DOCSLIB.ORG

Riding the Tiger the Liberal Experience of Coalition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Riding the Tiger the Liberal Experience of Coalition riDinG tHe tiGer tHe Liberal experience of coalition Government ‘There was a young lady of Riga Who smiled as she rode on a tiger; They returned from the ride With the lady inside, And the smile on the face of the tiger.’ Coalitions between unequal partners can end up like the relationship between the tiger and the young lady of Riga. In March 2011 the Liberal Democrat History Group and British Liberal Political he story begins with Britain] does not love coalitions.’ Studies Group organised Disraeli’s famous com- But whether England or Britain ment in the House does or does not love coalitions, two seminars to learn of Commons on 16 we have had three peacetime from the Liberal December 1852, in the coalitions in the last 120 years: Tmidst of a thunderstorm, in which the 1895 coalition between the experience of coalition he said this: Conservatives and the Liberal Unionists; the Lloyd George coali- The combination may be success- governments. Vernon tion between the Conservatives and ful, a coalition has before this been one wing of the Liberal Party; and successful, but coalitions, though Bogdanor introduces the National Government of 1931. successful, have always found All have been coalitions between this special issue, this – that their triumph has been Conservatives and Liberals, or brief. containing papers from between Conservatives and one ‘This, too, I know,’ he concluded, wing of the Liberal Party. In the the seminars. ‘that England [he meant, I suppose, case of the Lloyd George coalition 4 Journal of Liberal History 72 Autumn 2011 riDinG tHe tiGer tHe Liberal experience of coalition Government and the National Government, and the past three: the 2010 coali- In the current, coalition, if the there were also other small par- tion is the only one that occurred Liberal Democrats were to decide ties involved. But there have been after a hung parliament. After the to leave the government, there does no coalitions between the Liberals 1895, 1918 and 1931 elections, the not, admittedly, in consequence of and the Labour Party, although the Conservatives, had they wished to the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act, Liberals have supported Labour do so, could have governed with- have to be a general election. But governments from the outside – in out the support of any other party. there would be a different sort of what would now be called a confi- Clearly, after 2010, that could not government – either a Conservative dence and supply agreement – in the have been the case. But, after previ- minority government or, possibly, a 1929 Labour government and, with ous hung parliaments, including the coalition of the left. That, of course, the Lib–Lab pact of 1977–78, the next most recent, in February 1974, makes it easier for the Liberal Callaghan government. the outcome was not coalition but Democrats to leave the coalition. There is, however, a fundamen- minority government. The fact that If the three previous coalitions tal difference between the three the 2010 coalition was, as it were, did not owe their existence to a previous peacetime coalitions and a coalition of necessity, alters its hung parliament, to what did they the present one. It is that the past dynamics very considerably. In pre- owe their existence? If one had to three coalitions were formed before vious coalitions the non-Conserv- grossly oversimplify and answer general elections and endorsed by ative elements were expendable. In in one word, that word would be the electorate in those general elec- 1918, Bonar Law, the Conservative ‘fear’. In 1895, the fear was of Irish tions – by landslide majorities, in leader, told his followers: home rule, which many otherwise fact. They were not, as the current intelligent people felt would mean by our own action we have made coalition has been, formed after a the disintegration of the United Mr Lloyd George the flag-bearer general election. In 1895, 1918 and Kingdom, and a surrender to ter- of the very principles on which 1931, governments went to the rorism and violence. The 1895 coa- we should appeal to the country. It country as coalitions and electors lition was founded on a negative is not his Liberal friends, it is the knew that they were voting for a proposition concerning home rule; Unionist Party which has made coalition. In 2010, the voters did not as soon as the coalition had to con- him prime minister and made it vote for a coalition and had to guess sider a positive policy, tariff reform, possible for him to do the great what coalition might ensue in the it began to disintegrate. work that has been done by this event of a hung parliament. Many In 1918, there was a positive government.1 guessed wrong, including The element as well as a negative – to Guardian, which advocated a vote But, if the Conservatives could create a new world after the First for the Liberal Democrats to create make Mr Lloyd George, they could World War, with a new alignment a progressive coalition of the left. also break him, as in fact they did Left: David of parties in a society in which This is important since it means that in 1922. Similarly, after 1932, the Cameron and the old issues – church disestab- the 2010 coalition lacks the legiti- Conservatives could have got rid of Nick Clegg at lishment, free trade, home rule, macy of the past three peacetime Ramsay MacDonald, but decided the formation etc. – had disappeared. But there coalitions. to keep him as a fig leaf to cover up of the coalition was also a negative element – fear There is a further interesting what might otherwise appear as a government, of the trade unions, fear of a gen- difference between this coalition nakedly Conservative government. May 2010 eral strike, and, above all, fear of Journal of Liberal History 72 Autumn 2011 5 riDinG tHe tiGer: tHe Liberal experience of coalition Government ‘Bolshevism’, sometimes equated, It was this element of fear that it was this personalities, and were in large part odd though it may seem today, with helped the Conservatives in 1895, responsible for breaking up the coa- the Labour Party. But, following 1918 and 1931, because, of course, element of litions in which they were domi- the Russian revolution in 1917, and when people are frightened, they nant. In Baldwin’s famous words, Communist uprisings in many of tend to vote Conservative. Indeed, fear that used at the Carlton Club meeting in the countries of central and eastern the Conservatives have benefited 1922, Lloyd George was a ‘dynamic Europe, there was a feeling, how- more than Liberals from coalitions. helped the force’ and a dynamic force was ‘a ever, misplaced, amongst mem- The Conservatives might well have very terrible thing’. There is a strik- bers of the governing class, few of won the elections of 1895, 1918 conserva- ing contrast with Baldwin him- whom had any close understanding and 1931 even without their coali- self, who, as leader of the National or knowledge of the labour move- tion partners, but their partners tives in 1895, Government in the 1930s proved an ment, that Britain too might be on strengthened them, enabling them 1918 and 1931, emollient figure capable of holding the brink of revolution, and that to win seats in areas that were not the disparate elements of a coalition the forces of order should combine naturally Conservative. because, of together. A coalition does better together to defeat this threat. In As late as 1965, John Nott, who with an emollient head of govern- February 1920, the Deputy Cabinet was to become a minister in the course, when ment rather than a dynamic one. Secretary, Thomas Jones, recorded governments of Edward Heath and The Liberal Democrats hope that a meeting of Lloyd George with Margaret Thatcher, came to be: people are the 2010 coalition will institutional- his advisers at which the Home ise recognition of a multi-party pol- selected as the National Liberal Secretary ‘outlined his proposals itics in which they can play a hinge and Conservative candidate for St frightened, to raise a special temporary force role, as the Free Democrats used to Ives – not the Conservative candi- of 10,000 soldiers for the national they tend do in Germany. But previous coali- date. I was told by the local associ- emergency’, the existing police tions proved to be a prelude, not to ation that St Ives could not be won force being inadequate. ‘There are’, to vote con- multi-party politics, but to realign- by a Conservative – but that as the the Food Controller insisted, ‘large ment and the restoration of a new National Liberals had supported groups preparing for Soviet gov- servative. two-party system of a different sort, the Conservatives and had done so ernment’. Walter Long, the First helping primarily the Conservative since 1931, I should not fret about Lord of the Admiralty, was wor- indeed, the Party. In 1975, Harold Macmillan the label. ried that ‘The peaceable manpower declared, perhaps with tongue in of the country is without arms. I Nott did not drop the National conserva- cheek: have not a pistol less than 200 years Liberal label until the general The last purely Conservative old’. Bonar Law, the Conservative election of 1974, even though the tives have government was formed by Mr leader, summed up the discussion party wound itself up in 1968. The benefited Disraeli in 1874. It is the fact that saying that ‘All weapons ought to accumulated funds of the party, we have attracted moderate peo- be available for distribution to the amounting to £50,000 were then more than ple of a liberal disposition and friends of the Government’.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Liberals in Coalition
    For the study of Liberal, SDP and Issue 72 / Autumn 2011 / £10.00 Liberal Democrat history Journal of LiberalHI ST O R Y Liberals in coalition Vernon Bogdanor Riding the tiger The Liberal experience of coalition government Ian Cawood A ‘distinction without a difference’? Liberal Unionists and Conservatives Kenneth O. Morgan Liberals in coalition, 1916–1922 David Dutton Liberalism and the National Government, 1931–1940 Matt Cole ‘Be careful what you wish for’ Lessons of the Lib–Lab Pact Liberal Democrat History Group 2 Journal of Liberal History 72 Autumn 2011 new book from tHe History Group for details, see back page Journal of Liberal History issue 72: Autumn 2011 The Journal of Liberal History is published quarterly by the Liberal Democrat History Group. ISSN 1479-9642 Riding the tiger: the Liberal experience of 4 Editor: Duncan Brack coalition government Deputy Editor: Tom Kiehl Assistant Editor: Siobhan Vitelli Vernon Bogdanor introduces this special issue of the Journal Biographies Editor: Robert Ingham Reviews Editor: Dr Eugenio Biagini Coalition before 1886 10 Contributing Editors: Graham Lippiatt, Tony Little, York Membery Whigs, Peelites and Liberals: Angus Hawkins examines coalitions before 1886 Patrons A ‘distinction without a difference’? 14 Dr Eugenio Biagini; Professor Michael Freeden; Ian Cawood analyses how the Liberal Unionists maintained a distinctive Professor John Vincent identity from their Conservative allies, until coalition in 1895 Editorial Board The coalition of 1915–1916 26 Dr Malcolm Baines; Dr Roy Douglas; Dr Barry Doyle; Prelude to disaster: Ian Packer examines the Asquith coalition of 1915–16, Dr David Dutton; Prof. David Gowland; Prof. Richard which brought to an end the last solely Liberal government Grayson; Dr Michael Hart; Peter Hellyer; Dr J.
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Responsibility of Ministers: an Outline of the Issues
    The Individual Responsibility of Ministers: An Outline of the Issues Research Paper 96/27 21 February 1996 The individual responsibility of ministers is a vital aspect of accountable and democratic Parliamentary government, yet it is a 'convention' which is difficult to define with certainty and which, to a large degree, depends on the circumstances of each individual case. This Paper seeks to explore, in general terms, the subject as a whole and several interesting examples from the era of Crichel Down in 1954 onwards to illustrate the issue. It does not seek to provide a comprehensive analysis of ministerial responsibility (including collective responsibility) or Parliamentary accountability. Barry K Winetrobe Janet Seaton Home Affairs Section Reference and Reader Services Section House of Commons Library Summary Individual ministerial responsibility is an important if complex constitutional issue. It is often described as a constitutional convention, and this Paper examines its nature in that context, and in relation to collective responsibility and in the light of developments such as the growth of select committees, the development of Next Steps agencies and quangos, and the publication in 1992 of Questions of procedure for Ministers. The nature of individual responsibility in action is described briefly, including aspects short of a ministerial resignation or dismissal. The interesting, if short, debate on ministerial responsibility on 12 February 1996 is considered. A number of modern examples of situations where individual responsibility could be said to have arisen are examined, purely to illustrate various aspects of the 'convention'. It is not intended to be a comprehensive list. It covers significant episodes such as Crichel Down in 1954 (in which Sir David Maxwell Fyfe set out what is often regarded as the classic statement of the traditional doctrine), the Falklands (1982) and Westland (1986), and includes instances where resignation demands were successfully restricted such as Court Line (1975) and the Maze Prison escape (1983).
    [Show full text]
  • Conservative Parties and the Birth of Democracy
    Conservative Parties and the Birth of Democracy How do democracies form and what makes them die? Daniel Ziblatt revisits this timely and classic question in a wide-ranging historical narrative that traces the evolution of modern political democracy in Europe from its modest beginnings in 1830s Britain to Adolf Hitler’s 1933 seizure of power in Weimar Germany. Based on rich historical and quantitative evidence, the book offers a major reinterpretation of European history and the question of how stable political democracy is achieved. The barriers to inclusive political rule, Ziblatt finds, were not inevitably overcome by unstoppable tides of socioeconomic change, a simple triumph of a growing middle class, or even by working class collective action. Instead, political democracy’s fate surprisingly hinged on how conservative political parties – the historical defenders of power, wealth, and privilege – recast themselves and coped with the rise of their own radical right. With striking modern parallels, the book has vital implications for today’s new and old democracies under siege. Daniel Ziblatt is Professor of Government at Harvard University where he is also a resident fellow of the Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies. He is also currently Fernand Braudel Senior Fellow at the European University Institute. His first book, Structuring the State: The Formation of Italy and Germany and the Puzzle of Federalism (2006) received several prizes from the American Political Science Association. He has written extensively on the emergence of democracy in European political history, publishing in journals such as American Political Science Review, Journal of Economic History, and World Politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Contents Theresa May - the Prime Minister
    Contents Theresa May - The Prime Minister .......................................................................................................... 5 Nancy Astor - The first female Member of Parliament to take her seat ................................................ 6 Anne Jenkin - Co-founder Women 2 Win ............................................................................................... 7 Margaret Thatcher – Britain’s first woman Prime Minister .................................................................... 8 Penny Mordaunt – First woman Minister of State for the Armed Forces at the Ministry of Defence ... 9 Lucy Baldwin - Midwifery and safer birth campaigner ......................................................................... 10 Hazel Byford – Conservative Women’s Organisation Chairman 1990 - 1993....................................... 11 Emmeline Pankhurst – Leader of the British Suffragette Movement .................................................. 12 Andrea Leadsom – Leader of House of Commons ................................................................................ 13 Florence Horsbrugh - First woman to move the Address in reply to the King's Speech ...................... 14 Helen Whately – Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party ............................................................. 15 Gillian Shephard – Chairman of the Association of Conservative Peers ............................................... 16 Dorothy Brant – Suffragette who brought women into Conservative Associations ...........................
    [Show full text]
  • The Conservative Party & Perceptions of the Middle
    THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY & PERCEPTIONS OF THE MIDDLE CLASSES TITLE: THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY AND PERCEPTIONS OF THE BRITISH MIDDLE CLASSES, 1951 - 1974 By LEANNA FONG, B.A., M.A. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University © Copyright by Leanna Fong, August 2016 Ph.D. Thesis – Leanna Fong McMaster University - Department of History Descriptive Note McMaster University DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (2016) Hamilton, Ontario (History) TITLE: The Conservative Party and Perceptions of the British Middle Classes, 1951 - 1974 AUTHOR: Leanna Fong, B.A., M.A (York University) SUPERVISOR: Professor Stephen Heathorn PAGES: vi, 307 ii Ph.D. Thesis – Leanna Fong McMaster University - Department of History Abstract “The Conservative Party and Perceptions of the British Middle Classes, 1951 – 1974,” explores conceptions of middle-class voters at various levels of the party organization after the Second World War. Since Benjamin Disraeli, Conservatives have endeavoured to represent national rather than sectional interests and appeal widely to a growing electorate. Yet, the middle classes and their interests have also enjoyed a special position in the Conservative political imagination often because the group insists they receive special consideration. It proved especially difficult to juggle these priorities after 1951 when Conservatives encountered two colliding challenges: the middle classes growing at a rapid rate, failing to form a unified outlook or identity, and the limited appeal of consumer rhetoric and interests owing to the uneven experience of affluence and prosperity. Conservative ideas and policies failed to acknowledge and resonate with the changing nature of their core supporters and antiquated local party organization reinforced feelings of alienation from and mistrust of new members of the middle classes as well as affluent workers.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons from the Marginals Edited by Jesse Norman
    Lessons from the Marginals Edited by Jesse Norman With contributions from: Nicola Blackwood MP Robert Halfon MP Richard Harrington MP Martin Vickers MP Conservative Home, 2012 CONTenTS Introduction Jesse Norman MP 1 Harlow Rob Halfon MP 8 Oxford West & Abingdon Nicola Blackwood MP 18 Watford Richard Harrington MP 25 Cleethorpes Martin Vickers MP 30 Hereford & South Herefordshire Jesse Norman MP INTRODUCTION Jesse Norman MP If the Conservative party is to win the 2015 General Election, it will need to hold a large number of marginal seats, and take more besides. As the 2010 election showed, the old laws of politics are breaking down. Seats which would normally have gone with the national swing somehow failed to do so; others swung like never before. As electronic media proliferate, trust and turnout decline and a new and far more politically eclectic generation comes to the fore, fresh thinking is needed. This collection gathers together essays from five members of the 2010 parliamentary intake: Robert Halfon, Nicola Blackwood, Richard Harrington, Martin Vickers and Jesse Norman. Together, they span a wide range of constituencies won at that election: North and South, urban and rural, taken from Labour and the Liberal Democrats, first time round or at the second or even third attempt. These seats are diverse, with diverse populations and challenges; and it is interesting to see how their different challenges are addressed in different specific ways. But what is actually remarkable is the consistency of the underlying themes to be found here. They point to a quite different approach to campaigning: accountable, energetic, personal, informal, independent- minded, rather non-partisan, and focused on social action.
    [Show full text]
  • Lord Cecil Parkinson 1
    Lord Cecil Parkinson 1 Trade minister in Margaret Thatcher's first government in 1979, Cecil Parkinson went on to become Conservative Party chairman. He was instrumental in privatizing Britain's state-owned enterprises, particularly electricity. In this interview, Parkinson discusses the rethink of the British Conservative Party in the 1970s, Margaret Thatcher's leadership in the Falklands War, the coal miners' strike, and the privatization of state-owned industries. Rethinking the Conservative Party, and the Role of Keith Joseph INTERVIEWER: Let's talk about Margaret Thatcher during the '70s. After the defeat of [Prime Minister Ted] Heath, Margaret Thatcher almost goes back to school. She and Keith Joseph go to Ralph Harris [at the Institute for Economic Affairs] and say, "Give us a reading list." What's going on here? What's Margaret really doing? LORD CECIL PARKINSON: I think Margaret was very happy with the Heath manifesto. If you look at the Heath manifesto, it was almost a mirror image of her 1979 manifesto. All the things—cutting back the role of the state, getting rid of the nationalized industries, curbing the train unions, cutting of taxes, controlling public expenditure—it's all there. It's a very, very good manifesto. And I've heard her recently compliment him on the 1970 manifesto, which was a slightly sort of backhanded compliment, really. What troubled her was that we could be bounced out of it. We could be moved from doing the things which we knew were right and doing things which we secretly knew were wrong because of circumstances, and I think instinctively she felt this was wrong, but she didn't have the sort of intellectual backup, she felt, to back up her instincts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Conservatives in British Government and the Search for a Social Policy 1918-1923
    71-22,488 HOGAN, Neil William, 1936- THE CONSERVATIVES IN BRITISH GOVERNMENT AND THE SEARCH FOR A SOCIAL POLICY 1918-1923. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1971 History, modern University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED THE CONSERVATIVES IN BRITISH GOVERNMENT AND THE SEARCH FOR A SOCIAL POLICY 1918-1923 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Neil William Hogan, B.S.S., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1971 Approved by I AdvAdviser iser Department of History PREFACE I would like to acknowledge my thanks to Mr. Geoffrey D.M. Block, M.B.E. and Mrs. Critch of the Conservative Research Centre for the use of Conservative Party material; A.J.P. Taylor of the Beaverbrook Library for his encouragement and helpful suggestions and his efficient and courteous librarian, Mr. Iago. In addition, I wish to thank the staffs of the British Museum, Public Record Office, West Sussex Record Office, and the University of Birmingham Library for their aid. To my adviser, Professor Phillip P. Poirier, a special acknowledgement#for his suggestions and criticisms were always useful and wise. I also want to thank my mother who helped in the typing and most of all my wife, Janet, who typed and proofread the paper and gave so much encouragement in the whole project. VITA July 27, 1936 . Bom, Cleveland, Ohio 1958 .......... B.S.S., John Carroll University Cleveland, Ohio 1959 - 1965 .... U.
    [Show full text]
  • Margaret Thatcher, Thatcherism and Education
    Commentary Reginald Edwards McGill University Margaret Thatcher, Thatcherism and Education The changes in educational policy in Britain that are being promoted by Margaret Thatcher's government are of such significance that educators in North America might be well advised to take notice of them. Professor Buck, in the Win ter issue of this journal, detailed many of these changes and compared them to the policies of Matthew Arnold. In this commentary, an attempt is made to examine the personal and political background of Margaret Thatcher and to draw sorne inferences about the origin of her ideas and policies, which have come to be known commonlyas "Thatcherism." Thatcher's personal background Margaret Roberts, born in Grantham, Lincolnshire, in 1925, began her education in a local primary school, and at the age of eleven began secondary education at the Kestevan and Grantham Grammar School for Girls. Admitted to Somerville College, Oxford, in 1943, she graduated in Science in 1946. In her final year she was the President of the Oxford University Conservative Association and, in this capacity, was invited to her first Annual Conference of the Conservative Party in 1946. She attended her second conference in 1948, as the representative of the Graduates' Association, and met representatives of the Dartford constituency. Asking to submit her name as a candidate for nomination, she was accepted, and she contested, unsuccessfully, the elections of 1950 and 1951 for that constituency. Through her political activities she met Dennis Thatcher, whom she married in an East London Methodist Chapel in December 1951. After marriage she began to study law, specializing in taxation law, and was adJTJitted to the Bar in 1954, one year after giving birth to twins.
    [Show full text]
  • Holders of Ministerial Office in the Conservative Governments 1979-1997
    Holders of Ministerial Office in the Conservative Governments 1979-1997 Parliamentary Information List Standard Note: SN/PC/04657 Last updated: 11 March 2008 Author: Department of Information Services All efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of this data. Nevertheless the complexity of Ministerial appointments, changes in the machinery of government and the very large number of Ministerial changes between 1979 and 1997 mean that there may be some omissions from this list. Where an individual was a Minister at the time of the May 1997 general election the end of his/her term of office has been given as 2 May. Finally, where possible the exact dates of service have been given although when this information was unavailable only the month is given. The Parliamentary Information List series covers various topics relating to Parliament; they include Bills, Committees, Constitution, Debates, Divisions, The House of Commons, Parliament and procedure. Also available: Research papers – impartial briefings on major bills and other topics of public and parliamentary concern, available as printed documents and on the Intranet and Internet. Standard notes – a selection of less formal briefings, often produced in response to frequently asked questions, are accessible via the Internet. Guides to Parliament – The House of Commons Information Office answers enquiries on the work, history and membership of the House of Commons. It also produces a range of publications about the House which are available for free in hard copy on request Education web site – a web site for children and schools with information and activities about Parliament. Any comments or corrections to the lists would be gratefully received and should be sent to: Parliamentary Information Lists Editor, Parliament & Constitution Centre, House of Commons, London SW1A OAA.
    [Show full text]
  • Room 261 University of London Senate House London, Wcie 7Hu
    n :e a c a d e .1C registrar ROOM 261 UNIVERSITY OF LONDON SENATE HOUSE LONDON, WCIE 7HU foi THE EDUCATIONAL POLICIES OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY, 1918-1944 Kevin Jefferys (Bedford College) Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ll: JLXN/! ProQuest Number: 10098489 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest. ProQuest 10098489 Published by ProQuest LLC(2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 ABSTRACT This thesis sets out to examine the role played by the Conservative Party in the evolution of the state education system between 1918 and 1944. The early chapters provide a chronological account of ministerial policy and party attitudes towards secondary and elementary education between the wars. This is followed by assessments of the party's approach to the dual system of council and church schools, and to the problems of ' education for employment '. The manner in which Conservative education policy operated locally is then examined with particular reference to the area of London; and the arguments put forward are brought together finally by an analysis of the party's responsibility for, and reaction to, the 1944 Education Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Dorman Michael D. Kandiah and Gillian Staerck ICBH Witness
    edited by Andrew Dorman Michael D. Kandiah and Gillian Staerck ICBH Witness Seminar Programme The Nott Review The ICBH is grateful to the Ministry of Defence for help with the costs of producing and editing this seminar for publication The analysis, opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the JSCSC, the UK Ministry of Defence, any other Government agency or the ICBH. ICBH Witness Seminar Programme Programme Director: Dr Michael D. Kandiah © Institute of Contemporary British History, 2002 All rights reserved. This material is made available for use for personal research and study. We give per- mission for the entire files to be downloaded to your computer for such personal use only. For reproduction or further distribution of all or part of the file (except as constitutes fair dealing), permission must be sought from ICBH. Published by Institute of Contemporary British History Institute of Historical Research School of Advanced Study University of London Malet St London WC1E 7HU ISBN: 1 871348 72 2 The Nott Review (Cmnd 8288, The UK Defence Programme: The Way Forward) Held 20 June 2001, 2 p.m. – 6 p.m. Joint Services Command and Staff College Watchfield (near Swindon), Wiltshire Chaired by Geoffrey Till Paper by Andrew Dorman Seminar edited by Andrew Dorman, Michael D. Kandiah and Gillian Staerck Seminar organised by ICBH in conjunction with Defence Studies, King’s College London, and the Joint Service Command and Staff College, Ministry of
    [Show full text]