British Social Policy and the Second World War - Essay Example

British Social Policy and the Second World War Bentley B. Gilbert Socialist policies vary over the world. Different countries offer different socialand welfare policy keeping in mind the attitudes of the populace of the nation. The concept of the welfare state has become popular in recent years but the concept has been around since even before the Second World War, as compared to the popular belief that the War saw the beginning of the concept of the welfare state. Britain has differed in its socialist policies in comparison to the rest of Europe. This could be due to the difference in the attitudes of the Britons. The philosophy of the pre-war era, namely Webbs, George Bernard Shaw, James Kier Hardie and George Lansbury, discussed social welfare as not providing the needs of the people but their most basic rights. It was their belief that the government should be spending more time taking action than wasting its time on policy building. (Alcock, 2003, page 88) In 1942 Joseph Schumpeter proposed an idea that Britain's socialism was less ethically sound as compared to the rest of Europe's. He believed that the people did not consider social justice as an endowment but as their right. This in turn led the Britons to take an unappreciative approach to the policy makers and government as a whole. A couple of other reasons included that after the World War many people believed that they would soon lose their jobs and would emigrate to some other country such as South Africa. The state wished to build a sense of solidarity instead they were faced with a state of emergency. People believed that the government could have diverted the war and was ineffective in managing the state's affairs. The people took for granted society's business to support them when they were unemployed and to care for them in their old age. But observing the development of the English citizen's social rights it can be seen that this attitude had been prevailing since the 1930s. An Example of a movement which signifies this phenomenon is the rebellion against the Unemployment Assistance Board in 1935. This signifies that the workers knew of their rights and what they deserved even before the war was on the horizon. So contributing the welfare movement to the war seems imprecise. (Glynn & Booth, 1996, pages 98-99). By 1939 the government had now undertaken the responsibility to keep peace throughout the state, provide protection to the people, provide for their education but now the added responsibility included providing economic welfare to all its citizens. This was harmful for the government as now they had to look after the actual deserving such as widows and retired citizens as well as the undeserving such as unemployed drunkards (Jacobs, 1993, page 46). The war helped implement military efficiency into the system of welfare but the system did exist even before the war. Many war time inventions became adapted into people's personal lives during that era. The transistor radio is one such gadget that became incorporated into people's households. Aside from the technical inventions, the social experiments also became popular in their implementation in everyday procedures. The medical profession benefited from the new techniques in managing the influx of patients and it became easier to manage large number of patients. Wars also recognize social weaknesses. Evacuating people from different regions of the country discovered potential transportation problems and terrible living conditions (Addison, 1975, page 32). Around 1940 Ernest Bevin proved to be a major influencer of the time. He was the Minister of Labour and most of his decisions were beneficial for the people working in the industrial sector. Recognizing how the people working should be given the proper atmosphere and work place environment he instigated many policies related to minimum wages in a step wise procedure implementing them in industry after industry. He believed that these measures would bring about a Social Revolution for the working class. But even he was unable to break the gloomy atmosphere existing. In the spring elections a new party was able to defeat the two reigning parties and made a new government. The Commonwealth Party won a majority due to the plain fact that the people wanted to see some change and for it they were even willing to bring newcomers in the hope that they would be the one to do so. The party adopted the Beveridge report as its manifesto after noticing that there was a gap between the previous existing parties. The older organizations were looked upon with contempt and now the stage was set for a new fresh start. On December 2nd 1942 the Beveridge Report appeared amidst mixed opinions. Some viewed it as a positive step towards citizen welfare whereas others believed otherwise. The positive aspects of the Beveridge Report which are recognizable can be that most people viewed it as a crystallized version of the Capitalist theory and that it was a practical approach to handling the situation. Even though people viewed it in a positive light in a clear majority much credit could be given to the press support it was getting as being a welfare policy benefiting all. But however, during the drafting of the Beveridge proposal the government had serious doubts as to applying it for the general populace. This could be due to the fact that where Beveridge, the economist who proposed the concept, was aiming to help the true needy people who deserved the state's help the report was a general welfare policy which would affect 7 million individuals. It offered family allowances, free health service and full employment with the aim of abolishing poverty. It appeared that the government would have some issues in incorporating the Report as a rule but after severe pressure from the Parliament it had no choice and it was officially declared law (Abel-Smith, 1992) The negative aspect of the Beveridge Report was that it encouraged an element of society to live off the hard earnings of others as they were secure that the state would take care of them. This affected the overall output of the production of the state and by 1944 the political parties were trying to put together much more realistic and feasible options for their Welfare policies. This proved to be a difficult task as most people now took all these services offered under the Beveridge Report for granted. Taking the facilities away would have instigated trouble amongst the specific element of the populace. The selfish and unresponsive behavior of the political parties wasn't helping much either as they did not want to amend the rule as it would have affected their seats and they would lose out on their voters. Both these conflicting attitudes delayed any real change. Expectations of the people and the actual laws implemented saw a widening gap and the nation could not match their policies with what was expected of them (Pope, Pratt & Hoyle, 1986, page 259). Even now people wonder as to why the steps and measures taken by the government evoked such little response from the people and the attitude of indifference towards the government is still discussed with various theories pitched about but no definite proof available. Works Cited 1. P. Alcock, Students Companion to Social Policy, Blackwell 2003 2. Daniel Yargin & Joseph Stanislaw, Commanding Heights- The Battle Between Government and the Marketplace That Is Remaking the Modern World 1998 3. Richard M Titmuss, Problems of Social Policy, 1950 4. Angus Calder, The People's War: Britain, 1939-45, 5. N Timmins, The five giants, Fontana 1996. 6. H Glennerster, Paying for welfare: towards 2000, B. Blackwell 1985 7. G Hughes, G Lewis (ed), Unsettling welfare, Routledge 1998. 8. J Baldock et al (eds), Social Policy, Oxford University Press 1999 9. Paul Addison, The Road To 1945, Jonathan Cape 1975 10. Harry Eckstein, The English Health Service: Its Origins, Structure and Achievements,1959 11. Arthur Marwick, Total War and Social Change, Palgrave Macmillan 1988 12. Paul Addison, Now the War Is Over: A Social History of Britain 1945-51, Pimlico 1995 13. Lawrence R. Jacobs, The Health of Nations: Public Opinion and the Making, Cornell University Press 1993 14. Sean Glynn, Alan Booth, Modern Britain: An Economic and Social History, Routledge 1996 15. Rex Pope, Alan Pratt, Bernard Hoyle, Social Welfare in Britain,1885-1985, Routledge 1986 Read More