Such was the way of things in 1900, but this was all to change soon. In 1906 the Liberal Party introduced the first steps of the Welfare State. But why exactly did they do this?
Up until 1906 the Government did very little to actually help the poor. All political parties held on to the idea of laissez-faire – letting people live their lives alone – as it meant that the richer people didn’t need to be too highly taxed. This policy was quickly reversed in 1908 when a new threat sprung up, seemingly out of nowhere. The Labour Party was gathering a lot of supporters. The poor loved them, they were the only party offering to help them. The Liberals quickly realised this and decided to launch their own social reforms. Doing this let the Liberals stay in power and helped the poor at the same time. But this was not the only reason for social reforms…
In 1906 the Liberals won the elections in a landslide victory. Unfortunately in 1908 a split arose in the party and a new generation of leaders stepped in to assume control. This group, headed by H. Asquith, were a lot more pro-collectivism (collectivism is basically the opposite of laissez-faire – tax the rich to feed the poor). The group realised they had moral obligations to fulfil, it also realised that helping the poor would keep them in power. This was the main reason that the social reforms take place, and probably the main reason we have the NHS today. It is generally agreed upon by historians that the new leaders were the catalyst in social reforms although not the reason.
Other influential individuals in the push for social reforms came from outwith the Liberal Party. Charles Booth and Seebohm Rowntree both carried out detailed investigations into poverty in the UK. They found overwhelming evidence that proved reforms were not only advisable but absolutely necessary or very soon there would be a national disaster. The Liberal Party’s reputation was at stake, they moved fast to help the poor and save their status as a good political party at the same time.
In 1899 a new problem arose: the Boer War. This war highlighted the need for better health. 27% of all recruits to the army were rejected due to ill health and being physically unfit. This brought the nations poor health sharply into focus for the government. It forced Prime Minister Asquith to take action against poverty or watch the health of the ‘national stock’ deteriorate. People would start getting smaller and weaker and therefore the factories would be less efficient. The Army would not be able to fight properly. It was therefore of the utmost importance to get the poor fit and healthy. This was one of the most important reasons for social reform in the UK.
National efficiency is a very important factor in determining the industrial strength of a country. The Liberals didn’t realise the importance of national efficiency themselves. Germany is fundamentally very similar to the UK but in the late 19th Century it has one important difference. It has a good social welfare system and this was shown through the productivity of its factories. The German economy was tremendously successful. It was going through a massive boom, which was widely attributed to the health of its workers who had been receiving the benefits of a social welfare system. The Liberals saw this and decided to try out the social welfare state for themselves.
The social welfare system in the UK was installed because of a number of factors:
The main reason for the introduction of the welfare system was the growth of the Labour Party. The poor were effectively bribed into voting for the Liberals. The Boer War was also important in the decision, it came as a shock that the UK was in danger of losing it’s status as a military superpower. Rowntree and Booth also brought the poverty of the county to the eyes of the middle classes, the Liberal’s had to appear to be a caring party. The last factor in the process was that something just clicked in the minds of the Party leaders; they realised that they were there to help, they had the power to help, why not help?
“Simply a response to the growth of the Labour Movement” is not an adequate explanation for the social reforms of 1906-1914 although it was most probably the deciding factor.
