• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Why did Labour lose the 1951 General Election?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Tony Marsden - Somerville College - PPE BPG, John Davis. Why did Labour lose the 1951 General Election? The Attlee governments of 1945 to 1951 can be divided into four key sections. The first years, between 1945 and 1946, saw fervour for rapid reform in many areas of government. The year 1947 brought an abrupt end to the honeymoon, as the government was forced to shift focus from massive reform to crisis management in response to fuel and trade shortages. Between 1948 and the election year 1950, Labour was committed to a period of tighter spending and more austere demands placed upon citizens. Then, the second ministry saw a fractious Parliamentary party being further divided over the Korean War and the advancement of the National Health Service, leading up to a comfortable Tory win in the October 1951 election. Having been given such a considerable mandate to rebuild the country in 1945, the Attlee post-war government lost popular support considerably over the next six years. There are several causes which can be established, first by looking at the events of the Attlee years and then isolating those points at which factors were working toward the party's defeat. The 1945-1946 period of Labour government sought to address some key difficulties facing the nation following World War II. ...read more.

Middle

The new Chancellor Sir Stafford Cripps expected of the country an austere realism which entailed the retention of rationing. His frugality extended to his welfare policies, which involved the further tightening of benefit payments. Both of these policies were unpopular amongst the mass electorate, and rationing caused consternation most notably the middle class, to whom the need for wartime prudence was no longer apparent. It is at this point that the switch from socialist idealism to pragmatic consolidation might be identified as a cause of voter disaffection. In spite of some successes during 1948, including good export figures, participation in the Berlin Airlift and - regardless of middle class perceptions - generous relaxations in rationing, the public's faith in the Attlee government to manage the rebuilding of Britain had dropped off considerably. The Conservative Party made some political headway by attacking the government's credentials with regard to the 1948 devaluation of the pound, which was designed to bring about the much needed rise in exports. Although it did help to achieve this end, Churchill's party was able to lament publicly the humiliation the government had brought upon the British currency, and at the same time place blame on the government for the continuing food scarcities and long queues. So, at the 1950 election there was a 2.9% swing against Labour. ...read more.

Conclusion

Firstly, the party enacted most of its initial 1945 manifesto pledges in establishing the NHS, founding the Welfare State, and building one million new homes. With an inadequate sense of self-renewal, the Attlee era party had little further to put before voters after 1947. This is especially so when one considers the crises they faced in that year, making the 1945 blue-skies, 'New Jerusalem' thinking incredibly difficult to sustain. Rather, the balance of payments problem forced the non-idealists within the leadership to face the necessary curtailing of public spending. This brought about a little unrest within working class support but it was the effect on middle class attitudes and the cracks opening among the Parliamentary party's support which began to harm electoral credibility. Then, as the Cripps years failed to bring an end to food scarcities and food queues, Labour's perceived impact upon the national way of life was minimal to voters in the most crucial swinging constituencies. Furthermore, an apparently humiliating trade policy including subservience to US demands was particularly discrediting in the eyes of post-colonialists who identified this as betrayal rather than pragmatism. Finally, splits over the Korean War - both over the political justifications for British deployment, and over the cuts in public spending domestically - brought about splits in the party which made it poorly placed to fight the 1951 election. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Politics essays

  1. How significant was The First World War in the Labour Party's rise to second-party ...

    after 1922 Baldwin "devoted a significant part of his time to securing what Leo Amery was to call 'the right solution' that is for The Liberal Party to disappear by one section joining with and diluting the Labour Party and the other section coming into line with [the Conservatives]".27 Although

  2. Examine the extent to which the aims of the Beveridge report of 1942 had ...

    receiving anything but, things were still generally the same as before the war. The government introduced free milk for all school children in 1940, with the government abolishing the household means test in 1941. The old system merely couldn't cope with the demands the public needed.

  1. The Creation of the Welfare State

    Therefore, in an attempt to tackle poverty was a failure. 'Squalor', or housing in some ways was an improvement, such as when the government introduced the Town and Country Planning Acts and the New Towns Acts, which provided shelter for the poor.

  2. The Impact of Electoral Design on the Legislature.

    member representatives at a regional level while at the same time allowing for some representation of minority groups that would likely be left out of power in a majoritarian system. Other countries using this system and its variations include Germany, New Zealand, Lithuania, Hungary, Mexico and Bolivia.

  1. "Why did the Conservative government lose so much support by 1906?"

    The working class couldn't strike over this because they thought that the Chinese would replace there jobs! Combined with the 'Taff Vale case" it is easy to see why the working class had no incentive to work and why the conservatives lost there support.

  2. Should the UK reform its system for General Elections?

    Again, this emphasises the need for a change of electoral system, so that every person has an equal vote and the majority vote presides. Though it is possible that FPTP could be scrapped, a more democratic alternative would need to be implemented.

  1. A critical analysis of selected election literature and party political broadcasts from the general ...

    Because it is 'our' it means that by right we should have a say in what happens to it. "Tax the rich" has consultations of Robin Hood, there's a connection between nationalization and Robin Hood, i.e.: taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

  2. Decentralization and development of modern local government systems in Eastern Europe

    and staff. The general direction of development is to guarantee the political neutrality of staff and at the same time to defend professionals from political pressure. This is not easy even in local governments; due to the increased influence of elected bodies, their role is more important in the decision-making process for public administrative matters.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work