The Liberal Reforms: The Rise of Social Welfare in Britain, 1906-1914, Study notes of Social Welfare

Download The Liberal Reforms: The Rise of Social Welfare in Britain, 1906-1914 and more Study notes Social Welfare in PDF only on Docsity!

Why did the Liberals

introduce Social

Reform?

Collect a copy of this image and stick it in your jotter

Why the Liberals introduced social welfare reforms? National Security (Boer War) New Liberalism Rise of Labour Poverty (Booth & Rowntree) Municipal Socialism

During the late 19 th century the British Government, under the Liberal party, followed the principle of laissez faire. Individuals were solely responsible for their own lives and welfare. The government did not accept responsibility for the poverty and hardship that existed amongst its citizens. A popular point of view at the time was the poverty was caused by individual idleness, drunkenness and other moral weaknesses on the part of the working classes. The poor were viewed by the wealthy as an unfortunate but inevitable section of society. There were no old age pensions, unemployment benefits or family allowances. If the main wage-earner died or could not work, a whole family could be plunged into terrible poverty. The state would not interfere. Families relied on charitable donations or faced the terrible prospect of the workhouse. During this period, the accepted role of the government was very limited. It was simply expected to maintain law and order and protect the country from invasion. Government involvement in social issues was unpopular as it would inevitably lead to tax increases. Laissez - Faire

Charles Booth

• Born in Liverpool 30 March 1840
• Died 23 November 1916
• Wealthy ship-owner
• Raised with the belief that poverty was the fault of

the poor and could be dealt with by charity.

• Between 1886 and 1903 studied the life of the poor

in London

• Published his findings in 17 volumes entitled Life

and Labour of the People in London.

Life and Labour of the People of London

• Booths findings changed the opinion of many in Britain about poverty
• He used scientific methods and put people into recognisable classes
• He worked out a poverty line of 21 shillings per week to indicate the income a family needed to survive
• He provided statistics that showed the widespread nature of poverty
• The scale of poverty he uncovered could not be handled by charity
• He concluded that 35% of London’s population was living in poverty

Benjamin Seebohm Rowntree

• Born in York 17 July 1871
• Died 7 October 1954
• Son of wealthy chocolate manufacturer Joseph

Rowntree

• A committed Christian who carried out his own

investigation into the poor of York after reading

Booth’s findings

• Published his own findings in 1901, Poverty: A

Study of Town Life

• He estimated that 1/3 of town populations lived in

poverty

Poverty: A Study of Town Life

• Rowntree’s work in York showed that poverty was not exclusive to London
• Rowntree is responsible for identifying the two types of poverty; primary and secondary
• He put a figure on the amount of money a worker needed to earn in order to maintain a minimum standard of living
• He also stated that poverty was not constant – people drifted below the poverty line at different stages in life i.e. in old age
• Rowntree’s investigation confirmed the belief that if a ‘typical English town’ like York had 30% of its population in poverty then it must be a national problem

Summary

• Booth and Rowntree were private wealthy individuals who studied poverty in London

and York

• They introduced new scientific methods to study the extent of poverty
• Their findings found that 30% of the urban population lived in poverty
• They confirmed that only the Government, not charity, could tackle Britain’s level of

poverty.

• Their reports were important because it was hard statistical evidence – not opinion.
• If the reports were so important why did the Liberals not introduce reforms that at

least matched the agreed poverty line

• Both surveys focused on the inner cities so there was some criticism that this was not

a true reflection of the scale of British poverty and some MPs still blamed the working

class for their situation

Andrew Marr on Seebohm Rowntree

Historiography – Booth & Rowntree copy any 3 quotes from the 6 on pages 43- 45 that you understand and could use in an essay copy the quotes on page 122 by Goodlad and Staton and Peter Murray

National Security

Why does it take 30 months for 250,000 British

soldiers to defeat 60,000 South African farmers?

• 25% of the volunteers for the Boer War in 1899-1902 were unfit for service due to ill health.
• Urban figures were the worst - Manchester 8,000 rejected out of 11,000 recruits
• This was alarming for a government that may need to call up a strong army at short notice against a greater enemy.
• Real fear of German militarism – “Place in the Sun”
• Politicians and the public alike began to ask questions as to whether Britain could survive a war.
• Lack of efficiency on the battlefield against what were termed farmers highlighted not only the inefficiencies of the male populace but also introduced the idea of “National Efficiency” into the language of British society
• Without the Boer War unearthing the horrors of poverty that an industrialised non-interventionist state had created, it would have been highly unlikely that reform would have played such a major role in Liberal policies between 1906- 1914.

New Liberalism “Don’t be afraid to take a big step” (^) If you’re not a Liberal at 20, you have no heart”