So I've been playing around with Prime Minister Infinity and had a pretty solid run as the Liberals in 1950 and enjoyed myself so much I'm thinking of both making a continuation scenario and maybe a short timeline based on how a hypothetical Labour minority government with Liberal support would look like. The numbers are fairly flexible, but I'm honestly somewhat palming about in the dark in relation to Labour factions and Liberal factions (Because the Liberal party just loved a bit of the old factionalism). I'm not sure what Davies would demand from Attlee, what Attlee would be willing to offer, or how long the government would actually last.

1950 UK General Election:

Labour: 43% - 293 Seats (Plus 1 independent Labour MP)
Conservatives: 42.9% - 281 Seats (303 if you count the National Liberals and Ulster Unionists)
Liberals: 9.7% - 27 Seats
 
Why would you assume that it would be a Labour-Liberal pact? Not only would they be seen as the largest party in the Commons under this scenario (by virtue of having the most MPs taking their whip) but this was also an era where the Liberals leaned heavily toward the Tories-in fact, a substantial number of their MPs that were elected in OTL's 1950 Election owed their victories to local pacts with the Tories. I suspect there would be a very strong chance of a Tory-Liberal pact as long as those parties could command a majority in the Commons.

As regards to what the Liberals would demand out of either party, as always, electoral reform would probably be a major point of emphasis. I believe Churchill was open to PR in order to secure greater co-operation with the Liberals IOTL, but he had been unable to convince his party of the need for it. With his government now dependent on the Liberals, he may have more success. Maybe AV would be pushed through.

As for other stuff, I'd recommend reading the Liberals manifesto from this era to get some pointers. If memory serves, their platform was very right wing on the economy at this time, probably more so than the Tories. There was a strong emphasis on balanced budgets and reducing price controls and state expenditure, as well as on cutting back on foreign engagements and ending conscription. So I suspect whoever they support will be dragged to the right on the economy, and to the left on foreign policy.
 
I only really assumed a Labour-Liberal pact as that was the result I wound up with, as I won most of those seats off of the Tories in the South-West and thus due to the way PMI calculates relations had thoroughly pissed off Churchill and the National Liberals. Would a reunion of the Liberals and National Liberals, given they'd be working closely together be in the cards?

As for foreign policy, my knowledge of the era is kind of skint, but Churchill doesn't seem the type to be dragged to the left on the topic of Empire very readily. As for AV, fortunately, PMI can model that with minimal-ish issues, would just need to figure out how each party's voters split.
 
Does anyone have any idea on how long a hypothetical Tory-UUP-NLB-Liberal government would survive, and under what circumstances it might collapse?
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Why would you assume that it would be a Labour-Liberal pact? Not only would they be seen as the largest party in the Commons under this scenario (by virtue of having the most MPs taking their whip) but this was also an era where the Liberals leaned heavily toward the Tories-in fact, a substantial number of their MPs that were elected in OTL's 1950 Election owed their victories to local pacts with the Tories.

I'd recommend reading the Liberals manifesto from this era to get some pointers. If memory serves, their platform was very right wing on the economy at this time, probably more so than the Tories. There was a strong emphasis on balanced budgets and reducing price controls and state expenditure, as well as on cutting back on foreign engagements and ending conscription.
However, a Liberal Party capable of winning 27 seats would have been a very different beast compared to IOTL, because it must have done much better in 1945 to get close to such a result. A "successful" performance in 1945 (when they ran a left-leaning campaign using William Beveridge himself as their poster boy) might have prevented them from drifting rightward.
 
However, a Liberal Party capable of winning 27 seats would have been a very different beast compared to IOTL, because it must have done much better in 1945 to get close to such a result. A "successful" performance in 1945 (when they ran a left-leaning campaign using William Beveridge himself as their poster boy) might have prevented them from drifting rightward.
I mean it is still a party led by Clement Davies, though having Sinclair not lose his seat and maintaining a slightly adjusted version of the 20 points plan from 1945 could be doable. Any idea on just how that might sit with Labour? I'm kind of defaulting towards an assumption that any minority government is not long for this world, as Attlee called another election a year later.
 
Top