The Liberal Reforms:
Why were they
introduced?
• “Merely a response to the threat of the Labour party” How accurately
does this statement explain the introduction of welfare reforms 19061914?
• To what extent were the studies of Booth and Rowntree responsible
for the introduction of welfare reforms in Britain 1906-1914.
• How important were concerns for national efficiency in motivating
the Liberal government to introduce welfare reforms 1906-1914?
• To what extent did was New Liberalism the main motivation for the
introduction of the Liberal Reforms?
What were the Liberal Reforms?
A series of welfare reforms which aimed to helped:
• Children
• Old People
• Sick people
• People who had low wages/were unemployed.
Introduction: Contexts
The liberal government came to power in 1906 with a landslide victory of 399 seats
to the 156 of the Conservatives. During their election campaign they had focussed
on their promise of free trade, yet, during their time in power, they introduced a
series of welfare reforms aimed at helping those in need.
The Liberal Party were in power from 1906 to 1914. During this time they
introduced a series of welfare reforms which were designed to provide support for
the 1/3 of Britain’s population who had been identified by Seebohm Rowntree and
Charles Booth as living in poverty.
When the Liberal Party came to power in 1906, the poverty line was at 21 shillngs
per week and around one third of British families were below this – living in
poverty. Through his study, Rowntree identified five main causes of poverty; old
age, large families, unemployment/irregular work, low wages and the death/illness
of main wage earner.
Factors
TASK:
While watching the video,
take a note of at least one
FACT for each of the
following:
• National Efficiency
• Social Awareness
• Political Advantage
By 1906 it was becoming difficult for the government
to ignore the problem.
Research findings of:
Seebohm
Rowntree
Charles Booth
The Social Surveys of Booth and Rowntree
The large surveys into British poverty conducted
by Booth and Rowntree provided the incoming
Liberal Government with detailed evidence which
had not been available to previous governments.
Charles Booth’s “Survey of Life and Labour
in London” completed in 1903, showed the
huge level of poverty in London: nearly one
third of the population.
•
17 year study in London
•
30% lived below poverty line
•
Only 3% received help from the Poor Law
Seebohm Rowntree
Poverty or bread
line= basics (home,
food, clothing)
Seebohm Rowntree’s study of working class families in York:
“Poverty: A study of Town Life” was published in 1901.It
confirmed Charles Booth’s findings that one third of Britain’s
population was living in poverty.
• York
• 30% lived below poverty line.
• A family needed £1 a week to stay above the poverty line.
Low wages
52%
Death of
main wage
earner 16%
Illness or
old age 5%
Unemployment or
irregular work 5%
Large
families
22%
Other evidence of poverty
Socialists
Social Democratic
Federation tried to make
people aware of
conditions of poor.
Writers
Reverand A. Mearns ‘The
Bitter Cry of Outcast
London’
William Booth ‘Darkest
London’
Charles Dickens ‘Oliver
Twist.
Teachers & Civil
Servants
Teachers complained to
school inspectors that
children were too hungry
to learn.
Medical officers (for local
councils) reported on poor
state of people’s health.
SIGNAL TO ARGUMENT
Revelations influenced the Liberals to pass
reforms after the true extent of poverty was
uncovered, however, it is clear that many
reforms were introduced due to other factors.
 EVIDENCE
Evidence:
• Booth & Rowntree – 1/3rd of population living in
poverty.
• Middle & upper classes made aware of extent of
poverty by novels such as those by Charles Dickens.
 ARGUMENT
This was important because:
• It had been believed that only 3% of the population
were living in poverty and were being helped by the
poor law.
 EVIDENCE
Evidence:
Identified the real causes of poverty e.g. old age and
unemployment.
 ARGUMENT
This played a role in the introduction of the
reforms because:
• It dispelled the belief that individuals were
responsible for their poverty.
• Showed that people could not pull themselves out of
poverty and encouraged government intervention.
• Indeed – Libs were motivated by revelations because
the 1909 Peoples’ Budget signified a move away from
Laissez-faire.
 REFUTE ARGUMENT
On the other hand, the limitations of their
reforms suggest that they were not influenced
solely by a desire to help the poor.
 EVIDENCE
Suggested that the 1908 Old Age Pension Act
was introduced due to a desire to help the poor
BUT the government ignored the recommended
monetary allowance which would have kept them
above the poverty line.
 ARGUMENT
SUGGESTS – the government were motivated
by other factors.
LINK TO QUESTION
As such, it may be more valid to argue that
revelations were important in the sense that
they influenced the view of those in political
parties, rather than directly brought about
social reforms.
Why did the Liberals introduce reforms? MOTIVE(S)
Revelations influenced the liberals to pass reforms after the true extent
of poverty was uncovered, though it clear that many reforms were
introduced due to other factors. Awareness came through the work of
social investigators and authors of the time. For example, Booth and
Rowntree found that 1/3rd of the population were living in poverty.
Also, the middle and upper classes were made aware of the extent of
poverty through the writings of Charles Dickens etc. This was crucial in
encouraging the Liberals to take action because before revelations it
was believed that only 3% of the population were in poverty and being
helped by the poor law. Most importantly it showed the real reasons
for poverty e.g. unemployment, old age and large families. This was
important because it dispelled the belief that that individuals were
responsible for their poverty. Also, it showed that people could not pull
themselves out of poverty and encouraged government action. Indeed,
it can be argued that the Liberals were motivated by revelations
because the 1909 Peoples’ Budget signified a move away from Laissezfaire.
1906 – Liberal Prime Minister, Henry Campbell-Bannerman believed
in Gladstonian Laissez-Faire.
However, a growing number of Liberals saw the need for change.
They had sympathy for the poor but were also worried by the
rise in support for the Labour Party. They convinced their leaders
to do more to help Britain’s poorest.
Winston Churchill
David Lloyd George
Make Poverty
History
“Don’t be afraid to take a big
step”
Analysis 
• Most reforms came after 1908 after Campbell Bannerman
had died and cabinet positions changed; bringing in New Libs
such as DLG and Churchill. Reforms included; OAPs and
National Insurance Acts.
• Shows direct link between the political ideology of the Libs
and motives for introducing reforms.
• Can be argued this would not have happened without new
Liberalism as these acts were distinct move away from
Laissez Faire.
Analysis 
ALSO:
• Evidence that other reforms introduced were led by New
Liberalism. E.g. 1908 Children’s Charter & 1909 Trades
Board Act – both problems identified by Booth & Rowntree.
• Also – OAP was non-contributory. Shows huge influence
of New Liberals upon the actions of the Liberal government
as a whole.
Analysis 
This demonstrates:
• The importance of New Liberalism as before they arrived on
scene, the Lib govt. did very little to help the poor.
• Their progressive ideas changed the views of others in the
party e.g.
• Robertson (MP) said ‘Laissez faire…is quite done with.’
Analysis 
BUT –
• New Liberals also wanted to gain more votes than Labour.
• DLG said, ‘We must eliminate the widespread
poverty…otherwise the working men of GB will
vote Labour instead’.
• SUGGESTS: Libs had stronger motive – political power.
Analysis 
ALSO –
• Many reforms did not deal with the problems.
• For example:
• They did not successfully deal with the strikes of miners and
dockers (1910-14) DESPITE DLG’s Welsh, working class
background.
• Indeed, if they were truly concerned with helping the poor, surely
they would have done more to help.
TASK
With a partner, complete the worksheet by:
1. Identifying evidence and argument which suggests New
Liberalism was an important motive.
2. Identifying evidence and argument which suggests New
Liberalism was not an important motive.
3. Place the argument with the correct piece of evidence.
4. Check with Miss MacKay
5. Either write in, or stick in the information – in the correct
order.
1. Threat from the Labour Party
Labour MPs
1900
2 MPs
1906
29 MPs
1910
42 MPs
Labour threatened the Liberals because in 1890, working class
men were given the vote and the majority associated with Labour –
the working man’s party.
‘The relief of poverty is always an act of power’
P. Hennock
Speech by Lloyd George to a Liberal Party meeting in Cardiff, October
1906
I warn you about the Labour Party. I warn you it will become a terrifying
force that will sweep away Liberalism. We have a Liberal Parliament, but we
must act to help the poor. We must get rid of the national disgrace of slums.
We must eliminate the widespread poverty which scars this land glittering
with wealth, otherwise the working men of Britain will vote Labour instead of
Liberal.
2. Threat from the Conservative Party
The historian Morrison argues that the Conservatives posed a
bigger threat to the Liberals than Labour.
Housing Act
1890
The Conservatives
had already
introduced
reforms…
Education Act
1891
Workmen’s
compensation Act
1897/ 1900
Analysis 
• Evidence:
Labour threatened Liberals because in 1890 the working class
were given the vote and the majority associated with Labour;
the working man’s party.
Analysis 
Argument:
• Labour was gaining support quickly. They had 2 seats in 1905
and this increased to 29 in 1910. So, the Liberals required a
way to regain support from those voters.
• This is evidenced by the Liberal introduction of the Free
Schools Act which was originally suggested as a bill in
parliament by a Labour MP.
• Thus showing that the Liberals were concerned that Labour
had a greater appeal to the working classes.
Analysis 
Evidence:
The Liberals majority was only 2 seats in 1910. In 1907
election, they had lost ‘safe’ seats e.g. Jarrow and Colne Valley
to Labour.
Analysis 
Argument:
Historians argue that this led the Liberals to introduce
pensions the following year. Indeed, Lloyd George said that
they would only be put out of power if they failed to deal with
the problems of the people.
Refute the argument
On the other hand, the Liberals seemed willing to lose votes in
order to introduce these reforms. For example, many workers
resented the NI scheme and parents objected to the state
‘interference’ through the Children’s Charter. Showing that
perhaps, the Liberals were not entirely motivated by gaining
the Labour vote.
Argument 
Evidence does, however, suggest that the reforms
were introduced more as a result of a threat from
the Conservatives than the Labour party.
The Conservatives had already introduced some
reforms e.g. the Housing Act (1890), Workman’s
Compensation Act (1897 & 1900). This may have
motivated the Liberals into action.
Argument 
The Conservatives had also introduced Royal Commission
(1905) which aimed to look at the problems of poverty and
offer solutions. Didn’t carry out solutions as they were
knocked out of power by the Liberals.
Argument 
Even so – if the Liberals were concerned about their own
political interest and viewed the Conservatives as a threat;
why did they persevere with the Peoples’ Budget. By doing so,
they were willing to lose middle and upper class support
(those who vote Cons) and indeed returned to power with
only a majority of 2 seats. Thus showing, that the threat from
the Cons could NOT have been the main driving force BUT
when combined with the threat from Labour, the Liberals had
to do something to attract voters away from both parties.
Historians – Lib Vs Lab
• Historian Wood argues that the defeat to Labour in
1907 prompted the Liberals to introduce OAP the
following year. (Winning Labour candidates had
promised OAP and other reforms)
• P. Hennock – the relief of poverty is always an act
of power.
• Marxist historians (ant-Capitalist) believe that the
liberal were just buying off the w/c.
Historians – Lib Vs Cons
• The historian Morisson argues that the Liberals
were more concerned with the threat of the
Conservatives!
• Recent historiography 2005 by Valocchi argues that
the Liberals were warding off ALL threats – both
Labour and Conservatives to maintain power- it was
NOT out of genuine concern for the masses.
However it is worth noting that……
If the Liberals were
concerned with
maintaining power, why
did they push through
with the
People’s Budget
(tax increases to pay
for OAP) in 1909?
The Liberals
called a General
Election in 1910they won by only
by 2 seats!!!!!
Brief Summary
• The 1909 Peoples’ Budget taxed the rich in order to introduce
further reforms. Surely then, if the Liberals were more
concerned about threat from Conservatives they would have
tried to attract support from the wealthy.
• Further to that, the Liberals may also have been losing support
from workers.
• Many actually objected to paying out the money for National
Insurance. They got paid very little so any deduction (regardless
of size) had detrimental consequences.
• SUGGESTS: Liberals were in fact genuinely attempting to help
those in need.
Evidence
Britain was worried about her position as the world’s leading
industrial nation because:
• By 1900 Germany & USA had overtaken e.g. USA could make
steel cheaper than UK.
• UK companies e.g. Cadbury complained that workers were
too unhealthy to work productively.
This was a motivation because…
• The govt. attempted to deal with the health of workers by
introducing the National Insurance Acts to provide financial
support to workers in times of illness.
• Would ensure they return to work healthy
• So – enhancing the productivity of UK industry.
E–
UK also threatened by other countries e.g. Germany.
• Germany excelling in industry. DLG visited & believed this
was down to their social reforms.
• Indeed – Germany had introduced reforms to deal with
problems of workers e.g. Accidence Insurance (1884) and
Health Insurance (1883).
• Sense of rivalry also existed due to Naval Arms Race.
E–
UK also threatened by other countries e.g. Germany.
• Germany excelling in industry. DLG visited & believed this
was down to their social reforms.
• Indeed – Germany had introduced reforms to deal with
problems of workers e.g. Accidence Insurance (1884) and
Health Insurance (1883).
• Sense of rivalry also existed due to Naval Arms Race.
Refute the argument –
• Reforms not successfully helping national efficiency –
• NI Act only covered 13 million workers, families excluded &
workers could not receive specialist treatment.
• If the govt. really wanted to improve national efficiency it
would have made sure these reforms went further to
actually improve the health of the people.
Further evidence suggests that national efficiency
was not the only motive…
• DLG’s infamous ‘war budget’ in 1909 was willing to
raise £16 million for defence and welfare incl.
pensions.
• AND OAPs did not benefit national efficiency…TOO
OLD to work.
Evidence –
Took 3 years for 400,000 British soldiers to defeat
35,000 Boer farmers.
This motivated the reforms because:
• It showed the government that they had to
intervene to ensure the army was at its strongest to
fight effectively.
Evidence:
The health of adult males in UK was so poor that
34.5% of men were turned away from the army due to
poor health!
This caused the government to:
• Introduce Territorial Reserves & Expeditionary
Force which was designed to back up regular army.
• Showing that national security was important
because the govt. introduced reforms to specifically
improve the performance of the UK army.
Evidence:
• Inter Departmental Committee on Physical Deterioration
reported in 1904 that health of many males was poor and
recommended improved diet and reduction of overcrowding.
• Dundee Survey, 1905 stated that children couldn’t learn
because they were malnourished = they would be future
workers and soldiers.
• The 1903 Royal Commission found that Edinburgh children
were underweight compared to children in the USA.
• Following year – found that Glaswegian children were in a
poorer condition than the Edinburgh children.
It is clear that these findings motivated reforms:
• It was obvious that if called upon to protect UK or
empire, the future generation of soldiers would
stand little chance.
• Indeed, Libs introduced Free School Meals (1906)
and Medical Inspections (1907) to deal with
unhealthy children.
• Difficult to see other motive as these were
introduced before Campbell Bannerman’s death so
not motivated by New Liberalism.
Refute argument:
• Not motivated by National Security alone as by 1914,
the govt. had spent £12.5 million on OAPs.
• If National Security was sole concern then surely
the Liberals would not have spent so much on a group
of people who would never again contribute to the
security of the UK.
• With a partner (or alone, if you prefer) complete the following:
Using the essay sheet on National Security and National Efficiency,
make a diagram of what you should (and could) include in a paragraph.
Due to the time constraints, it is best to merge both factors into one
paragraph. Include MORE than you think you can write in timed
conditions.
SO –
• Choose which factor will come first
• Ensure there is balance for each factor (evidence and argument)
• Write a ‘refute the argument’ sentence that will go between the
factors.