Why did the liberal government come into conflict with the house of lords in the years 1906-1911?

WHY DID THE LIBERAL GOVERNMENT COME INTO CONFLICT WITH THE HOUSE OF LORDS IN THE YEARS 1906-1911?

The liberal government came into conflict with the House of Lords for the fundamental reason that the Lords consisted of a huge majority of conservative supporters and members thus numerous differences of political views arose causing conflict between the Lords and the liberals. Bills presented to the Lords were not passed as they not were benefiting the conservative party due to this the liberals became frustrated as rejection of their bills became frequent, for example the veto of the plural voting bill 1906. The Lords were simply going to protect the interests of the conservative party and basically do whatever Mr.Balfour told them to do, which undoubtedly was going to cause conflict between the two houses. The liberals only alternative to deal with the problem of the Lords was to reduce there power but the Lords were not going to stand for this which also brought about major conflict .The set up of an undemocratic system in parliament had arisen as the un-elected body was stopping the elected body from governing the country.

Overall from 1906 to 1910 The House of Lords vetoed liberal bills. This included the Education bill. This bill was rejected by the Lords in 1906 it was the first of many. The idea of the bill was that it would reduce the Anglican Church influence in schools. This was vetoed by the Lords for the main reason that the conservative party had major influence over the House of lords so they were not going to allow a bill to be passed if it was not going to coincide with their views as a political party. The conservatives were great supporters of the Anglican Church and were not going to reduce the role they played in schools as this was generally seen as morally wrong as it would affect the children of Britain poorly. The Lords rejected the Education bill of 1906 for this reason, and because Balfour didn’t want this bill to pass and he was certainly the person with the power for the Lords. From this it is clear that the liberals were going to be extremely frustrated by the veto of their bill causing conflict between them and the Lords.

This is a preview of the whole essay

The Lords also vetoed the Plural voting bill of 1906. The aim of this bill was to ensure that voters only got a single vote, that is, abolishing the principle of having a residential vote and a business vote, which was currently in affect at the time. The Lords rejected this because affectively it meant that the conservative party was going to lose votes in forthcoming elections because the people who had the business vote as well as the residential vote were the business man, who were conservative party supporters. This is an example of how the Lords were protecting the needs of the conservative party. Once again the liberals were annoyed by the rejection of their bill, it was coming quite apparent that the Lords were simply not going to pass any liberal party inflicted bills. Balfour’s influence in the House of Lords was also causing conflict because the liberals were feeling as though the Lords were an opposition as inevitably they were the conservative party. The rejection of the plural voting bill was building on the conflict present between the liberals and the Lords.

The Licensing bill of 1908 wanted to reduce the amount of public houses, the liberals just wanted to stop the availability of pubs to the British workers, in turn making them work harder. The conservatives however definitely did not want this to pass because it meant that public house owners would lose out in profit and almost certainly complain to their representing party which was the conservatives, Balfour certainly was not going to let this happen. Due to this the House of Lords vetoed the Licensing bill, giving the conservatives another victory and the liberals an exasperating failure. The rejection of yet another bill was adding to the hatred towards the Lords from the liberals in turn accumulating to the conflict between the Lords and the liberals.

The rejection of the 1909 budget was a major climax for the conflict between the liberals and the House of Lords. This was a great shock to the Lords. The liberals had thought the Lords would not reject the bill because off the fact of it being as finance bill. It was thought that the breaking of the Lords’ tradition of not rejecting a finance bill would not occur, but to there surprise the Lords also had thoughts of the 1909 budget. The Lords never dreamt up that the liberals would construct a budget that would blatantly impose direct tax on the rich and wealthy and affect their supporters to such a major extent. The bill was seen as extremely radical for the Lords to pass and was definitely worth the breaking of their 250-year tradition, therefore it was vetoed, this brought about major conflict. The liberals desperately needed the money from the budget to pay for the now more expensive old age pensions, by more expensive I refer to the miscalculations made by Asquith, it was now apparent that twice the amount of old people were now allegeable for this social scheme. Other costly aspects also needed to be paid for from the 1909 budget, for example the dreadnoughts and most importantly the forthcoming social reforms planned by the liberals. The rejection of this was going to cause major problems for the liberals as a political party and the conflict between the Lords and the liberals was ever increasing in 1909 when it was vetoed. The Lords themselves were also extremely annoyed by the budget because it was seen as a direct hit on the conservative supporters, it was seen as so radical because nothing of this extent had been presented as a finance bill in the past. The rejection of the peoples budget encouraged the liberals to reduce the power of the Lords so a major blow to their social legislation plans would not occur in the future, as had occurred with the budget veto in 1909. The rejection of the 1909 budget was a major climax for the conflict between the House of Lords and the liberals because the veto was undemocratic. The Lords had also brewed up general hatred for the liberals for their blatant attack on the conservative supporters, thus causing conflict. The Lords were stopping the elected body from introducing their legislation therefore causing conflict.

Further explanation for the conflict between the liberal government and the House of Lords is that the general attitude towards the liberal bills presented to the Lords was extremely undemocratic, from the stated rejections from 1906 to 1909 it is very clear that the conservative values clearly came through when they vetoed the bills, this was effectively stopping the liberal government from implementing any of their campaigns made in the 1906 election victory. The Lords were just not willing to pass any bills that were going to help the liberals succeed as a governing body.

“The great unionist party should till control whether in power or opposition, the destines of this empire.” Balfour – 1906

This quote shows the general attitude by the conservative leader Balfour, he inevitably had control over the House of Lords and they effectively did anything he said as though they had no self-opinion. This fact obviously extremely irritated the liberals as this meant that the Lords would never pass any of their bills.

“Watchdog of the constitution” – Balfour referring to the Lords

Lloyd George’s retorts - “Mr. Balfour’s poodle”

Here Lloyd George makes out how the Lords simply were doing anything that Balfour told them to, they were following him around like they had nothing better to do! The constant rejection of the liberal bills due to conservative influence over the Lords was stopping the liberals from acting as a governing body and in turn caused hatred towards the Lords, thus causing conflict between them.

After the rejection of the peoples budget in 1909 the liberals were encouraged to attempt to reduce the power of the Lords to effectively achieve a more democratic parliamentary system, the only way this could occur would be to pass the Parliament bill. In order for the liberals to pass this they needed to win a general election. This election took place in 1910, the liberals had totally lost their majority in the commons and had to rely on the support of the Irish Nationalists, in return the liberals had to promise to reduce the power of the Lords so the Irish Home rule bill would be passed. This placed extra pressure on Asquith to pass the Parliament bill. In the end what Asquith did was to secretly make a deal with the king, this was that if the liberals won another general election the creation of liberal peers would occur, if the Lords did not pass the Parliament bill. Asquith sent the Parliament bill up in November 1910, it was rejected, and the liberals were again infuriated, as the Lords were making no effort to help the undemocratic system. Asquith’s announcement of his ‘deal’ with the king was made in the commons after another victorious general election in July 1911; this was a major shock to the Lords and caused major conflict. Hugh Cecil-“Traitor” directed towards Asquith openly showed hatred towards the liberals, this effectively causing conflict between the liberals and the House of Lords.

In conclusion it can be said that conflict between the liberal government and the House of Lords came about because the Lords were effectively the conservative party as Balfour was ‘calling the shots’, this obviously was frustrating for the liberals because they could not pass any of their bills, it also meant that the un-elected body, the Lords were stopping the elected body, the liberals from implementing their campaigns made to the people in the 1906 election. The Lords constant vetoing of bills was portraying the liberal party quite badly and in turn making them look as an unsuccessful political party. Conflict from this occurred because the liberals were being treated extremely unfairly and the whole system was completely undemocratic. The rejection of the Education, Plural voting and Licensing bills contributed to the conflict because the liberals virtually could not do anything and they were bitter towards the vetoing by the Lords. The rejection of the peoples budget in 1909 was the climax of the increasing conflict because a finance bill was not rejected due to the 250-year tradition of the Lords, the rejection was going to bring about major problems for the liberals as a governing body and the rejection of it was seen as unreasonable. The obstacles faced by Asquith to pass the Parliament bill caused major conflict because of the hatred aimed towards the liberals from the Lords for reducing their power. Overall the Lords themselves brought about the conflict caused because they refused to reorganize the undemocratic system currently present in parliament. So they definitely were not justified in their harsh reactions to the Parliament bill, the liberals were simply trying to set up the democratic system that was needed in Britain to run a successful government.