WHAT WAS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE POOR LAWS, 1905-09? Flashcards
When was the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws set up?
• 1905.
How many members of the Commission were there and who were they?
- 20 members.
- poor law guardians, members of the COS, local government board members, social researchers (Charles Booth and Beatrice and Sydney Webb), religious leaders and trade union leaders.
In terms of its members was the Royal Commission of 1905 better than the Royal Commission of 1832?
• members were far better qualified to address the problem of poverty.
How detailed was the Commission?
- more detailed than the 1832 Commission.
- visited 200 Poor Law unions and 400 institutions, took evidence from 450 witnesses and analysed 900 statements of written evidence.
When did the Commission come to report?
• 1909.
What government set up the Commission on the Poor Laws?
• conservative.
Why did the Commission consist of 2 reports? What were these reports?
- they couldn’t agree on the way forward.
* the majority report and the minority report.
What were the findings of the majority report?
- the origins of poverty were moral.
- the Poor Law should stay as the main way of dealing with poverty.
- boards of guardians allowed too much relief so should be replaced by public assistance committees.
- general mixed workhouses didn’t deter the able-bodied poor.
- greater cooperation needed between charities and those administering the Poor Law- voluntary aid committees should be set up to enable this to happen.
What were the findings of the minority report?
- the origins of poverty were economic.
- a ministry of labour should be set up which would introduce and oversee public work schemes, set up national labour exchanges to help the unemployed find work, organise training schemes and set up detention colonies for those who were deliberately idle.
- Poor Law administration should be broken up into education committees to deal with child poverty, pension committees to help the elderly poor and health committees for the sick or infirm.
How was the majority report received at first? How did those behind the minority report react?
- it was well received.
- alarmed Beatrice abs Sydney Webb (driving forces behind the minority report), so they began campaigning for the breakup of the existing Poor Law, capturing the support of younger generations but risking antagonising leading politicians from the government and the opposition.
What did the two sides of the Commission actually have in common?
- both condemned the north costing system of relieving poverty.
- both criticised the failure of the central government to monitor local boards administering relief fairly.
- both criticised general mixed workhouses.
- both criticised the wasteful overlapping of services provided by the Poor Law guardians and the local government boards.
What was the problem with the Commission having two opposing reports?
• government didn’t feel obliged to act on either set of recommendations- so those who favoured no change were strengthened by the majority report and the changes in it were overlooked.
What was the opinion of the boards of guardians and the Local Government Board on the Commission?
• boards of guardians opposed the proposal that they should be dissolved and the Local Government Board supported this opposition.
What did the Commission achieve?
- gave the problem of poverty and the causes of poverty a high profile.
- put pressure on the government to come up with solutions.
By the time the report was published, what had the new Liberal government already done?
• embarked on their own programme of reform (liberal government came in in 1906).
