the harsh reality for themselves, for example when young educated students went to live among
poor people to witness it first hand. Humanitarian concern among the educated induced the
Liberal Welfare Reform Acts because the majority of the population wanted it, and parties obey
their nation’s opinion.
The Leaders of the Liberal Party, predominantly Lloyd-George and Winston Churchill,
showed a personal interest in social reform.
“These problems of the sick, of the infirm, of the men who cannot find the means of earning a living are
problems with which it is the business of the state to deal with. They are problems with which the state has eglected
for far too long” Lloyd-George, speech made to parliament 1908.
Lloyd-George had a very non-conformist and radical upbringing, he was not a Gladstonian
Liberal conformist either, and liked the new ideas on poverty. Having witnessed poverty he had a
personal desire to amend it and he pressured the reform movement personally. Winston
Churchill, although he had an aristocratic background, was also keen to eradicate poverty on a
large scale on principle alone, regardless of any political pressure. These two strong leaders
who desired change for the good of humanity helped Liberal Reforms. Their personal interest
in it however, was not a factor in reform as dominant as the exposure in poverty. Indeed it can
be argued that their interest in it stemmed from Rowntree and Booth’s exposure. Therefore,
although Churchill and Lloyd-George were catalysts for reform, changing public opinion due to
exposure of real causes of poverty were more powerful catalysts, and the leaders opinions
themselves perhaps just a result of exposure.
The Liberal government as a whole were starting a branch of named ‘New Liberalism’.
The previous Gladstonian government ethic had been that the Liberals take a laissez-faire policy
(leave alone) which meant low interference with welfare of people because of a belief that
economic problems would sort themselves out. However, recent ideology on the causes of
poverty caused Liberal governments to question their low interference policy. The Liberals
believed everyone had to get themselves out of poverty and into comfortable situations through
hard work, but as people were unable to provide for their families despite hard work, then they
considered this to be unfair. New Liberalism wanted to establish a basic living standard for
everyone.
“…promote measures for ameliorating conditions of life for the multitude.” Lloyd-
George.
This meant that social reform was necessary, to make sure everyone could at least secure
themselves a minimum standard of living. Winston Churchill declared he wished to ‘strap a
lifebelt around them’; he wanted to make sure no one was sinking too far below the poverty line.
Therefore, the New Liberalist desires for a national living standard meant a need for Welfare
Reform. Hence, New Liberalism was a reason that prompted Welfare Reform. However, the
New Liberalism was not as important catalyst as the changing attitudes towards poverty. Without
the changing attitudes and ideology, New Liberalism would never have been born, so the
ideology was the most important first cause.
The National efficiency of England was falling low. Although Britain was the leading
nation, Germany, the USA and Japan were threatening its place. Britain’s’ primacy was seen as
threatened economically and militantly. The working class recruits in the Boer War suffered
severe health problems and affected their efficiency. The workers in factories also suffered from
ill health and affected productivity.
“…the country that spent 250 million to avenge an insult levelled to her pride by an old Dutch farmer
is not ashamed to see her children walking the streets hungry and in rags.”
Generally, the poor distribution of wealth and an unfair tax system was not beneficial to
the economy. The economy in Germany had benefited from their introduction of Welfare
reforms and hence the working classes spending power had improved. The redistribution of
taxes, a shift of wealth from rich to the poor, was also seen as an improvement in the German
economy. Hence, the British saw this scheme as beneficial and aimed to introduce it to Britain
to help their failing economy as regards to poverty; no longer did the Liberals believe a powerful
national economy could sort out poverty because of the unfairly distributed wealth. Therefore,
there was a lobby for social reform to help the British Empire, to eradicate poverty and keep
Britain as the number one nation. The national efficiency argument for Liberal Reforms was a
very large pressure for change. Without the argument that welfare reforms would be beneficial to
the country as a whole and not just beneficial to a quarter of the population then perhaps reform
would not have taken place. The national efficiency argument was more of a catalyst for reform
than the personal humanitarian interests of Liberal leaders because without the argument, the
reforms wouldn’t have been seen as beneficial. However, they were not as important as changing
attitudes to poverty, which perhaps were the primary cause of ideology behind a welfare state.
The Labour Party was established in 1900s as a response to a growing demand by the
working classes to have more political representation in parliament. They felt ignored by the
conservative aristocratic leaders such as Balfour, and not in favour of Liberal leaders such as
Gladstone who employed a laissez-faire policy which did not help their impoverished state.
They wanted leaders who would identify with their needs and troubles and help them. In 1901
their membership was 350,000 and by 1903 it had risen to 861,000. This showed the
conservatives and the Liberals that the Labour party were a real threat.
The Liberal Party promised no social reforms in its election campaign in the early 1900s,
but recognised that they would lose working class votes if they did not answer the demands of
the working classes.
“The election is to decide whether or not labour is to be fairly represented in arliament… The slums
remain. Overcrowding continues…Shopkeepers and traders are overburdened with rates and taxation…Wars are
fought to make the rich richer and underfed children are still neglected…” Labour Party manifesto 1906
The Liberals noticed that the working class were voting for labour because labour promised
social reform and felt if they did not respond to the issues the labour party had raised then they
would lose more votes in the next election. Therefore, social reform was necessary to counteract
the development of the labour party, to try and prove to the nation that they need not change
party because the Liberal’s were reforming to meet the changing demands in society instead. The
Trade Unionists were funding the Labour party and supported them demonstratively also. The
Liberals felt that if they did not act for reform, the Trade Unions would campaign for Labour
and hence give Labour more publicity and chance to increase their electorate support. Therefore,
the founding of the Labour party put considerable pressure on the Liberal government to act.
They were threatened by them, and hence, the founding of the labour party was more of an issue
than the national efficiency argument as they were more likely to lose votes to the labour party
because of not reforming than they were to lose votes because of low national efficiency.
In conclusion, the Welfare Reforms came about because of changing ideology and the
founding of the Labour party, which promised more action on the growing awareness of poverty
and exclusion of the working classes from political representation. The reforms were helped
along the way by changing Liberal ideas and humanitarian concerned leaders, but perhaps these
reasons were simply a political response to changing ideology and knowledge that reform was
necessary to please the majority of the electorate.
