Conservative Domination 1951 - 64 booklet 1 Flashcards
- Reasons for the Conservative victory 1951 - social changes, immigration, unrest, social mobility and tensions, education, living standards, housing, prosperity and unemployment; - Tory econ. policies: Butskellism, industrial growth and stagflation - Leadership of Churchill, Eden, Macmillan and Home - scandals including the Vassall affair, Philby, Argyll and Profumo - reasons for Conservative decline - Labour leadership, divisions and electoral failures of the Labour Party
What were the Results of the 1951 election?
Atlee’s Labour Govt. polled higher that the Tories yet received fewer seats (391 to 295)
Conservative Strengths = 1951 victory
- 1950 had reorganised the structure & policies of the party - in a stronger position to challenge Labour
- promised to build 300,000 new homes per yr to combat the housing crisis
- Churchill’s status as war hero - v. v. popular with the British public
Labour Weaknesses = 1951 victory
- difficulty dealing w the post war economy - associated with austerity, high taxation & food rationing only ending in ‘54
- internal divisions between the right and left wings of the party = incompetent as they fought over decisions
- backtracked on promises by charging for free nhs services
Despite weaknesses remaining in the party, Labour still won more votes than the Tories indicating they were still a popular choice. Thus electoral system = most important in securing conservative victory
FPTP electoral system = 1951 victory (MOST IMPORTANT)
- 1945 only needed 30,000 votes for a seat, by 1951 inc. to 47,000
- boundary changes meant seats were unevenly distributed so Labour needed 2% more of pop. vote to get same no. seats as tories
- decline of Lib. party - many ex-lib. voters turned to tories, helping them win labour seats
What were stop-go policies?
economic policy of reaction to economic developments rather than developing an actual strategy that would lead to consistent growth
What is stagflation?
a period in which inflation remains or increases whilst industrial output declines = slow econ growth.
What is Butskellism?
The Government simply deals with the economic issues they face rather than creating an actual economic plan
Evidence that ppl were increasingly well off under the Tories
- 500% rise in car ownership demonstrating increased purchasing power of the public
- housing boom - 44% ownership by ‘64
- 300000 housing pledge = creates more jobs
so ultimately the country was increasingly well off as stop-go policies led to a consumer boom although this was a by product of inflation and didn’t guarantee l-t growth
Evidence to challenge the claim that people were increasingly well off as a result of Tory econ policies
- rent act abolished rent controls = rents increased, harder for ppl to afford
- stop - go policy didn’t allow for a coherent l-t growth plan
- overall trend of increasing unemployment, by ‘64 = 501000
- industry = expanding but production costs v high & goods expensive
Who were the 4 Tory leaders between 1951-64?
- Winston Churchill (1951-55) won the 1951 election
- Anthony Eden (1955-57) won the 1955 election
- Harold Macmillan (1957-63) won the 1959 election
- Alec Douglas-Home (1963-64) lost the 1964 election
Conservative Leadership: Churchill
- 1951 Churchill js a figurehead as Butler running the party esp. in ‘53 when he has a stroke & was scarcely missed
- however did somewhat sustain power & support due to war time status
Conservative Leadership: Eden
- immediately called an election = incr. tory maj. bc of his personal appeal & Butler’s work
- undermined by Suez Crisis in ‘56 –> condemned globally!!
- 3 months after Eden stood down & mood v. anti-tory
Conservative Leadership: Macmillan
-won the ‘59 election and increased the Conservative majority to 100.
- fortunate to preside over a period of growing prosperity, but in his later years in office, his personal appeal to the electorate played a crucial role.
- won support for his numerous appearances on television, turned the satirist image ‘super-mac’ to his advantage and stated that Britain had ‘never had it so good’.
However, not all this success should be attributed to Macmillan, Butler (as Home Secretary), changed the appearance of the party, with things such as the Homicide Act.
- 1959 election was the high point for Macmillan.
CL: Macmillan (neg.)
After 1959 elections, things went downhill:
- By 1961, a balance of trade deficit was a sign of a downturn in the economy as the country was important more than it was exporting
- By 1962, unemployment was rising and the number of days lost to strike was increasing.
- reshuffled his cabinet in July 1962, he sacked 7 cabinet ministers and 9 other ministers. compared to ‘the Night of the Long Knives’ and gained Macmillan the nickname ‘Mac the Knife’. = opinion polls showed that the popularity of the Tories was falling
Conservative Leadership:
Alec Douglas Home
- not chosen by the public, chosen by Macmillan = brought a man of aristocratic background to power, viewed as out of touch with the ordinary people. This made it clear the Conservatives were still routed in the past.
- resentment among some MP’s, Enoch Powell and Iain Macleod refused to serve under Douglas-Home.
- also faced a new dynamic Labour under the youthful leadership of Harold Wilson. It was no shock that Labour won the 1964 election, however the narrowness of Labour’s victory was a shock.
What occurred in 1958?
Labour’s leadership can be blamed for electoral failures? (‘51-‘60 specifically 1959)
- Internal disputes were rife within the party & Gaitskell was unable to unite it
-eg. socialist bevanites pushing for more socialist policies i.e. trade unions being more involved & a greater commitment to clause IV which would lead to state controlled industry - nuclear policy - left wanted unilateral disarmament but the right wing rejected this
- under Attlee & Gaitskell the party opposed joining the EEC portraying the party as unprogressive
Labour’s leadership cannot be blamed for electoral failures (‘51-‘60 but specifically ‘59)
- the opposition (tories) often appeared more attractive by appearing to offer prosperity
- the…election coincided with a period of econ recovery, labour could take advantage of this by claiming that life was better w/out the Tories
1951 election:
Lab. Strengths
- estab. of the NHS
- NO. votes = highest polled party at the time
- formed political principles that govts would follow until ‘79
- forced the Tories to shift to the left wing
1951 election:
Labour weaknesses - bigger factor
associated w austerity & poor econ e.g cont. rationing and high taxes, involvement in Korea, changes in NHS & divisions in the party
so disregarding the FPTP system had labour strengthened its appeal it might not have lost voters to the liberals thereby allowing the tories to be elected
1951 election:
Tory Strengths
- reorganised the party = younger mps
- shifted policies to the left to appeal to public mood e.g 300000 houses per yr pledge
- Churchill = pop. figure
1951 election:
Tory weaknesses
- acc hadn’t won the most votes showing that they weren’t the most popular party
1955 election:
Labour strengths
- political campaign appealed to the public
1955 election:
Lab weaknesses
- conflict between Gaitskell’s supporters and the Bevanites, the split between the right and the left of the party.
- had a relatively weak campaign & no real manifesto so they were js seen as ‘the opposition’
1955 election:
Tory strengths
- rising wages & living standard
- timing of the election - js before the coronation so his effectiveness couldn’t be properly judged
1955 election:
Tory weaknesses
- Eden was still quite new to leadership - perhaps inexperienced
- Handling of the Suez Crisis severely undermined faith in the Conservative Govts abilities.
1959 election:
Labour Strengths
- 3 yrs after Suez
1959 election:
Labour Weaknesses
- continued divisions between the left and right of the party i.e. over nuclear disarmament
1959 election:
Tory strengths
- reduced income tax b4 election = econ boom helped boost the publics opinion of tory effectiveness
- ‘Super Mac’ - appealing candidate
1959 election:
Tory weaknesses
- poor handling of the suez crisis had undermined public confidence
- country was acc still in a poor economic state w/ un employment having increased & stagflation occurring
How did the Economy lead to declining support for Conservatives?
- failing economy contradicted ‘59 slogan ‘Don’t let Labour Ruin it’ which made the party seem ineffective & unable to deliver on promises
- the balance of trade deficit& estab. of Nat. econ. dev. council & nat. incomes commission failed to have much of an impact
- unemployment rose above 800,000 by ‘63 = increased discontent & consolidated opposition in Lab. strongholds
How did the EEC rejection lead to declining support for Conservatives?
- rejection humiliated Br. insinuating that it was weak
- Br. = no foreign relations or trading allies = neg. impacting exports & imports leading to greater economic decline
- Rejection ultimately portrayed the Tories as ineffectual in improving the Country’s status
How did the Night of Long Knives lead to declining support for Conservatives?
- reshuffling of Mac’s cabinet = 1/3 replaced, altering his image as the actions were quite vicious reducing his popularity.
Did irreparable damage to the party under Mac’s leadership as public unlikely to vote for him
How did Scandals lead to declining support for the Conservatives?
- there had been multiple scandals within a year (‘63) tarnishing the govt’s rep.
- Vassall affair - found guilty of being a russian spy
- Profumo affair - risk to nat. security
All scandals suggested that the Govt. was untrustworthy, disorganised and unable to portray themselves in a respectable light. - inextricably linked to the tory party thus eroding public support
How did social problems lead to declining support for the Conservatives?
- race riots i.e Notting Hill were poorly dealt with as the Salmo inquiry only exacerbated tensions alongside the ‘62 Immigration act which limited immigrants based on ethnicity
- developing youth sub-culture of punks & mods challenged ideas of trad. deference - younger gen. alienated ^& lack respect for tory govt
- Govt ultimately not viewed as progressive & unable to successfully resolve social issues
How successful were conservative econ. policies between ‘51 - ‘64? - Successful
- Butler’s ‘stop-go’ policies proved successful in the short term as wages rose faster than inflation
- most sig. in tory dominance in this period as ALL regardless of class felt the benefits so had no reason to vote labour
- universal credit - even the wc could purchase homes or luxury goods, achieving a higher standard of living
How successful were conservative econ. policies between ‘51 - ‘64? - unsuccessful
- stop-go policies acc led to inflation which exacerbated underlying economic issues & proved that the conservatives were only reactionary as they hadn’t developed an econ policy to encourage long term growth = harder to avoid depressions or stagnation
- unemployment on an overall increase & party unable to eradicate the issue as it never reached below 200,000 - indicates that tory victories can be owed to their luck with the economy
- Rent act - harder for poorer tenants to afford homes
Why did social policy allow the conservatives to dominate 1951-64
- house building & associations w rising living standards = stood out from austerity associated Labour
- tories had achoieved the 300k houses per yr target, triggering a myriad of other pos. impacts for the economy through generating more jobs
Why did social policy arguably
- educational policy continued to be a controversial topic that wasn’t really addressed, allowing the debate between comp & grammar skls to cont. Nevertheless the tories opposition to comp skls didn’t damage their image bc it was a consensus debate that Labour struggled to handle.
- Furthermore, luck of association highlighted inability to deal w/ unemployment & soc. tensions in the latter period
- e.g. race riots - didn’t deal w areas suffering from poor housing prov. & didn’t deal w racially motivated revolts properly e.g the Salmon report = inefficient govt
What was the Salmon report & what was its impact on the Tory govt?
- an inquiry into the reasons behind race riots that approached riots as a law & order issue but made no overt ref to racism or discrimination
- displayed that the tories weren’t progressive
What was the Commonwealth Immigrants act of 1962 & what was its impact on the Tory Govt?
This was a law/act that placed restrictions on immigrants based on their ethnic origin
- this again portrayed the tories as out of touch as it merely fuelled racist hatred & ideology towards immigrants viewed as ‘stealing houses & jobs’
