DOCSLIB.ORG

Liberalism and the National Government, 1931 – 1940

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Liberalism and the National Government, 1931 – 1940 Liberalism AnD tHe National Government, 1931 – 1940 The National Government of 1931 was formed as a result of the collapse of the Labour administration in the face of economic crisis. Politicians of the three main parties came together in an atmosphere of fear: fear of a collapse in the value of the pound sterling; fear of a repetition in Britain of the hyper- oalitions in the British the Lib–Lab Pact of 1977–78.1 The inflation that had system are most likely other type of situation is the coali- wrecked the German to be the product of one tion that grows out of a national of two very different emergency – the intrusion of exter- economy in the early sorts of situation. A coa- nal factors which compel parties to Clition can, as in 2010, be the result of put their parochial differences aside 1920s. The government arithmetical necessity. Only by two and unite in the face of a common so formed was to last or more parties coming together threat from beyond Westminster, can a parliamentary majority be usually war. The coalitions of 1915 until 1940. Dr David assembled and the hazards and and 1940 self-evidently fall into instability of minority administra- this category. But so too does the Dutton examines the tion be avoided. Sometimes such National Government of 1931–40.2 impact of the National an arrangement falls some way The external threat may not in this short of full coalition as in the case case have been war, but the leading Government on the of the Liberal Party’s generally actors in the drama appear to have benevolent attitude towards the believed that the economic crisis of Liberal Party. first Labour government in 1924 or 1931 was the most serious challenge 38 Journal of Liberal History 72 Autumn 2011 Liberalism AnD tHe National Government, 1931 – 1940 to have faced the country since the notwithstanding its dramatic elec- was achieved after the general elec- German spring offensive of 1918. toral setback in 1931. Even in that tions of 1923 and 1929, and, as has Politicians of the three main parties year, despite dropping to just fifty- often been pointed out, the Liberal came together in an atmosphere of two MPs, Labour held on to 30.6 per Party let itself down by failing fear: fear of a collapse in the value cent of the popular vote, marginally to use this position to extract an of the pound sterling; fear of a rep- higher than the percentage that had agreed programme of Liberal goals etition in Britain of the hyper-infla- brought the party to government from the minority Labour gov- tion that had wrecked the German after the general election of 1923. ernment that was formed on each economy in the early 1920s.3 Moreover, irrespective of the fig- occasion.8 Their problem, however, As Neville Chamberlain put it, ures, the events of 1931 confirmed was deeper and more fundamen- ‘the problem was to restore foreign a Conservative–Labour duopoly as tal. Liberals in the 1920s could not confidence in British credit. This the only two serious contenders for give a clear answer to the question could only be done by announcing power in the British polity after the of which of the two larger parties such a cut in national expenditure as brief experience of three-party pol- they would prefer to support in would convince him [the foreigner] itics in the 1920s. No, the real losers office. Indeed, not even individual that we had sufficient courage to of this time were the Liberals, even Liberal politicians of this era gave tackle the situation.’4 And, as this though the economic crisis and the consistent answers to this question. task proved beyond the capacity resulting formation of a National While Lloyd George moved from of Ramsay MacDonald’s Labour Government brought them back being the head of a Conservative– Cabinet, the three party leaders into government for the first time in Liberal coalition in the early 1920s, accepted the king’s suggestion of a almost a decade. to seeking an agreement to sustain National Government.5 For most of To understand the prob- Ramsay MacDonald’s minority its existence, however, the National lems experienced by the Liberal Labour administration at the end Government had a further, politi- Party in relation to the National Left: five Liberal of the decade, other Liberal lumi- cal, purpose – to keep the irrespon- Government, a word must be said ministers in naries moved in the opposite direc- sible Labour Party out of power. In about their experience of the previ- Downing Street tion. John Simon, who declared in some ways, therefore, it represented ous decade. During the 1920s, the in October 1931, 1922 that, when it came to practi- the belated triumph of the 1920s party, which had been the govern- just before the cal business, the immediate objects coalitionists, those who believed ing party of 1914, dropped rapidly calling of the he wanted to pursue were objects that only cooperation between to third place in the British politi- general election. which Labour men and women Conservatives and Liberals could cal system, scarcely having had From left: Sir also wanted to pursue,9 had by 1930 block Labour’s seemingly remorse- time to savour the status of being Donald Maclean, become the leading opponent of less rise – this, even though the two His Majesty’s Opposition. In such Lord Lothian, Lloyd George’s pro-Labour strat- leading Conservative architects of a position, though Liberals could Sir Archibald egy and was opening secret nego- the National Government, Stanley still talk optimistically of a future Sinclair, Sir tiations for a parliamentary pact Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain, Liberal government, in their more Herbert Samuel, with the Conservatives.10 Though had both been in the anti-coalition- sober moments they understood Lord Reading the dilemma of 1931 and beyond ist camp in the Tory split of 1922.6 that their more realistic ambition (Manchester was not occasioned by the same Yet Labour was not the real loser of was to hold the balance of power in Guardian, 3 sort of parliamentary arithmetic the era of National Government, a hung parliament.7 This, of course, October 1931). as had existed in 1923 and 1929, the Journal of Liberal History 72 Autumn 2011 39 Liberalism AnD tHe nAtional Government, 1931–1940 problem was fundamentally the office, while the Labour govern- majority of Liberal candidates same. Opposition to Labour as the ment – which had caused such as National Liberals to indicate party which had run away from divisions in the Liberals’ ranks that they were supportive of the the economic crisis was not suffi- – was now consigned to history. National Government, a categori- cient to hold many Liberals within But this internal harmony did not sation which included almost all, a Conservative-dominated admin- last long, as the purpose and func- even if with varying degrees of istration. Indeed, by the time of the tion of the National Government enthusiasm, apart from the small, 1935 general election many Liberals, quickly changed. At its formation in largely family, group surround- Lloyd George included, were back August, noted Austen Chamberlain, ing Lloyd George, who unequivo- to seeing Labour as their partner of the idea was for ‘a national govt cally opposed the holding of an preference.11 to deal with the present financial election. For this minority the As I have written elsewhere, the emergency. Not a coalition but designation of ‘Liberal’ or ‘inde- chief problem for the Liberals in cooperation. Dissolved as soon as its though pendent Liberal’ was reserved. their association with the National immediate task is accomplished and the previ- Samuel himself used the descrip- Government was the effect that it the following general election to be tion ‘Liberal and National candi- had on their unity.12 Indeed, the fought by the three Parties inde- ous period date’ in his address to the electors fragmentation of the Liberal Party pendently.’16 Within weeks, how- of Darwen in Lancashire.19 Lists did was, from the outset, an objective ever, the Tories, supported by those of Labour exist to differentiate the Samuelite of at least one leading Conservative. Liberals who looked to Simon for and Simonite camps, but even these Neville Chamberlain was deter- leadership, were pressing for a gen- government were not definitive and a few names mined that the Liberal Party should eral election fought by the National appeared on both. Samuelites were be made ‘to face up to the fiscal Government on the issue of tar- had served far more likely to be opposed by decision … The decision will split iffs. Around this proposition three Conservatives than were Simonites, it from top to bottom and … will separate Liberal factions began to to re-open but again this was not a hard and end it, the two sections going off coalesce. fast rule and there were excep- in opposite directions, and bring The Conservative Business and in some tions. Some MPs were remarkably us back nearly to the two party sys- Committee, the Shadow Cabinet of successful in misleading their elec- tem.’13 To begin with, of course, the the day, meeting on 24 September, cases to torates as to their true affiliation. entire Liberal Party gave its support were ‘all agreed as to the great Right down to 1935, Huddersfield’s to the National Government. Two importance of pitching our tariff reconfigure MP, William Mabane, managed to places in the Emergency Cabinet of demands high enough to make sure present himself as a Samuelite in ten, Herbert Samuel at the Home of getting rid of Samuel and, if pos- the divisions the constituency while behaving Office and the Marquess of Reading sible, Reading’.17 At the same time as a Simonite at Westminster.20 In a surprise appointment as Foreign Leslie Hore-Belisha took the lead in that had Dumfriesshire Dr Joseph Hunter Secretary, with additional senior organising a memorial to the prime plagued Lib- said little about his precise alle- posts for Donald Maclean, Lord minister, MacDonald, promising giance before suddenly announc- Lothian, Archie Sinclair and the unqualified support for any meas- eralism since ing in 1934 that he had accepted Marquess of Crewe, was a reason- ures necessary in the interests of the appointment as National Organiser able reward considering the respec- country.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Breach in the Family
    The Lloyd Georges J Graham Jones examines the defections, in the 1950s, of the children of David Lloyd George: Megan to Labour, and her brother Gwilym to the Conservatives. AA breachbreach inin thethe familyfamily G. thinks that Gwilym will go to the right and she became a cogent exponent of her father’s ‘LMegan to the left, eventually. He wants his dramatic ‘New Deal’ proposals to deal with unem- money spent on the left.’ Thus did Lloyd George’s ployment and related social problems. Although op- trusted principal private secretary A. J. Sylvester posed by a strong local Labour candidate in the per- write in his diary entry for April when dis- son of Holyhead County Councillor Henry Jones in cussing his employer’s heartfelt concern over the fu- the general election of , she secured the votes of ture of his infamous Fund. It was a highly prophetic large numbers of Labour sympathisers on the island. comment. The old man evidently knew his children. In , she urged Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin to welcome the Jarrow marchers, and she battled he- Megan roically (although ultimately in vain) to gain Special Megan Lloyd George had first entered Parliament at Assisted Area Status for Anglesey. Megan’s innate only twenty-seven years of age as the Liberal MP for radicalism and natural independence of outlook Anglesey in the We Can Conquer Unemployment gen- grew during the years of the Second World War, eral election of May , the first women mem- which she saw as a vehicle of social change, espe- ber ever to be elected in Wales.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Dumfries and Galloway Described by Macgibbon and Ross 1887–92: What Has Become of Them Since? by Janet Brennan-Inglis
    TRANSACTIONS of the DUMFRIESSHIRE AND GALLOWAY NATURAL HISTORY and ANTIQUARIAN SOCIETY FOUNDED 20 NOVEMBER 1862 THIRD SERIES VOLUME 88 LXXXVIII Editors: ELAINE KENNEDY FRANCIS TOOLIS JAMES FOSTER ISSN 0141-12 2014 DUMFRIES Published by the Council of the Society Office-Bearers 2013–2014 and Fellows of the Society President Mr L. Murray Vice-Presidents Mrs C. Iglehart, Mr A. Pallister, Mrs P.G. Williams and Mr D. Rose Fellows of the Society Mr A.D. Anderson, Mr J.H.D. Gair, Dr J.B. Wilson, Mr K.H. Dobie, Mrs E. Toolis, Dr D.F. Devereux, Mrs M. Williams and Dr F. Toolis Mr L.J. Masters and Mr R.H. McEwen — appointed under Rule 10 Hon. Secretary Mr J.L. Williams, Merkland, Kirkmahoe, Dumfries DG1 1SY Hon. Membership Secretary Miss H. Barrington, 30 Noblehill Avenue, Dumfries DG1 3HR Hon. Treasurer Mr M. Cook, Gowanfoot, Robertland, Amisfield, Dumfries DG1 3PB Hon. Librarian Mr R. Coleman, 2 Loreburn Park, Dumfries DG1 1LS Hon. Institutional Subscriptions Secretary Mrs A. Weighill Hon. Editors Mrs E. Kennedy, Nether Carruchan, Troqueer, Dumfries DG2 8LY Dr F. Toolis, 25 Dalbeattie Road, Dumfries DG2 7PF Dr J. Foster (Webmaster), 21 Maxwell Street, Dumfries DG2 7AP Hon. Syllabus Conveners Mrs J. Brann, Troston, New Abbey, Dumfries DG2 8EF Miss S. Ratchford, Tadorna, Hollands Farm Road, Caerlaverock, Dumfries DG1 4RS Hon. Curators Mrs J. Turner and Miss S. Ratchford Hon. Outings Organiser Mrs S. Honey Ordinary Members Mr R. Copland, Dr Jeanette Brock, Dr Jeremy Brock, Mr D. Scott, Mr J. McKinnell, Mr A. Gair, Mr D. Dutton CONTENTS Herbarium of Matthew Jamieson by David Hawker ..............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Progressive Politics
    the Language of Progressive Politics in Modern Britain Emily Robinson The Language of Progressive Politics in Modern Britain Emily Robinson The Language of Progressive Politics in Modern Britain Emily Robinson Department of Politics University of Sussex Brighton, United Kingdom ISBN 978-1-137-50661-0 ISBN 978-1-137-50664-1 (eBook) DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-50664-1 Library of Congress Control Number: 2016963256 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2017 The author(s) has/have asserted their right(s) to be identified as the author(s) of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub- lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • University Microfilms. a XER0K Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan
    72-11430 BRADEN, James Allen, 1941- THE LIBERALS AS A THIRD PARTY IN BRITISH POLITICS, 1926-1931: A STUDY IN POLITICAL COMMUNICATION. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1971 History, modern University Microfilms. A XER0K Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan (^Copyright by James Allen Braden 1971 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED THE LIBERALS AS A THIRD PARTY IN BRITISH POLITICS 1926-1931: A STUDY IN POLITICAL COMMUNICATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By James Allen Braden, B. S., M. A. * + * * The Ohio State University 1971 Approved by ment of History PLEASE NOTE: Some Pages haveIndistinct print. Filmed asreceived. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS Sir, in Cambria are we born, and gentlemen: Further to boast were neither true nor modest, Unless I add we are honest. Belarius in Cymbeline. Act V, sc. v. PREFACE In 1927 Lloyd George became the recognized leader of the Liberal party with the stated aim of making it over into a viable third party. Time and again he averred that the Liberal mission was to hold the balance— as had Parnell's Irish Nationalists— between the two major parties in Parlia­ ment. Thus viewed in these terms the Liberal revival of the late 1920's must be accounted a success for at no time did the Liberals expect to supplant the Labour party as the party of the left. The subtitle reads: "A Study in Political Communi­ cation " because communications theory provided the starting point for this study. But communications theory is not im­ posed in any arbitrary fashion, for Lloyd George and his fol­ lowers were obsessed with exploiting modern methods of commu­ nications.
    [Show full text]
  • A Forgotten Lib–Con Alliance
    For the study of Liberal, SDP and Issue 79 / Summer 2013 / £6.00 Liberal Democrat history Journal of LiberalHI ST O R Y A forgotten Lib–Con alliance Alun Wyburn-Powell The Constitutionalists and the 1924 election A new party or a worthless coupon? David Dutton ‘A nasty, deplorable little incident in our political life’ The Dumfries Standard, 1957 David Cloke David Lloyd George: the legacy Meeting report James Fargher The South African war and its effect on the Liberal alliance Kenneth O. Morgan The relevance of Henry Richard The ‘apostle of peace’ Liberal Democrat History Group 2 Journal of Liberal History 79 Summer 2013 Journal of Liberal History Issue 79: Summer 2013 The Journal of Liberal History is published quarterly by the Liberal Democrat History Group. ISSN 1479-9642 Liberal history news 4 Editor: Duncan Brack Lloyd George commemorations; plaque to Lord john Russell; Gladstone statue Deputy Editor: Tom Kiehl unveiled in Seaforth Assistant Editor: Siobhan Vitelli Biographies Editor: Robert Ingham Reviews Editor: Dr Eugenio Biagini A forgotten Liberal–Conservative alliance 6 Contributing Editors: Graham Lippiatt, Tony Little, The Constitutionalists and the 1924 election – a new party or a worthless York Membery coupon? by Alun Wyburn-Powell Patrons Letters to the Editor 15 Dr Eugenio Biagini; Professor Michael Freeden; Honor Balfour (Michael Meadowcroft and Hugh Pagan) Professor John Vincent Editorial Board Liberal history quiz 2012 15 Dr Malcolm Baines; Dr Ian Cawood; Matt Cole; Dr Roy The answers (questions in issue 78) Douglas; Dr David Dutton; Prof. David Gowland; Prof. Richard Grayson; Dr Michael Hart; Peter Hellyer; Dr ‘A nasty, deplorable little incident in our political 16 Alison Holmes; Dr J.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Liberalism Redefined?: the Intellectual Origins and Development of British Neoliberalism 1929 - 1955
    Classical Liberalism redefined?: The intellectual origins and development of British Neoliberalism 1929 - 1955 Elliott Banks MA by research University of York History December 2017 Abstract Neoliberalism is often viewed as a global intellectual movement detached from the ideas and politi- cal economy of the individual nation-state. However, the origins of what has subsequently been de- scribed as neoliberalism were heavily based on the intellectual traditions of the nation-state. Early British neoliberalism drew heavily on the thoughts and ideas of British classical liberal philosophers and political economists to justify their arguments on why the economy should be free to operate under market conditions. British neoliberalism rather than being detached from the intellectual tra- dition of British classical liberalism embraced some core tenets with the early neo-liberal theorists seeking to update and modernise the classical pillars of the British liberal tradition whilst recognis- ing the flaws of nineteenth-century laissez-faire liberalism and capitalism. The goal of this was to create a new type of liberalism and deliver a distinctive alternative to the prevailing collectivist movements of the 1930s and 1940s which would ultimately have influence in the 1970s and 1980s with the government of Margaret Thatcher and beyond. !2 Table of Contents Abstract 2 Table of Contents 3 Acknowledgements 4 Declaration 5 I 12 II 28 III 42 IV 60 V 76 Bibliography 81 Appendix One: Free trade posters during the 1906 Election Campaign 85 Appendix II: The Land 87 !3 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my academic supervisor Dr Chris Renwick for all of his assistance in the writ- ing of this thesis, his patience during our countless meetings helped to clarify my thoughts on this very complex subject.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Partly Made Politicians': the Youth Wings of the British Political Parties
    ‘PARTLY MADE POLITICIANS’: THE YOUTH WINGS OF THE BRITISH POLITICAL PARTIES, 1918-1939 The Complete Imp, The Imp, April 1931, p. 16. A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree of History PhD by Matthew David Seddon, Lancaster University, May 2020. Abstract This thesis is a comprehensive study of the youth wings of the major political parties between the wars. It examines the Conservative Party’s Junior Imperial League, the Labour Party’s League of Youth, the Liberal Party’s National League of Young Liberals, and the Communist Party of Great Britain’s Young Communist League. This thesis makes a significant contribution to our understanding of how the 1918 and 1928 Franchise Acts changed British political culture, and how young people were inducted into the British political system. The central premise of this thesis is that it is only by looking at these groups comparatively that we can get the full story of politicised youth. It will argue that, while their primary purpose was to recruit activists and party workers, these organisations were far more than insular, narrow interest groups. Rather than operating in isolation, these organisations learned from one another, adapted and reacted to each other’s activities, and actively sought to cast their recruiting nets as wide as possible to counter each other’s influence. Whereas studies of the class and gender dynamics of interwar politics abound, this thesis brings youth to the forefront of its examination of political culture between the wars. This thesis uses youth as a new lens through which to explore the themes of citizenship, the relationship between people and politicians, the blurring of the boundaries between public and private lives, and how mass democracy changed the practice of politics.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX I the Carlton Club Meeting, 19 October 1922
    APPENDIX I The Carlton Club Meeting, 19 October 1922 This appendix lists the vote at the Carlton Club Meeting of all Conservative M.P.s It is based on a list in the Austen Chamber­ lain Papers (AC/33/2/92), and has been checked against public statements by the M.P.s of their votes at the meeting. In two cases the public statements disagreed with Chamberlain's list. They were Sir R. Greene (Hackney North) and C. Erskine-Bolst (Hackney South). Chamberlaine's list said that Greene supported the Coalition, while Erskine-Bolst opposed it. The two men indicated that they had the opposite opinion, and their votes may have been transposed in Chamberlain's list. The appendix gives information on the attitude of Conserva­ tive M.P.s towards the Coalition before the Carlton Club Meet­ ing, and it also lists some M.P.s who were present but who according to Chamberlain did not vote. R. R. James, using a different source, published a list of the M.P.s voting at the Carlton Club (Memoirs Of A Conservative, 130-3). He gave the total vote as 185 opponents of the Coalition, and 88 supporters, and he lists 184 opponents of the Coalition. M.P.s who were listed differently from Chamberlain's accounting were: H. C. Brown (Chamberlain, anti; James, absent) C. Carew (Chamberlain, absent; James, pro) G. L. Palmer (Chamberlain, absent; James, anti) H. Ratcliffe (Chamberlain, absent; James, pro) 222 THE FALL OF LLOYD GEORGE N. Raw (Chamberlain, absent; James, anti) R. G. Sharman-Crawford (Chamberlain, anti; James, absent) R.
    [Show full text]
  • 0 Home Office, a Hostile Environment for Some
    0 Home Office, a hostile environment for some - Norman Baker 0 Green pact, good or bad? - Wendy Kyrle Pope and Theo Butt Philip 0 Talking trash in Freetown - Rebecca Tinsley Issue 390 - June 2018 £ 4 Issue 390 June 2018 CONTENTS SUBSCRIBE! Liberator magazine is published six/seven times per year. Subscribe for only £25 (£30 overseas) per year. Commentary .......................................................................3 Radical Bulletin ...................................................................4..5 You can subscribe or renew online using PayPal at our website: www.liberator.org.uk MAY BROUGHT THE DRAWBRIDGE DOWN ..............6..7 It’s not just the Windrush generation that suffered from Theresa May’s Or send a cheque (UK banks only), payable to callous incompetence in the Home Office and since - thousands of “Liberator Publications”, together with your name innocent people were caught up in her appeasement of the Daily Mail, and full postal address, to: says Norman Baker Liberator Publications HOW GREEN WAS MY PACT? ........................................8..9 Flat 1, 24 Alexandra Grove Richmond Liberal Democrats struck a pact with the Greens and took London N4 2LF control of the council in May. Was this too high a price to pay? Wendy England Kyrle-Pope says it worked, while Theo Butt-Philip (opposite page) urges caution THE LIBERATOR FIRM BUT UNFAIR ..........................................................10 COLLECTIVE The royal family used its recent wedding to burnish its image, but Jonathan Calder, Richard Clein, Howard
    [Show full text]
  • Juliet Rhys-Williams and the Campaign for Basic Income, 1942-55
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Apollo Beveridge’s rival: Juliet Rhys-Williams and the campaign for basic income, 1942-55 Peter Sloman, New College, Oxford Postal address: New College, Oxford, OX1 3BN Email: [email protected] Telephone: 07787 114629 Abstract: Historians of Britain’s post-war welfare state have long been aware of the shortcomings of the social insurance model, but the political impact of the Beveridge report has tended to obscure the alternative visions of welfare canvassed in the 1940s and 1950s. This article examines the social activist Juliet Rhys-Williams’ campaign for the integration of the tax and benefit systems and the provision of a universal basic income, which attracted wide interest from economists, journalists, and Liberal and Conservative politicians during and after the Second World War. Though Rhys-Williams’ proposals were not adopted, they helped establish a distinctive ‘social market’ perspective on welfare provision which has become central to British social policy debates since the 1960s and 1970s. Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Ben Jackson, Taku Eriguchi, Bill Jordan, Philippe van Parijs, and Malcolm Torry for helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. I am also grateful for valuable feedback from participants at the Women in British Politics conference at the University of Lincoln in May 2011 and the Modern British History seminar at the University of Oxford in January 2015, and from the anonymous Contemporary British History reviewers. 1 Beveridge’s rival: Juliet Rhys-Williams and the campaign for basic income, 1942-55 Historians of the development of Britain’s post-war welfare state have long been aware that they are dealing with a paradox.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    BIBLIOGRAPHY This biography aims to list the major sources of information about the history of the British Liberal, Social Democrat and Liberal Democrat parties. It concentrates on published books. Some references are made to archival sources for major figures but a guide to archive sources can be found elsewhere on the website and the books listed will guide towards collections of articles. It is organised in four sections: § The philosophic and policy background § The history of the party and Liberal governments § Elections § Biographies and autobiographies of leading party members The list does not attempt to be comprehensive but most of the major works included in this list will contain references to other relevant works. Those new to the subject are referred to our shorter reading list for an introduction to the subject. Unless otherwise indicated, the place of publication is usually London. THE PHILOSOPHIC AND POLICY BACKGROUND GENERAL R Bellamy, Liberalism and Modern Society: An Historic Argument, (Cambridge University Press, 1992) Duncan Brack and Tony Little (eds) Great Liberal Speeches (Politico’s Publishing, 2001) Duncan Brack & Robert Ingham (eds) Dictionary of Liberal Quotations (Politico’s Publishing, 1999) Alan Bullock (ed), The Liberal Tradition from Fox to Keynes, (Oxford University Press, 1967). Robert Eccleshall (ed) British Liberalism: Liberal thought from the 1640s to 1980s (Longman, 1986) S Maccoby (ed), The English Radical Tradition 1763-1914, (1952) Conrad Russell An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Liberalism (Duckworth,
    [Show full text]