Arguments in favour of a political consensus following 1945 also exist, during this period the majority of policies followed by the two parties were essentially the same and were heavily influenced by the Beverage report of 1942, which is considered the foundling stage of the welfare state. This consensus of policy can be seen as certain areas of the party’s political strategy didn’t change from one government to the next, such as education and foreign policies which showed that there was a common vision for post-war reconstruction.
In 1944 the government passed the Education Act which reformed the British secondary education system, which according to Peter Hennessy was “the first great legal marker of the classic welfare state”. This act was written by the conservative minister Butler, but was implemented practically by his labour successor following the 1945 election, showing a level of consensus as both parties had the same direction. Butler himself believed that a political consensus existed after 1945 especially between himself and Wilkinson the labour education minister as he said “both of us spoke the language of Keynesianism”. This shows on this issue there was a definite political consensus that existed in the post-war era amongst the political elite.
This feeling of consensus amongst the two parties can also be seen through the study of other policies which didn’t really change between the different governments, for example foreign policy. In 1945 Ernest Bevin became the foreign secretary and essentially continued the policies of Sir Antony Eden with whom he had worked closely during the wartime coalition. Kavanagh and Morris point out that following the labour victory in 1945 Attlee laid out his main foreign policy aims which included “retreat from the Empire...[to pursue...Britain’s role as a nuclear power and membership of the Atlantic alliance]”, which they argue were policies that were accepted and pursued by conceding conservative governments as well. The retreat from the Empire which meant granting colonies independence and promoting the concept of the Commonwealth was a crucial change in direction for Britain during this era. The similarities in policies which concern the creation of the Commonwealth can be seen through the comparison of election manifestos. The labour party’s manifesto recognises “the desire of the Commonwealth countries for complete national self-determination... [Which]...has immensely helped strengthened the essential unity of the Commonwealth.” This is echoed in the conservative manifesto as they lay out that “we pledge ourselves to give our active support to all measures to promote the welfare of the British Empire and Commonwealth... the more frequent the meetings between the principal ministers from the countries of the Commonwealth the better.” This shows a high level of agreement between the two parties on the matter of Empire and Commonwealth. Further similarities between the Labour and Conservative foreign policies in the post-war era can be seen, as they both had the desire to “adhere to the ideals set forth in the Charter of the United Nations”, “pursue the aim of closer unity in Europe” and “seek to work in fraternal association with the United States of America.” This aptly shows that both political parties in Britain sought to view their foreign policies through the kaleidoscope of Churchill’s Three Circles Theory. The fact that many of Bevin’s policies, which were laid out during the 1945-1951 Labour government, went unopposed by successive government of both political parties show there was a large scale of consensus between the political elite during this era.
It has been argued that this consensus between the political elite existed primarily because of the close bonds that had formed as the parties worked together during the wartime coalition. During this era the political elite had common interests, similar backgrounds, and shared experiences which historians argue caused the influential and powerful leaders of the parties to have similar policies and approaches to politics, which gives support to the idea of a post-war political consensus. The similarity of their approaches can be explained by the fact that during the wartime coalition, all personal and political differences had been swept aside in order to work towards the common goal of victory and the defeat of Fascism. This can be seen through the study of the poignant image that portrays Churchill, Bevan, and Attlee appearing together on the balcony of the health ministry on VE day. This image shows the close working relationship that existed between the two leaders and historians argue that this ability to work closely together evolved into the post-war consensus and both leaders and parties aimed for the rebuilding of the nation and construction of “a new Jerusalem.” Kavanagh and Morris argue that this common goal of reconstruction led to a consensus across the whole sphere of British party politics, as the people who were leading the country and their respective parties had a very similar and coinciding direction. They argue that there were differences between the parties but these were only “differences of ruhetoric... and of emphasis”. This links closely to Butler who stated that both parties spoke the language of Keynesianism, but they “spoke it with different accents and differing emphasis.” This shows that a consensus existed at an elite level where it was most effective and apparent.
To conclude if we are define consensus as Addison did as “an historically unusual degree of agreement over a wide range of economic and social policies” then this essay has shown a consensus did exist in British politics in the post-war era as on certain key policies the Labour and Conservative governments had the same direction. Moreover Kavanagh and Morris argue that when Churchill was re-elected in 1951 most major “welfare...foreign and colonial [policies were] largely untouched”, I believe this demonstrates the similarities of both parties policies and direction, which shows that consensus existed between the elite of the era. Although there were differences between the supporters of the political parties on ideological grounds these differences played a very insignificant role in fermenting the parties’ direction as essentially a political consensus existed as both governments worked together in order to make Great Britain great again.
Word Count: 1,785
Bibliography
Books
Addison, Paul. The Road to 1945: British Politics and the Second World War. London: Pimlico, 1994.
Hennessy, Peter. Having It So Good: Britain in the Fifties. Illustrated edition ed. Sydney: Penguin Global, 2008.
Hennessy, Peter. Never Again: Britain 1945-1951. New York: Pantheon, 1993.
Jones, Harriet, and Michael Kandiah. The Myth of Consensus: New Views on British History, 1945-64 (Contemporary History in Context). New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1996.
Kavanagh, Dennis, and Peter Morris. Consensus Politics: From Atlee to Major (Making Contemporary Britain). 2 ed. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 1994.
Marr, Andrew. History of Modern Britain. Ill ed. London, England: Pan Books, 2008.
Websites
"Manifestos." Labour Manifesto. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Mar. 2010. <www.labour-party.org.uk/maifestos/1950/1950-labour-manifesto.html >.
"Political Science Resources: politics and government around the world." Political Science Resources: politics and government around the world. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Mar. 2010. <http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/man/con50.html>.
Paul Addison, The Road to 1945: British Politics and the Second World War, (London, Pimlico 1994), p. 270.
Dennis Kavanagh and Peter Morris, Consensus politics from Attlee to Major, (Oxford, Blackwell 1994), p.2.
The Labour party 1950 election manifesto, http://www.labour-party.org.uk/maifestos/1950/1950-labour-manifesto.html [accessed 05/03/10]
Addison, The Road from 1945, p.271.
Andrew Marr, A history of modern Britain, (London, Macmillan 2007), pp.67-68.
The Conservative party 1950 manifesto, This is the road: the conservative and unionist party’s polices, http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/man/con50.html, [accessed 05/03/10]
Addison, The Road from 1945, p.273.
Harriet Jones and Michael Kandiah, (eds.), The myth of consensus: new views on British history 1945-1964, (London, Macmillan 1996), p.51.
Addison, The road to 1945, pp.215-216.
Peter Hennessy, Having it so good: Britain in the fifties, (London, Allen Lane, 2006), p.70.
Kavanagh and Morris, Consensus politics from Attlee to Major, p.5-6
The Labour party 1950 election manifesto, http://www.labour-party.org.uk/maifestos/1950/1950-labour-manifesto.html [accessed 05/03/10]
The Conservative party 1950 manifesto, This is the road: the conservative and unionist party’s polices, http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/man/con50.html, [accessed 05/03/10]
Kavanagh and Morris, Consensus politics from Attlee to Major, p.7.
Peter Hennessy, Never again, Britain 1945-1951, (London, Jonathon Cape, 1992), pp.119-182
Kavanagh and Morris, Consensus politics from Attlee to Major, p.13.
Addison, The Road from 1945, p.286.
Kavanagh and Morris, Consensus politics from Attlee to Major, p.17.