In the late 17th century many old people were incapable of work due to old age which resulted in large-scale poverty amongst them. Lloyd George was interested in this area for a long time, due his time spent studying the scheme set up in Germany. In order to tackle this, the Liberals passed the Old Age Pensions Act in 1908 which
entitled those over 70 with an annual income of £21 - £31 to weekly pension of between 1 and 5 shillings. Due to this, by 1914, nearly a million people applied for pension. This showed the immense popularity of the scheme and highlighted to the government the extent of elderly poverty. Trevor May argues that the pension was a “lifebelt which many people were happy to cling to”, demonstrating his belief that the pension scheme was a success. However, the scheme had it’s limitations. The government admitted that it was not supposed to be a solution to elderly poverty as the maximum available pension was still 2 shillings short of Rowntree’s ‘poverty line’. Therefore it is clear that the Liberal reforms made a significant improvement in elderly poverty, however due to its limitations its success is debatable.
Prior to the Liberal reforms health care was expensive and there was no available insurance policy at the time. In 1911, the Liberals passed the National Insurance Act which introduced conditional health insurance. This mainly applied to mainly cyclical/seasonal unemployment in which the insured worker would contribute 4d a week if they earned under £160 a year. In return they would receive 7 shillings a week for up to 15 weeks in any one year after one week of unemployment. This meant that many people were now receiving suitable medical care that, before the Act, they would have been unable to afford. The Act also provided maternity benefit and free treatment for disabled children and pregnant women, therefore providing financial support in times of need. The Act however had its limitations. It only covered those who were employed and therefore those out of work were still going untreated due to high doctors bills. Also, the families of those insured workers were not covered by the Act meaning that if a family member was ill, the doctors bills still had to be paid out of their own pocket. Therefore it is clear that the Liberal government did attempt to improve the health care available to workers through the National Insurance Act, however as many people were not included, the success of the Act is debatable.
Before the Liberal reforms the unemployed of Britain had no income to live on as benefits were unavailable. This meant that they could not support themselves or their families leading to severe poverty. Victorians felt it was a moral problem, however reports like Booth’s and Rowntree’s highlighted it was largely due to reasons beyond control. The Labour Exchanges Act, passed in 1909 helped unemployed people find work through the use of job centres. Due to the Act about 3000 people were being set up with work everyday by 1914, despite scepticism from both employers and employees. The Act however had its limitations as it was unknown whether the exchanges actually helped tackle to problem as employment was already high due to the potential war. It was not completely effective as 75% of those listed on the Labour Exchange did not find employment. Also, when attacking this problem of unemployment the second part of the National Insurance Act, 1911 introduced unemployment insurance which meant that payments were provided when your out of work. Within 2 years 2.3 million workers were insured which meant that people were given some form of financial support when they were out of work. Both Churchill and Lloyd George seen it as the beginning of a better system for dealing with unemployment. However, despite the success a large proportion of the population remained uninsured suggesting the limitations of the reform. Overall it is clear that the Liberal reforms helped many unemployed people in financial difficulty, however as a large percentage of the population were uninsured, it was not entirely successful.
Before the Liberal reforms many workers were suffering from poor working conditions, working long hours for very little pay. In order to tackle this the government introduced the Coal Mines Act in 1909. This limited the working day in mines to 8 hours maximum and set a minimum wage for these miners meaning that they had better working conditions and better pay. Also when tackling this the government passed the Trade Boards Act in 1909 which looked at pay and conditions in the ‘sweated trades’. This set a minimum wage for 200,000 workers in areas such as box making, tailoring and lace-making. Peter Murray shows his approval of these Act by stating that minimum wages “mark a significant shift away from the 19th century laissez-faire attitude” showing that he believes this reform was a success. These Acts as a whole were mostly successful however there was no definition of minimum wage so nothing really happens to improve wages and as there was no mechanism to police the system increased wages were not always given. Therefore these Acts clearly improved working conditions and pay for many British people, however due to their limitations, their success is debatable.
There is debate between historians over how successful the Liberal Reforms were at addressing the problem of poverty in Britain. AJP Taylor stresses how limited the reforms were as the pensions were inadequate and because only certain groups of people were insured against unemployment and sickness “it left the adult citizen alone”. In contrast, Peter Clark argues that even though the reforms were limited, they by-passed the Poor Laws and brought in a system which won approval.
Martin Pugh stands somewhere in the middle, his argument being that the Liberal reforms were not meant to be a solution to the problem of poverty but an attempt to target and contain discrete parts of the problem.
In conclusion it is clear that overall the Liberal reforms introduced between 1906 and 1914 were relatively successful in meeting the social need of the British people, however due to their limitations, many people remained deprived. The introduction of health inspections improved the health of many British children and showed clearly to the government the extent of poverty through investigations, however by 1914 some medical treatment was inadequate suggesting the limitations of the reforms. By introducing a pension for the elderly in Britain, the extent of poverty was further revealed due to the number of applicants and with more money to live on, improvements were made to people’s lives, however the amount of money given was below Rowntree’s poverty line meaning it was inadequate to live on and not all people were entitled to the pension. The National Insurance Act, 1911 introduced health insurance for the worker in case of sickness, meaning that more people could now afford to get medical treatment, however not everyone was eligible suggesting the limitations of the insurance. In order to help the unemployed find work, for employers to find workers and to provide unemployment benefit, Acts were passed which meant that thousands of more jobs were found for people and the unemployed still had an income to help them financially, however many people still remained uninsured and unemployed. To improve conditions and pay for the employed, Acts were passed which set minimum wages and improved conditions in the workplace, however as the minimum wage was not defined and there was no mechanism to ensure increased wages were given, not a lot happens to improve the pay of these workers, leaving many still in poverty. These reforms were a significant step away from the laissez-faire principle and marked a significant improvement when meeting the social needs of the British people, however by 1914, many problems still remained and poverty was still a serious issue.