Why were the 1930's a decade of disappointment for the labour party?

Authors Avatar

Why were the 1930’s a decade of disappointment for the labour party?

        By the mid 1920’s, with one year of government experience under their belt, the labour party appeared to be making some progress.  Although the government of 1924 had collapsed after less than a year, Labour had proved to the country that they were in fact capable of conducting a moderate government; achieving various useful moderate reforms.  Not only were these reforms relevant to potential success but also it is important to remember that the Labour Party now held a secure place in the two party system while at the same time taking the majority vote in the left of centre in British politics.  With these achievements attained it would seem that the Labour party now had the grounds for optimism and further success in the future. However when looking at the party organisation, electoral achievements, the success of the national government and the intensifying divisions within the labour party in the 1930’s we can see that the early and promising successes of the 1920’s was followed by disappointment in the subsequent decade.

One of the main disappointments for the party in the early 1930’s was the collapse of the second labour government. By 1931 the devastating effects of the 1929 Wall Street Crash were reaching a climax as the depression continued to cripple the economy.  Unemployment benefits were now costing the government £112.5m more than they were in 1929 and the economy was suffering because of it.  The severity of the economic situation called for extreme unity and resolution yet all the Labour government could offer was indecisiveness, hesitation and confusion on the matter.  While Sir Oswald Mosley appealed for radical action in his ‘memorandum’, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Phillip Snowden, backed the traditional view that in order to rescue an economy out of a crisis such as this it is only necessary to cut government expenditure.  With government ministers so divided on the issue it made it virtually impossible for MacDonald to make a sound decision.  By August he had been persuaded to take unemployment cuts of 10 percent and on the 22nd he proposed it to the Labour Cabinet for approval.  The outcome of this internal vote was devastating to the survival of the second Labour government.  While 11 cabinet ministers voted for the unemployment cuts, a worrying 9 ministers opposed it.  This almost 50/50 split exposed the disturbing internal division of the Labour Party.  

I think this public exhibition of weakness is the first and perhaps the most influential cause for disappointment in the 1930’s.  Not only does it illustrate the Labour party’s inability to make quick decisions at a time when the country needed it most but it inevitably lead to the resignation of the Prime Minister and the total collapse of Labour power in government.  This early downfall would seriously hinder any chances the Labour government had of reconstructing a reliable and well-organised party that would gain significant support in the future.  This party split is wholly significant to the reasons why the 1930’s was a disappointment for the Labour party.

MacDonald’s resignation as Prime Minister did not in fact turn out to be an abdication of power over government.  Just two days after the labour party collapsed, it emerged that MacDonald would head a national government that would represent the Liberal party, the Labour party and the Conservative party.  It is not this formation of a new government that particularly damaged the Labour party it was, more importantly, the electoral result that were so in favour of the new National Government.  The October general elections saw the electorate supporting the National Government with an outstanding majority.  While the National Government took 558 seats the Labour party won a measly 56 seats showing the sudden rejection of the Labour party.  This massive defeat in election results was again devastating to the potential success of the party as it destroyed any opportunities of defeating the national government in future elections and gaining enough support to form a government.  Theoretically it would be at least two elections time before they could make a serious comeback.  For almost the same reasons as the effects of the labour party split, the election results again drew attention to Labour’s weaknesses and therefore became a main cause for disappointment in the early 1930’s.

Join now!

But it wasn’t election results alone that proved the 1930’s as a decade of disappointment.  The effectiveness of the leadership in any party must be taken into account when considering the successes, achievements and failures of a particular time period.  In the 1920’s the Labour party achieved much for the country and indeed for the party’s status.  It is not surprising that when we compare the 1920’s and its achievements with the 1930’s and its lack of achievements that a major difference between the two decades is the nature and degree of stability within the leadership of the party. ...

This is a preview of the whole essay