The Liberal Reforms: Why were they introduced?

The Liberal Reforms: Why were they introduced?

“Merely a response to the threat of the Labour party” How accurately does this statement explain the introduction of welfare reforms 1906-1914? • To what extent were the studies of Booth and Rowntree responsible for the introduction of welfare reforms in Britain 1906-1914. • How important were concerns for national efficiency in motivating the Liberal government to introduce welfare reforms 1906-1914? • To what extent did was New Liberalism the main motivation for the introduction of the Liberal Reforms?

What were the Liberal Reforms? A series of welfare reforms which aimed to helped: • Children • Old People • Sick people • People who had low wages/were unemployed.

Introduction: Contexts The liberal government came to power in 1906 with a landslide victory of 399 seats to the 156 of the Conservatives. During their election campaign they had focussed on their promise of free trade, yet, during their time in power, they introduced a series of welfare reforms aimed at helping those in need. The Liberal Party were in power from 1906 to 1914. During this time they introduced a series of welfare reforms which were designed to provide support for the 1/3 of Britain’s population who had been identified by Seebohm Rowntree and Charles Booth as living in poverty. When the Liberal Party came to power in 1906, the poverty line was at 21 shillngs per week and around one third of British families were below this – living in poverty. Through his study, Rowntree identified five main causes of poverty; old age, large families, unemployment/irregular work, low wages and the death/illness of main wage earner.

Factors Revelations (Social Awareness) New Liberals National Efficiency Power (Political Advantage)

TASK: • While watching the video, take a note of at least one FACT for each of the following: • National Efficiency • Social Awareness • Political Advantage

1.Revelations By 1906 it was becoming difficult for the government to ignore the problem. Research findings of: Seebohm Rowntree Charles Booth

The Social Surveys of Booth and Rowntree The large surveys into British poverty conducted by Booth and Rowntree provided the incoming Liberal Government with detailed evidence which had not been available to previous governments. • Charles Booth’s “Survey of Life and Labour in London” completed in 1903, showed the huge level of poverty in London: nearly one third of the population. • 17 year study in London • 30% lived below poverty line • Only 3% received help from the Poor Law

Seebohm Rowntree Poverty or bread line= basics (home, food, clothing) • Seebohm Rowntree’s study of working class families in York: “Poverty: A study of Town Life” was published in 1901.It confirmed Charles Booth’s findings that one third of Britain’s population was living in poverty. • York • 30% lived below poverty line. • A family needed £1 a week to stay above the poverty line.

What made people poor? Low wages 52% Rowntree - York - 1/3rd in poverty Large families 22% Death of main wage earner 16% Unemployment or irregular work 5% Illness or old age 5%

Other evidence of poverty

SIGNAL TO ARGUMENT Revelations influenced the Liberals to pass reforms after the true extent of poverty was uncovered, however, it is clear that many reforms were introduced due to other factors.

 EVIDENCE Evidence: • Booth & Rowntree – 1/3rd of population living in poverty. • Middle & upper classes made aware of extent of poverty by novels such as those by Charles Dickens.

 ARGUMENT This was important because: • It had been believed that only 3% of the population were living in poverty and were being helped by the poor law.

 EVIDENCE Evidence: Identified the real causes of poverty e.g. old age and unemployment.

 ARGUMENT This played a role in the introduction of the reforms because: • It dispelled the belief that individuals were responsible for their poverty. • Showed that people could not pull themselves out of poverty and encouraged government intervention. • Indeed – Libs were motivated by revelations because the 1909 Peoples’ Budget signified a move away from Laissez-faire.

 REFUTE ARGUMENT On the other hand, the limitations of their reforms suggest that they were not influenced solely by a desire to help the poor.

 EVIDENCE Suggested that the 1908 Old Age Pension Act was introduced due to a desire to help the poor BUT the government ignored the recommended monetary allowance which would have kept them above the poverty line.

 ARGUMENT SUGGESTS – the government were motivated by other factors.

LINK TO QUESTION As such, it may be more valid to argue that revelations were important in the sense that they influenced the view of those in political parties, rather than directly brought about social reforms.

Why did the Liberals introduce reforms? MOTIVE(S) Revelations influenced the liberals to pass reforms after the true extent of poverty was uncovered, though it clear that many reforms were introduced due to other factors. Awareness came through the work of social investigators and authors of the time. For example, Booth and Rowntree found that 1/3rd of the population were living in poverty. Also, the middle and upper classes were made aware of the extent of poverty through the writings of Charles Dickens etc. This was crucial in encouraging the Liberals to take action because before revelations it was believed that only 3% of the population were in poverty and being helped by the poor law. Most importantly it showed the real reasons for poverty e.g. unemployment, old age and large families. This was important because it dispelled the belief that that individuals were responsible for their poverty. Also, it showed that people could not pull themselves out of poverty and encouraged government action. Indeed, it can be argued that the Liberals were motivated by revelations because the 1909 Peoples’ Budget signified a move away from Laissez-faire.

1906 – Liberal Prime Minister, Henry Campbell-Bannerman believed in Gladstonian Laissez-Faire. However, a growing number of Liberals saw the need for change. They had sympathy for the poor but were also worried by the rise in support for the Labour Party. They convinced their leaders to do more to help Britain’s poorest. Winston Churchill David Lloyd George Make Poverty History New Liberalism “Don’t be afraid to take a big step”

Analysis  • Most reforms came after 1908 after Campbell Bannerman had died and cabinet positions changed; bringing in New Libs such as DLG and Churchill. Reforms included; OAPs and National Insurance Acts. • Shows direct link between the political ideology of the Libs and motives for introducing reforms. • Can be argued this would not have happened without new Liberalism as these acts were distinct move away from Laissez Faire.

Analysis  ALSO: • Evidence that other reforms introduced were led by New Liberalism. E.g. 1908 Children’s Charter & 1909 Trades Board Act – both problems identified by Booth & Rowntree. • Also – OAP was non-contributory. Shows huge influence of New Liberals upon the actions of the Liberal government as a whole.

Analysis  This demonstrates: • The importance of New Liberalism as before they arrived on scene, the Lib govt. did very little to help the poor. • Their progressive ideas changed the views of others in the party e.g. • Robertson (MP) said ‘Laissez faire…is quite done with.’

Analysis  BUT – • New Liberals also wanted to gain more votes than Labour. • DLG said, ‘We must eliminate the widespread poverty…otherwise the working men of GB will vote Labour instead’. • SUGGESTS: Libs had stronger motive – political power.

Analysis  ALSO – • Many reforms did not deal with the problems. • For example: • They did not successfully deal with the strikes of miners and dockers (1910-14) DESPITE DLG’s Welsh, working class background. • Indeed, if they were truly concerned with helping the poor, surely they would have done more to help.

TASK With a partner, complete the worksheet by: • Identifying evidence and argument which suggests New Liberalism was an important motive. • Identifying evidence and argument which suggests New Liberalism was not an important motive. • Place the argument with the correct piece of evidence. • Check with Miss MacKay • Either write in, or stick in the information – in the correct order.

1. Threat from the Labour Party POWER- Political Advantage Labour MPs 1900 2 MPs 1906 29 MPs 1910 42 MPs speed Labour threatened the Liberals because in 1890, working class men were given the vote and the majority associated with Labour – the working man’s party. ‘The relief of poverty is always an act of power’ P. Hennock

Speech by Lloyd George to a Liberal Party meeting in Cardiff, October 1906 I warn you about the Labour Party. I warn you it will become a terrifying force that will sweep away Liberalism. We have a Liberal Parliament, but we must act to help the poor. We must get rid of the national disgrace of slums. We must eliminate the widespread poverty which scars this land glittering with wealth, otherwise the working men of Britain will vote Labour instead of Liberal.

2. Threat from the Conservative Party The historian Morrison argues that the Conservatives posed a bigger threat to the Liberals than Labour. Evidence Housing Act 1890 The Conservatives had already introduced reforms… Education Act 1891 Workmen’s compensation Act 1897/ 1900

Analysis  • Evidence: Labour threatened Liberals because in 1890 the working class were given the vote and the majority associated with Labour; the working man’s party.

Analysis  Argument: • Labour was gaining support quickly. They had 2 seats in 1905 and this increased to 29 in 1910. So, the Liberals required a way to regain support from those voters. • This is evidenced by the Liberal introduction of the Free Schools Act which was originally suggested as a bill in parliament by a Labour MP. • Thus showing that the Liberals were concerned that Labour had a greater appeal to the working classes.

Analysis  Evidence: The Liberals majority was only 2 seats in 1910. In 1907 election, they had lost ‘safe’ seats e.g. Jarrow and Colne Valley to Labour.

Analysis  Argument: Historians argue that this led the Liberals to introduce pensions the following year. Indeed, Lloyd George said that they would only be put out of power if they failed to deal with the problems of the people.

Refute the argument On the other hand, the Liberals seemed willing to lose votes in order to introduce these reforms. For example, many workers resented the NI scheme and parents objected to the state ‘interference’ through the Children’s Charter. Showing that perhaps, the Liberals were not entirely motivated by gaining the Labour vote.

Argument  Evidence does, however, suggest that the reforms were introduced more as a result of a threat from the Conservatives than the Labour party. The Conservatives had already introduced some reforms e.g. the Housing Act (1890), Workman’s Compensation Act (1897 & 1900). This may have motivated the Liberals into action.

Argument  The Conservatives had also introduced Royal Commission (1905) which aimed to look at the problems of poverty and offer solutions. Didn’t carry out solutions as they were knocked out of power by the Liberals.

Argument  Even so – if the Liberals were concerned about their own political interest and viewed the Conservatives as a threat; why did they persevere with the Peoples’ Budget. By doing so, they were willing to lose middle and upper class support (those who vote Cons) and indeed returned to power with only a majority of 2 seats. Thus showing, that the threat from the Cons could NOT have been the main driving force BUT when combined with the threat from Labour, the Liberals had to do something to attract voters away from both parties.

Historians – Lib Vs Lab • Historian Wood argues that the defeat to Labour in 1907 prompted the Liberals to introduce OAP the following year. (Winning Labour candidates had promised OAP and other reforms) • P. Hennock – the relief of poverty is always an act of power. • Marxisthistorians (ant-Capitalist) believe that the liberal were just buying off the w/c.

Historians – Lib Vs Cons • The historian Morisson argues that the Liberals were more concerned with the threat of the Conservatives! • Recent historiography 2005 by Valocchiargues that the Liberals were warding off ALL threats – both Labour and Conservatives to maintain power- it was NOT out of genuine concern for the masses.

However it is worth noting that…… Liberals were not popular! If the Liberals were concerned with maintaining power, why did they push through with the People’sBudget (tax increases to pay for OAP) in 1909? The Liberals called a General Election in 1910- they won by only by 2 seats!!!!!

Brief Summary • The 1909 Peoples’ Budget taxed the rich in order to introduce further reforms. Surely then, if the Liberals were more concerned about threat from Conservatives they would have tried to attract support from the wealthy. • Further to that, the Liberals may also have been losing support from workers. • Many actually objected to paying out the money for National Insurance. They got paid very little so any deduction (regardless of size) had detrimental consequences. • SUGGESTS: Liberals were in fact genuinely attempting to help those in need.

National Efficiency Evidence Britain was worried about her position as the world’s leading industrial nation because: • By 1900 Germany & USA had overtaken e.g. USA could make steel cheaper than UK. • UK companies e.g. Cadbury complained that workers were too unhealthy to work productively.

National Efficiency This was a motivation because… • The govt. attempted to deal with the health of workers by introducing the National Insurance Acts to provide financial support to workers in times of illness. • Would ensure they return to work healthy • So – enhancing the productivity of UK industry.

National Efficiency E – UK also threatened by other countries e.g. Germany. • Germany excelling in industry. DLG visited & believed this was down to their social reforms. • Indeed – Germany had introduced reforms to deal with problems of workers e.g. Accidence Insurance (1884) and Health Insurance (1883). • Sense of rivalry also existed due to Naval Arms Race.

National Efficiency Refute the argument – • Reforms not successfully helping national efficiency – • NI Act only covered 13 million workers, families excluded & workers could not receive specialist treatment. • If the govt. really wanted to improve national efficiency it would have made sure these reforms went further to actually improve the health of the people.

National Efficiency Further evidence suggests that national efficiency was not the only motive… • DLG’s infamous ‘war budget’ in 1909 was willing to raise £16 million for defence and welfare incl. pensions. • AND OAPs did not benefit national efficiency…TOO OLD to work.

The Liberal Reforms: Why were they introduced?