The Liberal Welfare Reforms

Syllabus requirementsGovernment and People: socio-economic problems in the period and changing role of central government in addressing them as exemplified in: -

• Liberal Government 1906 – 14 and the problem of poverty

• i.e. considering origins of the welfare state*

system whereby the government takes

responsibility for the social and economic

security of its population, e.g. old

pensions.

Poverty & the Decline of Laissez-Faire

• Up to c1870, governments followed policy of ‘laissez-faire’.

• 1870 – 1900 policy increasingly challenged

Laissez-faire is the belief that the stateshould not interfere in the lives of the

people or in the workingsof the market economy.

19th C Beliefs

• Individuals free to run own life

• If destitute then own fault, due to moral failings

• Poor relief made harsh to avoid laziness

• ‘Age of Individualism’ (Dicey)

• Laissez-faire challenged

• ‘Age of Collectivism’ (Dicey)

• Governments accept need to regulate and care for their citizens in certain limited areas.

1870 onwards

Dicey too rigid in classifications

Overlap

Gradual intervention since 1840’s

Series of acts governing factories and public health

Why change in policy?

• 1870’s + 1880’s period of severe economic depression – mass unemployment – state and voluntary efforts could not cope.

• Social investigations revealed extent of poverty.

• Journalistic reports on slum life pricked Middle Class consciences.

• Public and private poor relief system deemed wholly inadequate.

Why change in policy?

• Political thinkers like T. H. Green, gave the intellectual ammunition for the ‘New’ Liberals to challenge traditional individualist ideology of their party.

• Socialist/collectivist ideas spread through groups such as the SDF (Social Democratic Federation) and Fabian Society.

Pressure for change resulted in welfare legislation tackling public health, education and poor relief.

Welfare State of late 19th C

• Transition period

• Ideas of self-help endured but private solutions no longer capable of tackling the severe problems of that period

• Poor Law inadequate - help from the wealthy was forthcoming but in the form of philanthropy, i.e. private charity

• Although not collectivist in response it was a shift away from laissez-faire notion of self-help

Charitable Organisations

• Christian or humanitarian motives

• Tried to care for the weakest members of society.

• YMCA (1844)

• Dr Barnardo’s Homes (1869)

• Salvation Army (1866)

• RSPCC (1884)

Actions contradicted social ‘Darwinism’,

i.e. survival of the fittest.

Charity Organisation (C.O.S.)• Founded 1867• Aim: more rigorous/coherent approach

to tackling poverty• Key figure: C.S. Loch – did not believe in

indiscriminate charity – help ‘deserving’ poor + investigate applicants – restore person’s independence and self respect

• 1890’s: more moderate line – Widespread economic distress– Acceptance some poverty unavoidable – Economic reasons

Situation 1880’s & 1890’s

• Poverty largely untreated

– Few wanted shame of entering poorhouse

• 1880’s 3% of population received poor relief; 30% in dire poverty

• Poor Law viewed as inadequate and fundamentally wrong

– No point frightening unemployed worker into finding work when none available

– Failed to deal with mass poverty revealed in investigations

Refuge for homeless women

The Investigation of Charles Booth• Aim: disprove H. M.

Hyndman’s view that wages of a ¼ of working men insufficient to keep them healthy

• Defined poverty/lineInsufficient to obtain ‘necessities of life’ i.e. minimum income 18/- to 21/- per week for family with 3 children

• Findings a shock• 30% below poverty

line• Philanthropy

ineffective• Challenged Poor Law

stats.• Some poverty due to

moral failings• Biggest problem:

casual labour, poor pay & unemployment – outwith individual’s control

Wealth ship ownerStudied London poor 1886 – 1903

‘The Life and Labour of the People of London’

Team incl. Beatrice Webb

The Investigation of Seebohm Rowntree

• Distinguished between ‘Primary’ & ‘Secondary’ Poverty

• Primary – income sufficient to meet basic needs

• Secondary – income sufficient, but misspent so as to produce poverty

• Poverty line: minimum necessary for necessities:food, rent, clothing, light, fuel, etc. = 21/8

• Findings27.8% poor (1899)

Related to chocolate firm, RowntreesStudied York

Other writers:Less academic

approachLargely emotive descriptions of

poverty

Increased awareness of

poverty by the middle class.

Drift towards ‘collective’

belief in social reform.

Other reasons for change in opinion

• Due partially to fear of working class agitation

• Political parties had to address needs of working class with their enfranchisement in 1867 & 1884

• Boer War recruitment saw 1/3rd rejection rate leading to campaign for ‘national efficiency’ - fit population needed

• Other countries developing welfare schemes

Reasons for poor response by Gladstone’s Liberals

• Keep public expenditure down• Gladstone’s belief in self help• Preoccupation with Irish question led to

Liberal split & out of office most of 1886 – 1906

• Main aim: preserve personal freedom

Little change:

Poor Law modified

Job creation schemes at exceptional

times

Local govt. would not accept that

poverty no always the individual’s fault

Situation c1900

• Private charity + self help still fashionable

• BUT, increased help for ‘deserving’ poor + deterrents for ‘undeserving’ to stop abuse of system

Turning point: Liberal Govt. social reforms 1906 – 14.

Conservatives and Reform

• In power most of 1870 – 1900• Lord Randolph Churchill advocated

social reform but deemed too radical • Resigned 1886• J.A. Gorst also critic of poor

Conservative record

3 significant reforms:– 1890 Housing Act – slum clearance +

house building– 1891 Education Act – free

elementary (primary) education– 1897, 1900 Workmen’s

Compensation Acts – compensation for injury at work without having to prove employer negligence – only some occupations

Did rise of Labour force pace of social reform?

1880s

Appeal of socialism had to be tackled by both political parties

Marxists like Hyndman saw social reforms as inadequate - capitalism itself needed to be destroyed.

Fabian Society wanted increased intervention to relieve poverty – Webbs’ thinking spread through their books, etc

By 1900 Labour Party established

– Protect Trade Union rights + interests

– Represented WC so put pressure on other parties to attract voters

Historical Debate

Disagreement over the importance of the working class and Socialists

in forcing pace of reform

D. Fraser regards the Socialists and the Labour as ‘a threat to the other

two parties’

However,

H. Pelling saw pressure from WC as ‘negligible’ before WW1