How Effectives Were Social Reforms Flashcards
intro
Before 1906, the Government (gov.) operated a ‘laissez-faire’ policy regarding social issues and believed that the poor should look after themselves. However, when the Liberals came to power there were growing concerns about the health of the nation, leading to the Liberals introducing a series of limited social reforms to improve the lives of the people. This essay will examine how the Liberal gov. introduced reforms to help the young, the sick, the unemployed and the employed. Ultimately, it will be demonstrated that the Liberal government’s reforms did have some successes, but didn’t completely meet the needs of the British people.
para 1 - KU
One group the Liberal gov. aimed to help was the young. In the early 1900s, children faced many problems, including poverty and poor health. In 1906 the gov. introduced the Provision of School Meals Act, which let councils raise local taxes to pay for school meals, if they chose to provide them. This law became compulsory in 1914 and the gov. agreed to pay half the cost. In 1906, 3 million school meals were given each school day. In 1907, the Liberals introduced medical checks for young people. They were to be inspected 3x during their time at school. From 1912, young people could get basic treatment for certain illnesses identified.
para 1 - important A
This shows that the Liberal gov. did meet the needs of the British people because free school meals meant that children received at least one nutritional meal daily, improving their overall health and making it easier for them to concentrate in school. Also, checking children’s health meant that health problems were identified, meaning the child’s parents could arrange treatment.
para 1 - unimportant A
However, it can be argued that the Liberal gov. didn’t meet the needs of the young as children receiving free meals still went hungry at weekends and during school holidays. Also, at first, children were inspected but not given free treatment, meaning many children continued to be ill since their family couldn’t afford treatment.
para 1 - E
Overall, the reforms were somewhat effective because free schools meals helped to feed poorer children, but the 1906 law wasn’t mandatory for councils, which meant most chose not to provide them, meaning most children couldn’t access free meals and still faced repercussions from poverty like starvation and ill health, which could lead to early death. This shows that the reforms didn’t completely meet the needs of the British people.
para 2 - KU
Another group the Liberal gov. aimed to help was the sick. The National Insurance Act (NIA) 1911 was in 2 parts - part 1 was aimed at the sick. A national sick-pay scheme was introduced - workers paid 4p weekly when working, employers paid 3p and the gov. 2p. If a worker was too sick for work they were paid 10 shilling per week for 13 weeks, then 5 shilling for 13 weeks. Also, the sick could visit a doctor (for free) and be treated for illnesses like tuberculosis. Insurance committees made lists of doctors that accepted patients and sick people chose which one to visit.
para 2 - important A
This shows that the reforms met the needs of the British people as the NIA stopped sick people who couldn’t earn money from immediately starving or losing their home and meant that people didn’t feel they had to work whilst ill, helping many recover and return to work. Also, receiving healthcare meant that sick people would get better faster and possibly not infect their families.
para 2- unimportant A
However, it can be argued that the reforms didn’t meet the needs of the sick as sick pay was only paid for 26 weeks and workers suffering from long term illness still faced poverty. Furthermore, medical treatment was only available to the worker - their family wasn’t included - meaning they still struggled to pay for treatment for sick family members.
para 2 - E
Overall, the reforms were somewhat successful but weren’t entirely effective as, whilst the NIA’s sick pay scheme allowed people time off work to recover without worrying about finances, women receive less sick pay than men, a major problem for families where the breadwinner was a woman because it meant they didn’t have much to survive during their sick leave. The amount provided wasn’t enough for people to afford basic needs to stay out of poverty, showing that the reforms weren’t entirely effective in meeting the needs of the British people.
para 3 - KU
A third group the gov. aimed to help was the unemployed. The NIA part 2 provided insurance for the unemployed. Workers paid 2.5p a week from their wages and would then receive 7 shillings each week (for 15 weeks per year) if they became jobless. In 1909, Labour Exchanges were introduced to advertise jobs locally - workers could also collect their unemployment benefits. By 1912, there were 414 Labour Exchanges across Britain
para 3 - important Ku
This shows that the reforms were effective as part 2 of the NIA meant the unemployed could afford food and rent until they got a job. Also, exchanges made it easier for unemployed people to find jobs, meaning they didn’t have to walk around town searching. They also made it easier to gain workers, benefiting businesses.
para 3 - unimportant KU
However, it could be argued that the reforms didn’t meet the need of the unemployed as part 2 of the NIA only covered some workers, e.g those in shipbuilding. This meant that the majority of workers weren’t covered, especially women. Furthermore, many people opposed Exchanges, including trade unions who believed exchanges could lower wages by attracting workers from across the country.
para 3 - E
Overall, the reforms were effective as the NIA made it so people were able to afford basic needs whilst unemployed. However, the cover only lasted for 15 weeks, after which people received nothing. This would likely plunge people back into poverty if they were unable to find work again - meaning they would struggle to afford food and housing (leading to homelessness) after those 15 weeks, showing that the reforms weren’t entirely effective since people likely would still struggle to survive after the insurance ended.
para 4 - KU
A final group the gov. aimed to help was the employed. In 1908, a maximum working day of 8 hours was introduced for miners. In 1911, the Shops Act limited working hours (60 maximum) for assistants and guaranteed them a half day off each week. The 1909 Trade Boards Act tried to set minimum wages for ‘sweated trades’ (e.g tailoring.) In 1912, the gov. passed the Coal Mines (Minimum Wage) Act, meaning local trade boards could negotiate a minimum wage (with miners and employers) for all miners.
para 4 - important A
This shows that the reforms were effective as working fewer hours reduced accidents in mines as miners weren’t as tired as they were before. Also, the introduction of trade boards allowed workers to negotiate pay rises with their employers. This, and changes to miner’s wages, gave some low paid workers a boost in their weekly incomes, meaning more money for food and rent.
para 4 - unimportant A
owever, it can be argued that the reforms didn’t meet the needs of the employed as most workers weren’t covered by maximum working day laws, so didn’t have their hours reduced. Most workers also weren’t covered by minimum wage laws so didn’t benefit from a minimum wage - even those in sweated trades saw little benefit. It also took up to 9 months to implement minimum wages, and often they were low.
para 4 - E
Overall, the reforms were somewhat effective in helping the employed because workplaces had ignored previously voluntary measures to limit hours, and the Shop Act forced them to reduce working hours. However, the 1906 Trade Dispute Act didn’t completely benefit the employed as workers in domestic trades (especially women) weren’t covered by trade unions and other employers prevented their employees from joining them, so the law made no difference for them, showing the reforms weren’t entirely effective.
conclusion
In conclusion, the Liberal reforms didn’t fully meet the needs of the British people. The reforms helped the young because multiple children were given free school meals and free health inspections, but the impact was limited as free school meals weren’t mandatory for councils, leaving many children to continue living in poverty, showing that the reforms weren’t completely effective in meeting British people’s needs. The reforms helped the sick because the NIA part 1 gave workers sick pay which allowed them to recover, but women were paid less than men and the amount provided wasn’t enough for people to survive, showing the reforms weren’t completely effective. The reforms helped the unemployed because the NIA part 2 gave people financial aid whilst they looked for work, but it only covered some workers and lasted for a limited amount of time, meaning that people could easily become poor once the payment ended, showing the reforms weren’t completely effective. The reforms helped the employed because it set maximum working hours and minimum wages, but most workers weren’t covered by these laws and many weren’t a part of trade unions, so the Trade Disputes Act didn’t benefit them. This shows that the reforms weren’t completely effective at meeting the needs of the British people.
