Summary
Summary 13 Years of Conservative Dominance - British History Notes
- Course
- Institution
- Book
Notes on the British History A-Level course covering the 13 years of Conservative Dominance
[Show more]
Connected book
Book Title:
Author(s):
- Edition:
- ISBN:
- Edition:
More summaries for
-
Labour and Conservative Governments 1964-1979
-
Churchill and international Diplomacy
-
Churchill Case Study Notes
Seller
Follow
StewartGilliganGriffin
Content preview
Chapter 4-Conservative domination, 1951-64Why did the Conservatives win the 1951 election?
The debate on the 1951 election centred much around Conservative strengths and Labour weaknesses but the addition
of a third element, the electoral system, is perhaps what defined the outcome.
The results showed that Labour polled more voters than the Conservatives (13.7 million vs 13.9 million) yet won fewer
seats because of the first-past-the-post system (candidate elected if they win more votes than any other candidates in a
constituency, with no account taken of the proportion of which they win by).
Interestingly, the Liberal party noted a poor performance. A financially stretched party in decline, they only contested
109 seats which helped the Tories into power as many ex-Liberal voters turned to the new-look Conservative party.
Although, Labour had increased their popular vote by 2 million since 1945, but the Tories had increased theirs by 4
million.
International factors also played a part, in 1945 there had been considerable sympathy for socialism, and admiration of
planning and state control such as that adopted by the USSR. However, by 1951 the Cold War had led to the USSR being
seen as the enemy and these ideas which the Labour party had been seen to share meant people voted Conservative.
Labour had had many achievements in 1945-51,but was divided and had somewhat ‘run out of steam’, there were new
figures in the Conservative party who could be trusted to keep the gains of post-war Europe but to give people more
freedom.
How important were Labours weaknesses?
While the Labour failings in their first two administrations of 1945-50 and 1950-51 could be argued as the reason for
their removal from office, the party was hardly one in decline as it recorded its highest number of votes ever in the
history of British politics at that time in 1951.
Thus, it has to be seen that it was the cabinets difficulty dealing with the post-war economic and financial problems
which had exhausted them. In the popular mind, they were associated with the policies of austerity, rationing and high
taxes and strain on the people was further exacerbated by the Korean War entry which was costly (KW 1950-53,
Communist North Korea backed by Russia and China invaded non-communist South Korea, opposed only by a heavily
US lead UN force which was supported by GB, war lasted until ‘53 when communist forces were pushed back to their
originally occupied land).
The Labour party was not only exhausted by divided over issues regarding the NHS such as payment for dental
treatment, which undermined the ‘free at point of use’ selling point of the welfare state.
The electorate subsequently faced the decision between an incredibly polarised party which was split over economic
and foreign policies and the revitalised, reorganised Conservative party.
How important were the Conservative strengths?
In light of their defeat in ‘45 the party put in place a structure of reorganisation which allowed them to recover in time
for the 1951 election and take advantage of Labour troubles.
Lord Woolton reformed party finances and local organisation while new, young and talented politicians such as
Reginald Maulding gave the party a new dynamic. Labours nationalisation of the iron and steel industry, one of the
most profitable areas of business, was a topic of contention which the Tories could challenge Labour on.
The party offered an attractive programme, 300,000 houses a year in a time of housing shortages was a winner despite
Labour managing 200,000. Also, to give people more red meat at a time when it was strictly rationed. They also said
they would not avert Labours achievements, but consolidate, finally backing a welfare state. The party, led by the still-
popular war hero Winston Churchill, was the nations choice.
How important was the electoral system?
1. The nature of the British electoral system-In 1945 Labour needed 30,522 votes for a seat but in 1951 it was 47,283
whereas the Conservatives needed 42,733 compared to in 1945 when they needed 46,892. This came from the first-past-
the-post system whereby Labour piled up votes in safe seats, but the Tories won many of the marginal Labour seats.
2. Boundary changes brought by the 1948 Representation of the People Act-Labour needed to win 2% more of the popular
vote in order to win the same number of seats due to the redistribution of seats which meant some of their seats became
marginal or increased the number of votes needed to win that safe seat.
3. The decline in the Liberal Party-Liberal votes fell from 2.6 million to 730,556 from 1945-51, the Liberals did not contest
every seat (109) and thus ex-Liberal voters turned to Conservatives, helping them win the Labour marginal seats.
, Why were the Conservatives able to dominate British politics for so long?
The Conservatives had the advantage that this period was one of significant economic growth which led to a rise in
living standards.
There was also a growth in industrial production which, given the lack of it post war, was inevitable but was also
stimulated by the Korean War. Whilst Britain’s growth rate was not as significant as countries like Italy and Germany
(5.1% & 5.6% vs 2.3%), the prior two countries did have a lower base.
Britain’s share of world trade shrank from 25% to 15%, while Germany’s grew from 7% to 20%. This change can be
explained partially by 10% of Britain’s GDP going onto defence expenditure, the high cost of Britain’s nuclear R&D and
maintaining military bases equated to around 34.5% of funds that could have been invested into industry.
It is therefore difficult to say the government aided development which supports the argument that it was ‘thirteen
years wasted’.
The government was criticised for failing to maintain a strong sterling area and prioritising investment overseas as well
as modernising staple industries.
The government defended their poor performance, blaming it on consumerism-people spending money on goods
rather than investment.
Wages and living standards
There was a continuous rise in living standards despite the low level of industrial growth.
Wages rose faster than prices, so people were able to buy more with the money they earned. In 1951 the average
weekly wage of an adult was £8.30, but by 1964 it had risen to £18.35. Secondly, chancellors were able to cut income
tax before both elections in 1955 and 59, reducing it by the equivalent of 2.5p and 3.75p respectively, giving people a
greater amount of money to spend improving the ‘feel-good’ factor.
There was a 500% rise in car ownership, 91% of the population owned TV’s as well as washing machine ownership,
demonstrating the public purchasing power.
Credit
The improvement of living standards was also helped by the greater availability of credit. People could borrow more
and make small, monthly repayments over a number of years, they were therefore able to buy more things that would
have been out of reach.
Coupled with tax cuts, a consumer boom began, and people were able to go on foreign holidays for the first time and
life was better than ever.
Housing
The government promised 300,000 new houses a year, and mostly achieved this. They reached 354,000 houses in 1954
and 1.7 million houses while in office.
As a result of the Rent Act 1957 (abolished rent controls meaning more houses were available but house prices of rental
rising) as well as the building of new houses, the waiting list declined.
25-44% home ownership from before WW2 to 1964. This victory was claimed by Harold Macmillan; “Let’s be frank;
most of our people have never had it so good”.
This left the middle-classes and even some of the upper-working-classes with no reason to vote Labour as they had in
1945.
Education
There was an expansion of education, with 6,000 more schools built.
The Grammar Schools created by the Butler Act of 1944 continued to give a greater chance to children whose parents
could not afford to send their children to private education. Grammar Schools had benefited the middle-class voters
who kept the Conservatives in office.
Conservative education policies increased the amount of people going onto higher education and these policies
resulted in voters.
Expectations
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller StewartGilliganGriffin. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $4.54. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
78252 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now