peelitebkearns]

Hi all,

I'm working on a project, entitled 'Brexit... In 1975'-and I'm hoping I can discuss a few ideas:

First of all, given the somewhat lopsided 'in' vote in 1975 in OTL, is there any way of producing the opposite outcome, with the POD after the February 74 election-or ideally, after October of that year? Or, does this require a pre-1974 POD? I have a feeling an embattled Heath government returned in 1974 with a reduced majority could at least do the trick in theory, especially if Heath is actively leading the 'in' campaign, though I have a hard time envisaging Heath agreeing to a referendum given the Tories were at this point the more 'Europe' friendly of the 2 main parties.

Assuming it's doable with a POD after Oct 1974 (so the main players are basically the same as OTL up until June of 75), what are the political consequences? Does Wilson have to resign after such a result, or can he hold on, since he was pretty hands-off during the campaign itself? Would he even try to stick around, given his OTL resignation the following year?
Assuming he resigns around about the same time as OTL, I imagine the 'out' result would embolden the Eurosceptic left, meaning Foot (or Benn, at a stretch) would have a much better chance of replacing Wilson. I doubt it'd be Callaghan (as Foreign secretary, he'd be in the firing line for the result of the referendum in this scenario)-I can't see Jenkins immerging either.
Assuming this to be the case (though maybe I'm overplaying the ramifications), could a more 'electable' 'out' campaigner (Castle maybe) be chosen instead? Or could it be a more junior (and electorally palatable) member of the Wilson cabinet who perhaps kept their head down during the campaign? Or, if there doesn't seem to be an alternative to the far left, could this give Wilson the impetus to hold on longer than he'd have liked?

Also, what does this do to the Conservatives? Thatcher has been leader for a few months by this stage-and was an enthusiastic 'in' campaigner (strange as it may seem)-even criticising Wilson for holding the referendum. So would an 'out' result irreparably damage her leadership? Or, would she survive (perhaps despite being challenged for the leadership by someone from the Heath wing)? And what of the Liberals? Could there be an SDP style breakaway if Foot or Benn take over from Wilson while in government? I imagine a Lib-Lab pact may well be unachievable ITTL, as even if a moderate takes over as PM it'll be clear the left are in the ascendancy within Labour. So would all this produce an early election, with the Tories (under Thatcher or someone else) eventually forming a government?

What effect does Britain leaving the EEC have on the common market itself? Do they concentrate more heavily on integration ITTL? Or do they try and entice other countries into the block? Might the UK decide in this scenario to rejoin the EEC (or a later EU equivalent) a few years down the road? Or does the UK draw closer to America and the Commonwealth at the expense of European ties?

 

[sendô]

Britain lives happily ever after.




Apparently.

 

[pjmidd]

Hi all,

I'm working on a project, entitled 'Brexit... In 1975'-and I'm hoping I can discuss a few ideas:

First of all, given the somewhat lopsided 'in' vote in 1975 in OTL, is there any way of producing the opposite outcome, with the POD after the February 74 election-or ideally, after October of that year? Or, does this require a pre-1974 POD? I have a feeling an embattled Heath government returned in 1974 with a reduced majority could at least do the trick in theory, especially if Heath is actively leading the 'in' campaign, though I have a hard time envisaging Heath agreeing to a referendum given the Tories were at this point the more 'Europe' friendly of the 2 main parties.

Assuming it's doable with a POD after Oct 1974 (so the main players are basically the same as OTL up until June of 75), what are the political consequences? Does Wilson have to resign after such a result, or can he hold on, since he was pretty hands-off during the campaign itself? Would he even try to stick around, given his OTL resignation the following year?
Assuming he resigns around about the same time as OTL, I imagine the 'out' result would embolden the Eurosceptic left, meaning Foot (or Benn, at a stretch) would have a much better chance of replacing Wilson. I doubt it'd be Callaghan (as Foreign secretary, he'd be in the firing line for the result of the referendum in this scenario)-I can't see Jenkins immerging either.
Assuming this to be the case (though maybe I'm overplaying the ramifications), could a more 'electable' 'out' campaigner (Castle maybe) be chosen instead? Or could it be a more junior (and electorally palatable) member of the Wilson cabinet who perhaps kept their head down during the campaign? Or, if there doesn't seem to be an alternative to the far left, could this give Wilson the impetus to hold on longer than he'd have liked?

Also, what does this do to the Conservatives? Thatcher has been leader for a few months by this stage-and was an enthusiastic 'in' campaigner (strange as it may seem)-even criticising Wilson for holding the referendum. So would an 'out' result irreparably damage her leadership? Or, would she survive (perhaps despite being challenged for the leadership by someone from the Heath wing)? And what of the Liberals? Could there be an SDP style breakaway if Foot or Benn take over from Wilson while in government? I imagine a Lib-Lab pact may well be unachievable ITTL, as even if a moderate takes over as PM it'll be clear the left are in the ascendancy within Labour. So would all this produce an early election, with the Tories (under Thatcher or someone else) eventually forming a government?

What effect does Britain leaving the EEC have on the common market itself? Do they concentrate more heavily on integration ITTL? Or do they try and entice other countries into the block? Might the UK decide in this scenario to rejoin the EEC (or a later EU equivalent) a few years down the road? Or does the UK draw closer to America and the Commonwealth at the expense of European ties?

Looking at the campaign , OTL it was all about a common market , any other pieces were ignored and the impression given they either did not exist or were optional. A POD were OUT pushes the social aspect, loss of control over immigration etc might change the result. Admittedly it would take a massive swing and is highly improbable but it is barely possible.

Wilson stayed out of the campaign so he could deliver either result but by this time he was going to resign soon anyway, the stress, exhaustion together with possible health issues had already made certain. Given the era even with a different Prime Minister its probable they would recluse themselves just like Wilson.

 

[Politibrit]

Leave did start the campaign in the lead, so it's not inconceivable that they win. The problem was that their campaign was tarnished by association with extremists like Benn and Powell, whilst the remain campaign was well funded and relatively unified. That dynamic seems to be intrinsically linked with the nature of euroscepticism and pro-Europeanism during this era, so I'm not entirely sure how you would go about fixing that. You might need a PoD prior to 1974.

If Leave did manage to win, I think it is important to remember that exiting won't happen in the same way as now. It's far easier to exit a common market after two years than a union which governs a whole swathe of other policy areas after forty five years. Plus Article 50 didn't exist back then, so the process might have to be a bit more improvised, and it might well be a lot shorter.

I don't think Wilson would resign, he'd kept himself above the fray throughout the campaign, which would put him in a good position to implement the result. He'd probably still go in 1976. Foot would probably stand a better chance of succeeding him, but Callaghan would probably stand just as much of a chance. After all, Hammond was Foreign Secretary when people actually did vote leave, and he wasn't discredited by the result, he was actually rewarded with a promotion to Chancellor. Plus Callaghan, like Wilson, was very much on the fence when it came to Europe and didn't involve himself extensively in the campaign, so he would be well placed to win over the PLP by committing to honouring the referendum result-much like May did in 2016.

Whilst we probably wouldn't see as big a breakaway as ultimately happened with the SDP IOTL, I think Jenkins leaving to set up some sort of pro-European centrist party is inevitable somewhere down the line. He won't serve in a Labour cabinet that has a policy of withdrawal, and he can hardly escape by taking the Commission Presidency in these circumstances. He would probably take a small number of Labour right wingers, although probably not as many as the SDP ultimately got, at least to start off with. But that would probably be enough to deprive Labour of it's majority.

I also don't think that Thatcher would be fatally wounded by a leave vote, given how she wasn't really a major player in the campaign, but unlike Corbyn, didn't really seem to lack for enthusiasm. But how she approaches the outcome would be very important in determining how things proceed. Whilst I don't think the economic hit would be nearly as bad then as it would be now, the economy was in pretty bad shape at this time anyway, and if things drag on until the IMF bailout I can see a lot of people calling for us to remain after all, the 'wets' especially. If she didn't respond to that, then she could see a lot of people on the left of her party defecting to Jenkins new party, and she would also have the very real chance of being no confidenced by her own MPs and replaced by a Europhile-which could even be Heath.

But if the Tories do shift toward Remain, then they run the risk of pissing off the small number on their backbenches who voted Leave. It's not out of question that a small number of them start supporting the government to make sure we leave. They might even form their own Powellite Party. Either way, I think the government would not make it to 1979. There would be very little chance of a Lib-Lab pact in these circumstances.

Oddly, I think Labour would be in a stronger position going into a hypothetical 1976-77 election than IOTL, as they would enter as pretty much the sole party of leave, whilst the Tories would be competing with the alt-Alliance for pro-European votes. If I recall correctly, Scotland was one of the most leave friendly regions back then, so ironically the SNP could pick up some more support by saying that Scotland will not be able to leave Europe if they remain part of the UK.

Still, I don't think people would look past the IMF bailout and all the other stuff that was going on at that time, so the Tories probably win and either hold a referendum, or cancelling leaving altogether if they had included it in their manifesto. That has it's own interesting implications for who leads the UK into the 1980s, but going into that is probably a bit too far.

But that is really an absolute worst case scenario which presumes the whole process would be fairly lengthy and just as polarising as OTL-which is by no means guaranteed. It could just as easily be over with a few months with some sort of Norway deal. If leaving does stick, that is a good opportunity for EFTA to develop to become much more significant than it has become IOTL. The UK could end up as the key player in an outer ring of countries who play an important part in trade issues, but don't want a political union. In the long run, it might well be a better outcome for the UK than what actually happened.

Looking at the campaign , OTL it was all about a common market , any other pieces were ignored and the impression given they either did not exist or were optional. A POD were OUT pushes the social aspect, loss of control over immigration etc might change the result. Admittedly it would take a massive swing and is highly improbable but it is barely possible.

It was all about the Common Market because that was all Europe was at that stage. The other parts, including freedom of movement, did not come in until Maastricht, so they were non-issues.

 

[hammo1j]

WW2 broke Britain in that its debts had to be honoured. It played a major part in the restoration of civilisation to Germany too.

Being part of Europe must have seemed an opportunity to avoid the same in the future.

I think the peace aspect of the vote at the time must not be overlooked

 

[Mr Carrot]

You've got a very clear PoD here that is likely to give a leave victory. The FCO ECC strategy papers (full stack from briefing into Cabinet Office as well as internal long term strategy docs) are leaked by a leave leaning Civil Servant and escape a D-Notice.

I think given the full aspirations that the Europhile cabal in the FCO had for UK entry into the European Community coupled with the role foreign actors/institutions played in shaping and constructing those plans we would have had a scandal of epic proportions.

Remember this would be a UK populous prior to the drip drip drip strategy of the Lisbon Agenda and the evolution of European institutionalism away from multilateral intergovernmentalism over 40 years..

I also think Heath would escape from this as having been mislead (how willingly is a matter for debate), just as Thatcher subsequently managed when the goals of the Single Market were more fully realised.

P.s. having read most of the available archive material (and reviewed it after declassification) and having interviewed many civil servants from the era, it's amazing that the HMT and FCO agenda, which on paper had very similar long term outcomes if not objectives (UK dominant in an aspect of European federal policy making), they seem completely unaware of each other. So you end up with a double whammy of ASB level steering into 10. What I've not had time to investigate is what role Cabinet Office played in this development.