The Prime Minister’s Husband Wants A Divorce

[James G]

This is something that has been on my mind for a while.
I am conserving writing this as a proper story.
It needs a better, shorter title.

[James G]

The Prime Minister’s Husband Wants A Divorce

Britain’s third female prime minister – another Conservative – is Laura Holloway. She’s just shy of forty and at the pinnacle of her political career. Last year, during the race for the party leadership, she became a compromise candidate when scandals erupted around other challengers and Holloway avoided the pitfalls which hit them. She wasn’t expected to last very long in the job by her colleagues due to her inexperience. Holloway called and subsequently won a general election. She is rather popular with the British people… or at least not hated.

Now her husband has let it be known that he wants a divorce.


Her political career has been short. She’s been an MP for seven years after winning a by-election following the death of her local MP: beforehand she was a local councillor but had never ran for higher office previously. Quickly, she gained attention in Parliament when managing to gain a seat on a Commons select committee and becoming a star during a high-profile inquiry with regards to the negative impact of social media upon children. A mother herself, she came across honest, well-meaning and someone who ‘got it’. A job offer from the then prime minister, Daniel Miller, took her into a junior ministerial role (she left that committee) with responsibility for schools & early years education. Holloway excelled here, especially in her dealings with the media.

Media appearances propelled Holloway’s rapid career. In a celebrity-obsessed world, politicians were second best but still second. She was in the newspapers, on the radio and all over the internet. Her sister had a baking vblog and Holloway appeared on that as a special guest. The website Mumsnet named her their MP of the year. There was a connection which she sought with the public through the media. Others dismissed it and thought this overblow, superficial even but it worked for Holloway. A ministerial reshuffle following Miller’s resignation as prime minister and his replacement by Helen March saw Holloway enter the Cabinet despite being an MP for less than four years. March liked what she saw in Holloway with her down-to-earth attitude and believed that she would be a good fit for the government. It was to the Department of Digital, Media, Culture & Sport (DDMCS) where Holloway went as a secretary of state. Weeks into her new job, Holloway introduced into Parliament legislation on the media which reflected upon the findings of that committee report formed the years before which had first made her name. Increased visibility for Holloway improved her public standing. Among colleagues too, she was finding relations better with them. Enemies weren’t made among the Cabinet nor the party’s MPs. There were always some that didn’t like her but there was no real hatred. Holloway wasn’t regarded as a threat to their own ambitions but always those of others.

March lasted two years in Downing Street. Her premiership was a disaster, but a self-inflicted one that no one else shed any tears over. Holloway was regarded as loyal. She’d been closer to Miller yet retained on good terms with March. Not long before the prime minister resigned, another cabinet scandal erupted and the foreign minister was forced to go. Arguments over who should replace him would ultimately break March with two sides of a divided Cabinet supporting opposing colleagues. A suggestion from a member who was desperately trying to stay on the side-lines with that and keep the government afloat suggested that Holloway take the job. It was one of the Great Offices of State, not for amateurs. Holloway got it because the idea of her there offended no one, and everyone thought she would fail too. They just kept on underestimating her.

After March was gone, Holloway was initially not a candidate to replace her. Others throw their hats into the ring. The frontrunner for the party leadership, and thus to become the next prime minister was Nicholas Jones. Jones was the chancellor and the clear favourite. However, there were others in the race. Holloway made herself available for interviews before the media before the nomination process closed. There were international matters to discuss and with her as foreign secretary, she was dealing with them. A journalist posed the question in the right way as to whether Holloway would run. She deferred answering in the affirmative nor negative but let it be known it was something she would consider if colleagues asked her to run. Within days, there came quite the clamour for the reliable and likable Holloway to enter the contest. Her colleagues followed the media on this: getting their impetus to support the foreign secretary from media speculation. Some of their number would have none of this and were at first bemused but soon angry at how this all came about. Who were the media to tell them that Holloway should be their next party leader? Holloway announced and made it on the ballot. When the voting began, she did better than expected. Jones was out ahead and cast as a zealot by his opponents. Others fell away in chaotic circumstances leaving Jones on the ballot but also Holloway and another for the final vote among party MPs. The final two would be voted upon by the winner after that final three-candidate ballot. Holloway looked defeated. Then her nearest competitor dropped out and suddenly endorsed her. It was a shock indeed. The leadership vote went on to the party membership.

Holloway fought a fierce battle against Jones. She shed much of her ‘nice’ image in private and did struggle at times to keep that up in front of the media. The ordinary public took a stronger likening to her though, more than they did Jones. Nonetheless, it wasn’t up to them, nor the media too, but the party membership. The race went down to the wire. It was neck-and-neck. Jones remained stunned at the challenge Holloway gave him where she was an effective and active campaigner. He was left open-mouthed when she won. Within days, March’s long lame duck premiership was over with and Holloway was in Downing Street.

During that leadership campaign, where Holloway was battling for the votes of the party membership, her private life came under scrutiny. Such was how it was in the modern age. She had never hid things, she said, and was always open. Holloway had married young, straight out of university, and had a child. Divorced a few years later and left with a young child by a wayward father, she’d worked hard. There was another marriage which was far more successful and two more children born a few years before she first become an MP. That ‘working mum’ image had won her that fanbase among other women across the country. Her husband was Ian Thornton, a financier and entrepreneur with many interests in the world of business. Holloway kept her maiden name though he was often at her side in public events. Thornton was someone who didn’t share her popularity but he was her husband. As to her eldest daughter, she’d never been in the spotlight like her two younger half-siblings had often been as their mother’s career rose dramatically. In something denied by Jones’ spokesperson as being down to him, Holloway’s daughter became the subject of a media story where she was ‘outed’ as LGBTQ. It was quite the nasty incident. Holloway strove to her daughter’s defence and declared she was ‘proud’ of her daughter as all parents should be of their children. She gave a dignified speech while wearing a small rainbow badge on her suit lapel. This worked for her well and stung Jones bad. The denials from his camp hadn’t rung true with the public. Holloway gained public sympathy but also respect for how she stood up for her innocent daughter who had been dragged into such a horrid thing.

As prime minister, Holloway kept her promises to Cabinet colleagues she had made when first running for the position. Promoting new blood and easing out the old guard caused problems among her MPs but gave her premiership the necessary polling edge leading her to call that election six months in. She was finished, Jones and his supporters believed, and they looked forward to taking the party leadership after her loss even though the Conservatives would be out of government. How wrong they were. Holloway fought a short, tight campaign this time and run on a positive message. It was all very image based on her especially. She won her party a majority, increasing on what Miller had won and the party had feared that March before her would lose had she stayed in office. Like Jones before him, the leader of the opposition was stunned too. He had fought a good fight based on policies but lost to Holloway and her image as a working mum who won over a sizeable number of voting women recognised as swing voters for this election. The general election campaign had only suffered one tough moment for Holloway and that had concerned Thornton. This time Holloway hadn’t jumped to the defence of her family but stayed quiet on that. It all came from when she was back at the DDMCS as secretary of state there. Starting in the field of social media but moving beyond that in scope, Parliament would pass a law concerning UK-only control over the media. Foreign entities were allowed an overall ownership because Britain was open to business to the wider world but day-to-day control was meant to be in UK hands and subject to laws passed by Parliament. It had been something opposed back when presented from media interests though the public was onboard with it after so many media scandals. March had caught the flak from barbed attacks in the press there against these laws rather than Holloway. Since the legislation had passed, Thornton had quietly moved to become involved in taking financial stakes in holding companies associated with media organisations operating in the country. He’d built up quite the unofficial empire with companies he controlled having effective control over the press while those organisations still retained foreign ownership. The story had the potential to be very big here and would have pointed to quite the conflict of interest when it came to the media’s relationship with the prime minister but also her husband. Thankfully, before it could fully explode, there was an explosion elsewhere. A terror attack during the general election occurred and while that affected Holloway’s government somewhat as it gave the Labour opposition room for criticism of security policy, it buried the story about Thornton. Still, it wasn’t ever going to go away. Journalists kept on digging into how deep the links went.

The prime minister’s husband had plenty of control over the country’s mainstream media. It was freelance journalists working for small publications and websites working on this rather than the major elements of the media. The months went by. Less and less joint public appearances were made by Holloway and Thornton. One of those smaller media outlets questioned whether there was trouble in their marriage. The prime minister got on with the business of government and her husband continued his own interests. Finally though, the break between them came.


When the news came out, the story presented to the public was that Thornton was asking for the divorce and leaving his wife possibly for someone else. Downing Street told the media that this was a private matter; unofficial briefings to Holloway-friendly journalists (coincidently working for publications where Thornton had his financial interests) told of her sadness at her husband’s decision. The two of them were on course to end their marriage and it all looked rather acrimonious.

Things though were not as they seemed here. Someone was telling lies and playing quite the manipulative game…

[stevep]

  James

   Interesting idea but sounds like some serious dirt may be starting to emerge. I get the feeling your presenting her as a popular figure but with a few skeletons in the cupboard.  Definitely with her 2nd husband being very shady.  When things emerge I think the question would be how much did she know about what he's been doing.

  Technically isn't Holloway the 4th female MP?  Unless your got a POD before May comes to power or effectively say May = March?

  Steve

[James G]

May 17, 2019 9:48:44 GMT stevep said:

  James

   Interesting idea but sounds like some serious dirt may be starting to emerge. I get the feeling your presenting her as a popular figure but with a few skeletons in the cupboard.  Definitely with her 2nd husband being very shady.  When things emerge I think the question would be how much did she know about what he's been doing.

  Technically isn't Holloway the 4th female MP?  Unless your got a POD before May comes to power or effectively say May = March?

  Steve

Oh, there is plenty of dirt. She did those things which benefitted her such as being behind the outing of her daughters sexuality and the terror attack (allowing it to happen).
I wanted to present her as socially liberal and economically conservative as a character, on the face of it, but in reality just ruthless and power/money mad.
It takes place in a different world so the PM March (is OTL May). So Holloway is the third story-wise.