Labour in Power 1945-51 Flashcards
1
Q
What is the first factor?
A
- Want
2
Q
What did the 1946 NI Act do? (K)
A
- Welfare State gained structure with the 1946 National Insurance Act, an extension from the 1911 NI Act.
- This included coverage for all adults and any events that could happen ‘from the cradle to the grave’ universally.
- As well, unemployment benefits and sick pay schemes were mandated.
3
Q
How was the 1946 NI Act not a good improvement? (K)
A
- There were still limitations to having benefits, for example, sickness benefits could only be claimed after 156 contributions had been made which both made them useless until these had been reached and could cause more sickness towards the person or more spread of sickness.
4
Q
How were benefits limited more? (K)
A
- The benefits were only for a limited period, not helpful for people facing long-term unemployment.
- As benefits were counted in 1946, these were kept the same and as prices rose after WWII, many people couldn’t afford anything with these benefits as it was too low.
5
Q
What do the limitations prove the 1946 NI Act is?
A
- These limitations make the 1946 NI Act very useless with sickness and unemployment benefits as they were not accessible to everyone who needed them despite being advertised as universal.
6
Q
What was further brought in to help the public?
A
- The National Assistance Act 1948 was brought in to help people who didn’t fall under the 1946 NI Act.
- Ended up being heavily relied on, for example, in 1949 48% of the act was supplementing pensions, and this increased in the late 50s to 68%.
7
Q
What does the Assistance 1948 Act suggest? (A)
A
- As the act was so heavily relied upon suggests that the 1946 NI Act wasn’t doing its job in supplying universal financial aid, making it unsuccessful as its main aim was not achieved.
8
Q
How did the Assistance Act have issues? (K)
A
- Implemented a means test which had a negative stigma around it, which made Brits reluctant to submit an application to receive the benefit.
9
Q
Did the Assistance Act make the reform more or less successful? (A)
A
- This made the reform less successful in its aim, however, it isn’t Labour’s fault that it was feared by the public.
10
Q
What act made the reform more successful? (K)
A
- 1945 Family Allowances Act passed.
- This gave struggling mothers who had 2+ children.
- No means test and only mothers were targeted as they spent more money on household than the fathers who were in full-time jobs or fighting in the war.
11
Q
How was the Act successful? (A)
A
- As women could gain benefits, this allowed them to ease the pressure of some women being single mothers whilst men were fighting in the war, which shows that the reform was more successful in improving social conditions in the nation.
12
Q
What is the evaluation at the end of the first factor?
A
- There were lots of developments to social security, especially through the Family Allowances Act.
- Still, overall, the reform was less successful because of the reliance on the Assistance Act, implying that the original act implemented was not working.
13
Q
What was the LOA at the end of the evaluation?
A
- Want was partially conquered through the reforms introduced by the Labour govt.
14
Q
What is the second factor?
A
- Disease
15
Q
Did Britain have good health?
A
- Disease was common and as there was no healthcare system, and many couldn’t afford healthcare, they would continue to work and let their illnesses get worse.
16
Q
What brought in the NHS and when?
A
- The National Health Act 1946, which introduced the NHS which became operational on the 5th of July 1948.
17
Q
What was the 3 aims of the NHS?
A
- Comprehensive
- Universal
- Free to all
18
Q
What did the NHS also provide Britain?
A
- The NHS gave the entirety of Britain dental and other medical prescriptions, with 8 million dental and 13.5m prescriptions prescribed in the first year.
19
Q
How was the NHS good towards the public (A)
A
- This is very positive and helpful as it allowed Britain to gain free prescriptions and medical care, which improved health that wasn’t possible beforehand, making the reform more successful.
20
Q
What does Klein argue?
A
He named the NHS the “jewel of the crown” out of all the reforms Labour introduced, meaning it was Labour’s best reform between 1945-51.
21
Q
What is the counter-argument against the NHS?
A
- Labour didn’t have enough money to fund the NHS.
- They had to find £358m annually to fund it, which was a massive oversight to launch a big service without anticipating the amount it would cost.
22
Q
What did the less money to supply the NHS cause?
A
- This resulted in adding costs for glasses and dental care, causing a divide in the party with the Schism arguing against the Gaiskillities on prices of glasses and dentistry.
- This argument went as far as MPs like Ernest Bevin who agreed with this stance of no payment for prescription resigned from Parliament.
23
Q
How is Klien’s argument weakened?
A
- However, Klien’s argument is weakened as many right-wing historians argue that giving access to free dental care and prescriptions was a waste of resources as many people would get things they did not necessarily need, causing high demand with little supply.
24
Q
Does the NHS still have problems with money today?
A
- Whilst the NHS gave access to life-changing healthcare, it is important to note how underfunded it was as the lack of money and efficient planning over budgeting back in the late 40s still affects the NHS today.
25
What is the overall evaluation for the second factor?
- Labour made a wonderful decision to introduce the NHS, but because of its poor funding and planning, it eventually led to its downfall and many resignations within the party.
- Whilst labour was successful in introducing the NHYS, they weren't successful in maintaining its high costs, making the reform less successful.
26
What is the third factor?
- Housing
27
What did Labour recognise in their manifesto, and did Labour want to help families?
- Labour recognised housing as a massive issue in their manifesto, as by 1946, the lack of affordable and liveable houses for families was so limited, that many squatted in older army camps which weren't used.
- Labour wanted to solve this issue, so instead of prosecuting the families, they asked for local authorities to help by giving basic care and services to these families.
28
Was Labour's intervention helpful for families?
- This was somewhat helpful for the families that were struggling in these camps, whilst they focused on fixing the 700,000 destroyed homes and building additional ones for them.
29
What did Labour promise, what were the limitations to the promise, and how did it affect squalor?
- Labour promised 200,000 homes annually, however, this promise was limited because building materials were costly and in high demand.
- As well as this, the lack of construction workers was an issue, as many men were injured or killed because of the war.
- This slowed down Labour's progress significantly and the initial target was not met.
30
What is further evidence that Labour was ineffective in tackling squalor?
- Between 1945-50, Labour was very close to meeting their promise of high-quality working-class family homes with approximately 1m houses in total, however, the previous point is further proven that this reform was ineffective as by 1951 the Census showed that 750,000 households were homeless.
- This shows that there was the same amount of homelessness 20 years prior, showing Labour's lack of success.
31
What is the counter against squalor? (positives)
- However, it cannot be ignored that Labour's squalor reforms were somewhat effective as each house had gas and electricity, hot and cold water, back and front gardens and an indoor toilet.
- As well as this, they had kitchens, living rooms and usually 2 stories with separate bedrooms.
32
What does Timmin argue?
- However, although there were some successful improvements, Timmins's argument is correct as he states that "housing had been branded the welfare state failure" of Labour's post-war govt, further showing that Labour was unsuccessful in its mission to improve housing.
33
Were the squalor reforms successful?
- Despite best efforts in improving housing conditions, this was not enough to call the reform successful as there were high amounts of homelessness, as Labour had failed their promises to reduce homelessness rates, build more homes and improve the general public's quality of life post-war.
34
What is the overall evaluation for the third factor?
- Squalor is one of the 5 giants that Labour was somewhat successful in introducing reforms, but because of the failed promises and targets, they were not completely successful in tackling the general quality of life in Britain for families, and defeating the giant.
