Why did the conservatives win the 1951 election?

Página 1

Why did the Conservatives win the 1951 election?

The debate on the 1951 election result has centered around the extent to which it was Labour weakness or conservative strengths that determined the outcome. Although its possible to say that Labour failings in their two administrations of 1945-51 were responsible for their defeat in 51, however it would be wrong to see the result of 1951 general election as mainly a vote against the Labour party as there were many positive aspect to the Conservative campaign. However there is debated that the electoral system serves as a third element. The electoral system shows that Labour polled more votes that Conservatives, yet won fewer seats because of the first-past-the-post system, added to by the Liberal party's poor performance. Some could say that the electoral system was the most important in the Conservative win of 1951.

Paragraph one

In the 1951 election- Labour needed 47,283 votes and in contrast the Conservatives vote per seat had declined to 42,733 as a result of the first-past-the-post system whereby Labour piled up votes in the safe seats and won 200,000 more than conservatives, but the Conservatives won many of the marginal Labour seats. The changes meant that Labour had to win 2 per cent more of the popular vote to win the same number of seats because of the redistribution of seats resulted in some of their seats becoming marginal or simply increased the number of votes they could win in already safe seats. The problem was made worse for Labour by the decline in the Liberal party, whose fell from 2.6 million to 720,556 in 1951. The liberals did not contest every seat and many ex-liberals voters turned to the Conservatives, helping them Labour marginal seats. Despite this Labour had increased their popular vote by 2 million but Conservatives had gained over 4 million.

Paragraph two and three

One major Labour weakness was their policies, although they had achieved a great deal and laid down some political principles that would be followed by all governments for until 1979, they were not as strong as they had been and there were many areas in their policies that the public were dissatisfied with. The difficulties of dealing with the post-war economic and financial had exhausted many of the cabinet- in the popular mind they were associated with the policies of austerity, rationing and high taxation which most of the public longed to see ended.

The Labour Government had taken Britain into the Korean war in 1950 which had only added to to the financial strains.

In contrast to the Labour party the conservatives offered an attractive programme. They promised to build 300,000 houses a year- a winning proposition considering the housing shortages- despite Labour overseeing the building of an average of over 200,000 houses a year and to give people more 'red meat' at the time when meat was strictly rationed.

The party also made it clear that they would not reverse Labour's achievements and were fully committed to the welfare state. In practice, this meant that after a period of dramatic innovation the conservatives would consolidate. In 1945 the nation wanted change and the abandonment of those associated with the failed policy of appeasement this time they abandoned the party associated with austerity.

Paragraph four and five

Another weakness of the Labour party was it's disunity; Not only was the party exhausted but it was also divided. This division was seen most clearly in the imposition of charges for dental treatment, prescriptions and glasses, which undermined the principle that the NHS should be free at the point of treatment.

Debates on this and the reduction of Labour's majority to five in the 1950 election, encouraged some MP'S to voice their concerns about economic and foreign policy which further widened divisions between the right and left of the party. The electorate was therefore faced with a party which was internally divided, while the conservatives party had recovered and reorganized itself after its defeat in 1945.

After the defeat of 1945 but by 1950 they had put in place both policies and a reorganization of the party that allowed them to recover and take advantage of Labour weaknesses. Accounts often overlook the vital work of Lord Woolton who reformed part finances and local organisation so that the party was in a stronger position to challenge Labour. He was aided by an influx of young talented politicians into the party such as Reginald Maudling who gave the party new ideas and dynamism. Labour's nationalization of the iron and steel industry provided a contentious issue around which the party could challenge the government. In addition Winston Churchill was still a popular figure and many still saw him as a hero for leading the country to victory in the war and wanted to thank him.