A2 Britain Revision Questions

1. Why did the Conservatives win the 1951 election?

REASONS FOR LABOURS DEFEAT - handicaps... Clement Attlees government was worn down by heavy economic and financial difficulties. - Massive devaluation of to $. Collectively and individually, the government was exhausted (Attlee in and out of hospital. Ministers very divided. No new ideas) after six troubled years in office. A number of its ministers, e.g. Attlee, Herbert Morrison and Ernest Bevin, had been working continuously since 1940. Serious divisions had developed between the right and left of the party over economic, welfare and foreign policies. - Ernest Bevin and Herbert Morrison did not get along with each other There was resentment among some trade unions at Labours slowness in responding to workers demands. The shrinking in the 1950 election of its majority made governing difficult and damaged party morale. Labour found it difficult to shake off its image as a party of rationing and high taxation. - Rationing continued. In their call for the austerity that they claimed the times demanded, leading ministers such as the ascetic (a person who leads a simple life, abstains from normal pleasures and material satisfaction) Stafford Cripps as Chancellor of the Exchequer and the aggressive Manny Shinwell, Minister of Fuel and Power, did not present an attractive picture to the electorate. Britains entry into the Korean War in 1950 angered Labours left wing; they argued that, although technically British forces fought as part of a United Nations force, in reality the Labour government was sheepishly following the USA in a Cold War engagement. Britain increased defence spending for Korean War initially 8% of GDP spent on defence. After war, 14% of GDP cripples opportunity to spend elsewhere. REASONS FOR CONSERVATIVE WIN advantages... The Conservatives had begun to recover from the shock of their defeat in 1945. The 1950 election saw an influx of bright young Conservative MPs eager for battle against a tiring government Under the direction of the dynamic Lord Woolton (Tory Party Chairman) the Conservative Party had reformed its finances and constituency organisation and was much better position to fight for seats and votes than in 1945. The attack on the governments nationalisation of iron and steel provided a strong platform for opposition attacks. Labour polled more votes but the British electoral system

2. Why were the Conservatives so politically dominant between 1951 and 1964? (Remember to look at what was happening within the Labour Party especially their policies) WINSTON CHURCHILLS GOVERNMENT 1951-5 77 years old when he became PM regarded return to office as a thank you for wartime leadership. However, Churchill is too old and frail to be much more than a figurehead; reputation sustains him. ANTHONY EDENS GOVERNMENT 1955-57 Having waited so long in the shadow of Churchill, Eden in 1955 was described as a man in a hurry. Eden was determined to silence criticism from the Tory press de

Economic Policy R. A. Butler continued and accepted the Keynesian economics adopted by Atlees government which aimed to: - Maintain full employment while achieving economic growth. - expanding the welfare state - keeping to Britains heavily committed military defence programme (Includes costly Korean War 1950-3) Cost of British goods had dropped while exports had picked up. Major uplift in the international economy in the 50s, largely through Marshall Plan. This lead to increased demand for British products. Britain was heavily in debt, a result of wartime borrowing and heavy defence commitments produced a series of balance of payments deficits. Labour and Tory governments after 1945 overreached themselves trying to build a Interest rates Used to modern competitive industrial economy but crippling themselves by taking on the huge raise or lower the cost of costs involved in running a welfare state and extensive defence programme. borrowing money, thus BUTSKELLISM coined by The Economist (joined together Butler/Gaitskell) suggested retarding or stimulating that both parties met in the middle to form a consensus on matters of finance, economic activity. economy and welfare state. (There are differences between the two. Butler: economic control through manipulation of Interest rates. Gaitskell: high direct taxation and greater government direction)

LABOUR IN OPPOSITION 1951-64 Bevanites/Gaitskellites feud

Period marked by internal feuding between rival groups, the clash of personalities, and bitter disputes over policy and principles Contemporaries argue disputes within the Labour Party after 1951 as essentially a personal contest between Bevan and Gaitskell for the leadership succession to Clement Attlee. Uninspiring and timid policies of Labour leadership caused disillusionment among left-wing MPs in the House of Commons and activists in the constituencies. Bevan was appointed Minister of Labour in 1951 but soon resigned in protest at Hugh Gaitskell's introduction of prescription charges for dental care and spectaclescreated in order to meet the financial demands imposed by the Korean War. Bevans resignation from the Cabinet in April 1951 provided these critics with a natural and formidable leader. In the House of Commons, members of the Bevanite group were mostly Labour MPs who had been associated with the Keep Left movement. Key members Michael Foot, R.H.S. Crossman, Ian Mikardo. Bevanites supported further nationalisation. Bevan said: it is essential that we should keep clear before us that one of the central principles of Socialism is the substitution of public for private ownership. There is no way round this. Concerned industries had little to say.

 Main concern: foreign and defence policy. Against German rearmament; Against Britain being identified too closely with American aims in foreign affairs; Pro nuclear disarmament (unilateralist) believed resources were being diverted away from the needy and underprivileged. Bevan could not change party policy without support of the major decision-making organisations of the Labour Party. He argued that policies of the leadership were only maintained so easily as a result of their support at the Annual Conference by the block votes of the major trade unions. Bevan believed that the trade union bosses did not represent the views of Labour rank-and-file; nor did the complacent members of the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP the parliamentary party of the Labour Party in Parliament). Bevanite propaganda aimed at grass-roots opinion over the heads of higher party hierarchy. At the Morecombe Party Conference in 1952, the Bevanites captured a majority of seats in the constituency of the National Executive (The National Executive Committee or NEC is the chief administrative body of the UK Labour Party). As well as this, the old guard of Herbert Morrison, Manny Shinwell and Hugh Dalton lost their seats. However, their behaviour in the House of Commons led to discord and hostility rather than agreement In March 1952, 57 Bevanites had voted against the Conservative governments rearmament programme, even though it had been agreed Labour would abstain. In 1952, Bevan stood against Herbert Morrison for the Deputy Leadership I knew that my defeat was practically certain. But... the party will never regain its health until the stranglehold of bureaucracy is broken In 1954, Bevan stood against Hugh Gaitskell for the party Treasureship, and was again heavily defeated, though he did obtain the bulk of votes in the constituency section. However, trade unions were strongly pro-Gaitskell: even Bevans own union the miners voted two to one in favour of Gaitskell. A reflection of the unions ingrained hostility to factionalism and disunity in the labour movement, and their largely justified belief that Gaitskell would act as the hammer of the Bevanites. In response and in disgust, Bevan resigned from the Labour Shadow Cabinet in the same year, without consulting his Bevanite colleagues. Harold Wilson accepted the vacant position to Bevans annoyance. The culmination of Nyes period of rebellion came in Spring 1955 when he and 62 other Labour MPS abstained, in defiance of party orders, in a debate on the H-bomb; but this time he also attacked Attlees leadership. For this offence, Bevan had the Whip withdrawn for a short time (meaning he was excluded from the PLP) and narrowly escaped being expelled from the party. Harold Wilson and Richard H S Crossman supported the partys stance. In the eyes of the right-wing Labour leaders, particularly Morrison, Deakin, and their younger colleague, Gaitskell, the Bevanites had shown that they were a disloyal and disruptive force in the Labour party by organising themselves as a party within a party by their vilification (criticism) of Labour leaders, and their refusal to accept majority decisions. Deakin and Gaitskell supported tough action against them but Attlee anxious to maintain the appearance of party unity favoured a more conciliatory approach. In John Campbells study of Bevan, he suggests that even in revolt, Bevan was not happy. Furthermore, his purpose in politics was to win and use power Richard Crossman had already hinted at problems caused by Bevan in his 1951 diary: - he jibs at each fighting action when you propose it - Bevan and the Bevanites seem much more important and well organised to the rest of the Labour Party.. than they do to us who are in the group and know that we are not organised, that Aneurin can never be persuaded to have any consistent or coherent strategy... - What we have .. is a group of MPs who meet regularly .. And also have come to represent real Socialism. This produces an extraordinary bitterness among those who support the Gaitskell line. By 1954-5 it was fairly clear that the growing disunity of the Bevanite group, and their unpopularity with both the major trade unions and the PLP, meant that their challenge to the power of the Labour was almost bound to fail The turning point came with Edens electoral victory in May 1955 and Atlees subsequent retirement as Labour leader in December. In the leadership contest that followed in the PLP, Gaitskell won an overwhelming victory against Morrison and Bevan: figures were Gaitskell 157; Bevan 70; Morrison 40. - Morrison was said to be too old. - Bevan was mistrusted by most of his parliamentary colleagues Attlee commented to Crossman: Nye... wants to be two things simultaneously, a rebel and an official leader, and you cant be both.

 Bevan now accepted Gaitskells leadership of the Labour Party and returned to the party accepting the role of Shadow Colonial Secretary, shortly afterwards becoming the elected party Treasurer. Bevan died in July 1960 from cancer marking the end of the Bevanite movement. The 1959 Election Election came at a bad time for Labour Gaitskells misfortune that his time as the Labour leader coincided with a period of economic recovery. The recovery was not entirely due to the policies of Macmillans government, but well presented via Tory propaganda. - E.g. Macmillan, in 1957, famously said, British people had never had it so good. - E.g. In 1959, election slogan was Life is better with the Conservatives. Dont let Labour ruin it. To counter the slogan, Labour attempted to woo voters with a scheme promising substantial increases in state pensions with no rise in taxation. Scheme was too hurriedly drafted; questions raised about how it would be paid for which embarrassed the Labour candidates. Labour had no clear line on joining the EEC. Gaitskell against; many of Labour Party CDS Campaign for for. Democratic Socialism. A Labour lost 19 seats while the Conservatives gained 21. number of CDS members Reaction to Labour 1959 Election defeat went on to break from Labour in 1981 and form a Gaitskell accused the left of weakening the movement by their demands for new political party, the Social unilateralism. Democratic Party The left attacked Gaitskell over his betrayal of party principle by dropping Block Vote Labour Party nationalisation as his primary goal. procedures allowed Some of the Partys right defended Gaitskell forming the CDS. They argued that it was individual trade union undemocratic and improper for the left to use their influence with the leaders of large leaders to cast their trade unions (e.g. Transport and General Workers) to foist their extremist minority conference votes on behalf views on the Labour Party, the majority of those members were moderates. of all the members of their Attempts by the left to undermine Gaitskell and impose unilateralism on Labour came union, which could number to a dramatic climax at the 1960 party conference. The ability to rely on the block vote millions. of major unions saw unilateralists force their policy on Gaitskell. Gaitskell firmly believed that giving in and ignoring the views of the electorate on unilateralist policies, in turn alienating voters was political suicide. Gaitskell lost his next leadership vote however, won the argument. A year later, unilateralist was dropped as a party policy. NOTE: Same thing happened 25 years later with Kinnock and loony left. Age of affluence 1951-64 - Wages rose by 72%; prices up by 45%. - Income Tax: After an initial rise in 1951, income tax reduced from 47 p to 39p between 51- 64 - Unemployment typically less than 2% by comparison to high unemployment in 30s and 80s, a golden age for Britain. - Average wages per week, 1951: 8; 1961: 15 - Car ownership increased by 500% - Huge increase in foreign holidays, especially Spain. - Private home ownership 1939: approx 35%; 1964: 44%. - Expenditure on social services- 1951: 16.1% of GDP; 1964: 19.3% of GDP - By the early 60s, Tories were able to embark on ambitious new projects, e.g. 90 hospitals to be built by 1972. - Economy able to generate extra unskilled and part-time jobs for women; leads to rise of the two income family. - The 1950s saw a major expansion of building societies offering cheap mortgages. Home ownership became a reality for many working classes. The conservative aim of a property owning democracy becomes a reality. - Education: 6,000 new schools established along with 11 universities. The school leaving age raised to 16. - Between 1951 and 62, Britain was below the US, Italy, Canada, Japan, Belgium, Australia and France in terms of the number of hours lost per annum due to industrial disputes.

3. What was the domestic and international impact of the Suez Crisis? Background: Suez Canal Crisis Canal was a keystone of Britains overseas empire and trade routes. Canal bought in 1875 allowed Britain to become ruling power in Egypt in 1880s. Canal connected trade routes from Mediterranean to Indian Ocean and beyond to Asia, Australia and New Zealand. 80% of Western Europes oil passed through Canal VITAL. US cancel loans to Egypt for Aswan Dam (Nasser staked his and Egypts future on this) when they learn he asked the Soviet Bloc countries for aid. Seems to place Egypt on the Soviet side of Cold War Nasser nationalises the Canal to raise finance. Foreign ships now have to pay to pass through the Canal. Eden declares Nasser cannot be allowed to leave his thumb on Britains windpipe (oil supplies) Edens natural instinct to use force (doesnt like dictators and didnt support german appeasement in 1930s) is encouraged by France and Israel who have vested interests. (French dont want their colonies undermined. Israel keen to protect itself against Egypt by attacking first). Britain, France and Israel agree that Israel will invade and France and Egypt will intervene to enforce peace and seize control of Suez Canal. United

4. How and why did Britain decide to decolonise and follow the winds of change policy? 1951-75 (This needs to include Suez, the economy, USA, Africa, Rhodesia) 5. Why did Labour win in 1964? The Conservatives Last Years in Government 1963-4 SCANDAL
Macmillan was unlucky in that the final years of his premiership were marred by scandals which, while seldom the direct fault of the government, reflected badly on it:

VASSALL AFFAIR 1963: The govt was obliged to appoint an official investigation into the case of John Vassall, a civil servant in the Admiralty who was caught spying for the Soviet Union There were suggestions that senior Admiralty figures had tried protecting him. No evidence was found in the enquiries but talk of cover-ups suggested the government was not in control of its departments. KIM PHILBY 1963: A senior official in the Foreign Office had for decades been passing info to the USSR as well as recruiting agents and running a spy network. To avoid arrest, Philby fled to Moscow where he died in 1988.

Macmillans government took the brunt of the blame for the security services having failed for so long to spot a deadly traitor in the heart of the establishment. ARGYLL DIVORCE CASE 1963: Duke of Argyll sued his wife Margaret, for divorce on grounds of adultery. A list of 88 names, 2 govt ministers and 3 royals included which she had sex with, sometimes group sex with were released. One politician appeared in a Polaroid picture which was shown in court. PROFUMO AFFAIR 1963: Scandal that caused most concern was this one. March 1963, John Profumo, Macmillans Minister for War had a sexual liaison with Christine Keeler, a prostitute who numbered members of the Soviet embassy among her clients. The risk to national security was obvious and seized on by the media. Profumo declared in 1963 in the House of Commons that there was no truth in the rumours of inappropriate relations with Keeler, only to admit 3 months later that he lied. He resigned but his disgrace spread beyond him, implicating the government and Tory Party. Details emerged that Profumo met Keeler at Dr. Stephen Wards country house, used as a high class brothel. Ward used his contacts to obtain girls for upper-class men. However, Ward had many Conservatives on his books, damaging the party by association though many were genuine patients. IMPACT OF PROFUMO AFFAIR: Scandal did not bring down the government. Suggestion that Macmillan had lost his political grip when it was found that he believed Profumos original denial of impropriety. Macmillan apologised and said that he should be criticised for believing the word of a colleague/friend. The Times newspaper gave it the headline, It is a moral issue in which it argued that the scandal was about more than a Minister lying in Parliament. The Times newspaper caught the prevailing response of most people; while neither the PM nor the govt was directly to blame for the Profumo affair, emphasised that after 12 years in office, the Tory Party had weakened its claim to lead the nation. There was a feeling that Macmillan and the government he led had become faintly ridiculous and outmoded.

HAROLD WILSONS LEADERSHIP AND ELECTION 1964: Sir Alec Douglas-Homes single year as PM from 1963 was an undistinguished time, Conservative supporters also
agreed. Home did not compare well as a parliamentarian against Harold Wilson and came off worse in the Commons debates and Prime Ministers Questions. Therefore Wilson pulled away from Doulas-Home in the opinion polls, confirmed by Labours victory in the 1964 election. Labour presented a more youthful image because of their idea of a progressive Britain. They also appeared in tune with the swinging sixties (phrase coined by media referring to the relaxation of old taboos regarding social behaviour). Wilson played on the contrast between the images of himself an Home, Wilson: straight-talking Yorkshireman; Home: out of huntin-shootin-fishin aristocrat out of touch with real people and their wants. Voters did not turn overwhelmingly to the Labour Party in 1964, any more than they had to the Conservatives in 1951. Suggestions among some Tories that if Butler was leader, Labour would not have won.

One of the deciding factors was not Labours recovery, but the falling away support of the Tories. - Compared with 1959, Labour had increased its votes from 43.8% to 44.1%, - the conservatives had slipped from 49.4% to 43.6% giving Labour an overall majority of 4 seats. Reasons for Labours victory:

Wearing and lack of spirit undermined the Conservative government after 13 unbroken years in office. The scandals tainting the Tory Party in 1963-4 weakened its claim to integrity and competence. The antiquated system which had produced Douglas-Home as leader and PM damaged the Tory attempt to project a modern image. Unemployment reached over 800,000 in 1963 denting Macmillans claim Britain never had it so good. Governments failure in having its 1963 application to join the EEC rejected exposed how weak Britain had become internationally. The Labour Party presented a younger; with-it, image that was in tune with the changing times. In the public eye, Wilson was more impressive than Douglas-Home. The Tory govt was main target of satire which began to flourish in the early 1960s in the theatre and on radio and television. Wilsons skilful election campaign, in which he presented himself and his party as better fitted to lead the nation in the technological age that Britain had entered, edged him to victory.

6. Why did the Conservatives win in 1970? 7. What were the reasons for Britain remaining outside of the EEC until 1973? 8. What arguments have there been over Britains membership of the EEC/EU between 1973 and 2007? 9. What was the impact of the politicisation of the trade union movement on both the Labour and Conservative parties, 1964-1985? 10. Why did the economy and industrial relations dominate the agenda of British governments between 1964-85 (This will include In Place of Strife, Oil Price Crisis, Three Day Week, Winter of Discontent) 11. Why did the Conservatives win in 1979? 12. What is Thatcherism? -

13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Why was Mrs Thatcher able to remain in power in 1983 but fell from grace in 1990? Why did the Conservatives win the 1992 general election? Why did Labour win in 1997? To what extent were the Labour electoral successes from 1997-2005 down to Tony Blairs personality? What were Labours economic policies and their impact? 1997-2007

18. What were the successes and failures of Blairs foreign policy?