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: ContextsThe 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

TASK:

While watching the video, take a note of at least one FACT for each of the following:

•National Efficiency •Social Awareness •Political Advantage

By 1906 it was becoming difficult for the government to ignore the problem.

Research findings of:

Charles Booth

Seebohm Rowntree

The Social Surveys of Booth and RowntreeThe Social Surveys of Booth and Rowntree

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

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.

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.

Seebohm RowntreePoverty or bread line= basics (home, food, clothing)

Illness or old age 5%

Unemployment or irregular work 5%

Death of main wage earner 16%

Low wages 52%

Large families 22%

Other evidence of poverty

Socialists Writers Teachers & Civil Servants

Social Democratic Federation tried to make people aware of conditions of poor.

Reverand A. Mearns ‘The Bitter Cry of Outcast London’William Booth ‘Darkest London’ Charles Dickens ‘Oliver Twist.

Teachers complained to school inspectors that children were too hungry to learn.

Medical officers (for local councils) reported on poor state of people’s health.

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.

ARGUMENTThis 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.

Make Povert

y Histor

y

Winston Churchill David Lloyd George

“Don’t be afraid to take a big step”

“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.

TASKWith a partner, complete the worksheet by: 1.Identifying evidence and argument which suggests New Liberalism was an important motive. 2.Identifying evidence and argument which suggests New Liberalism was not an important motive. 3.Place the argument with the correct piece of evidence. 4.Check with Miss MacKay5.Either write in, or stick in the information – in the correct order.

1. Threat from the Labour Party

Labour MPs

1900 2 MPs

1906 29 MPs

1910 42 MPs

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 PartyThe historian Morrison argues that the Conservatives posed a bigger threat to the Liberals than Labour.

The Conservatives had already introduced reforms…

Housing Act 1890

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.

• Marxist historians (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 Valocchi argues 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……

The Liberals called a General

Election in 1910- they won

by only by 2 seats!!!!!

If the Liberals were concerned with

maintaining power, why did they push through with the

People’s Budget (tax increases to pay

for OAP) in 1909?

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.

EvidenceBritain 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Evidence –

Took 3 years for 400,000 British soldiers to defeat 35,000 Boer farmers.

This motivated the reforms because:• It showed the government that they had to intervene to ensure the army was at its strongest to fight effectively.

Evidence: The health of adult males in UK was so poor that 34.5% of men were turned away from the army due to poor health!

This caused the government to: •Introduce Territorial Reserves & Expeditionary Force which was designed to back up regular army.

•Showing that national security was important because the govt. introduced reforms to specifically improve the performance of the UK army.

Evidence: •Inter Departmental Committee on Physical Deterioration reported in 1904 that health of many males was poor and recommended improved diet and reduction of overcrowding. •Dundee Survey, 1905 stated that children couldn’t learn because they were malnourished = they would be future workers and soldiers. •The 1903 Royal Commission found that Edinburgh children were underweight compared to children in the USA. •Following year – found that Glaswegian children were in a poorer condition than the Edinburgh children.

It is clear that these findings motivated reforms:•It was obvious that if called upon to protect UK or empire, the future generation of soldiers would stand little chance. •Indeed, Libs introduced Free School Meals (1906) and Medical Inspections (1907) to deal with unhealthy children. •Difficult to see other motive as these were introduced before Campbell Bannerman’s death so not motivated by New Liberalism.

Refute argument: •Not motivated by National Security alone as by 1914, the govt. had spent £12.5 million on OAPs.

•If National Security was sole concern then surely the Liberals would not have spent so much on a group of people who would never again contribute to the security of the UK.

• With a partner (or alone, if you prefer) complete the following:

Using the essay sheet on National Security and National Efficiency, make a diagram of what you should (and could) include in a paragraph. Due to the time constraints, it is best to merge both factors into one paragraph. Include MORE than you think you can write in timed conditions.

SO –• Choose which factor will come first • Ensure there is balance for each factor (evidence and argument)• Write a ‘refute the argument’ sentence that will go between the

factors.