Modern Britain-John Irwin

Modern Britain

Modern Britain

An introduction

Third edition

John L.Irwin

London and New York

First published 1976by Unwin Hyman Ltd

Simultaneously published in the USA and Canadaby Routledge

29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group

This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005.

“To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’scollection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.”

© John L.Irwin 1976, 1987, 1994

All rights reserved. No part of this book may bereprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by

any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now knownor hereafter invented, including photocopying and

recording, or in any information storage or retrievalsystem, without permission in writing from the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication DataA catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data has been applied for

ISBN 0-203-98523-0 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 0-415-09563-8

To Christina and Tom, with love.

Contents

Preface to the first edition vi

Preface to the third edition vii

1 Introduction to Britain 1

2 The system of government 7

3 Local government 51

4 The legal system 57

5 The welfare state 71

6 Education 83

7 The industrial state 105

8 Life in Britain today 119

9 The mass media 133

10 Religious life 143

11 England and Ireland 151

Glossary 159

Select bibliography 165

Index 169

Preface to the first edition

In writing a book like this, one of the most difficult task s is to decidewhat should be put in and what should be left out. It is o bv iouslyimpossible to give a fully comprehensive account of all aspects of everyBritish in stitution in a book of this length, but nevertheless I hope that itwill at least serve as an introduction to some of the key features ofmodern British life. Another problem is that Britain is not a staticsociety. During the writing of the book many things have changed,while others are still in the course of changing. Whenever possibleaccount has been taken of new developments and I hope that the readeris not too irritated if he finds that an institution described in the bookhas changed its function, been modified or, possibly, disappearedaltogether. Perhaps it may serve to prove that Britain is not quite asconservative as he thought; some things do change!

I must acknowledge the assistance of many people in writing thisbook, a large n umber of them being my former students at theUniversity of Turku and the Turku School of Economics. It was theirquestions and (frequently critical) comments about British institutionsthat first persuaded me th at it should be written. I should also thank myformer colleagues at both these institutions for their help and advice, inparticular George Maude and Geoffrey Alcock, both of whom weregood enough to read the manuscript and make helpful suggestions. Ofcourse none of those who have assisted me bear any responsibility forwhat I have written—that is mine alone.

My greatest debt is to my wife, Merja, for the help, encouragementand patience, while I should also acknowledge the tolerance of mychildren, who (most of the time) allowed me to work in peace.

Preface to the third edition

In the preface to the second edition of this book published in 1987 I saidthat there had been a number of radical changes to British society sincethe first edition had appeared in 1976, largely due to the election ofa Conservative government in 1979. Since then the Conservatives havewon two further elections, in 1987 and 1992, giv ing them a sequence offour election victories. The policies pursued during these fourteen yearsof Conservative rule, first by Margaret Thatcher and subsequently byJohn Major, have been strongly right-wing in content and have hadfar-reaching effects on many British institutions and aspects of Britishlife. In the th ird editio n of Modern Britain I have retained the basicformat of the first two editions, but tried to update the text and bring innew information when ever appropriate.

As with the first two editions I have had assistance from a number ofpeople and would like to thank in particular Nigel Farrow, SoniaHubbard, Christina and Merja Irwin and Amanda Richardson, allof whom have been generous enough to help me with the preparation ofthe third edition. As with previous editions all errors and interpretationsare, of course, my own.

Chapter 1Introduction to Britain

The British Isles are situated off the north-west coast of Europe. At onetime they were part of the European landmass, but following the lastgreat ice age the level of the sea rose, and the land area becameseparated from the rest of the continent by a stretch of water. It is truethat at its narrowest p oint this water is only some twenty miles wide,but those twenty miles have had a great effect on the development ofBritain, for the gap is not only physical, b ut psychological too. Britain isat the same time p art of, but separate from, Eu rope, and this has had far-reaching implications for the development of all aspects of life—social,political, economic and linguistic.

The fact that Britain is o n the western side of the European continentmeant that when trade routes went overland to the East, Britain was onthe fringe of Europe, and was virtually ignored. With the discovery ofthe New World in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, andthe development of ocean trade routes, Britain became more important.She was in a position to dominate Western trade and was not slow totake advantage of this. As Britain was an island she had to depend onshipping for contact with her neighbo urs, whether she wanted to tradewith them or fight them. This meant that the British had to be conversantwith ships and the sea. The new trade routes lay across the oceans andBritain was to build the basis of her power and wealth on her navies.

Island states h ave usually found that the sea can be both an advantageand a disadvantage as far as defence is concerned. Although the sea canprovide a moat, it can also be a highway for invaders, and this has beenso in the case of Britain. Until 1066 the North Sea and the EnglishChannel were a wide highway, on which invaders from Germany,Scandinavia and Normandy sailed at different times. After 1066,however, the seas proved to b e a moat; for since that date there has beenno successful military invasion of Britain by a foreign power. This isvery important for an understanding of British institutions, for it has

2 MODERN BRITAIN

meant that, following the Norman Conquest, with its far-reachingimplications for English society, foreign institutions and customs havenever been forcibly imposed on the British. Thus the form ofgovernment, the legal system and many other aspects of British lifehave developed in a particularly British, some would say insular, way.This is not to say, of course, that Britain has been completely free offoreign influence throughout her history. However, ideas, institutionsand other contributions from overseas have not been introduced by aninvading army or occupying force, nor have foreign customs and waysof life been forced upon the inhabitants against their will.

This freedom from invasion can be attributed to a number of factors,one of the most important being the English Channel itself. Althoughwider seas than the Channel have been successfully crossed—while theBritish themselves have on more than one occasion invaded Europeacross the Channel—the fact remains that, whenever invasion hasthreatened, the British have managed to retain control o f the watersbetween Britain and the Continent. Another factor that should be takeninto consideration is that Britain is not on the way to anywhere. It is truethat Britain lies on the sea routes to the Americas, but by definitiona sea route does not go overland. Continental industrialists andmerchants wanting to develop their trade with the New World couldeasily avoid Britain by sailing round her coasts. Nor do any othercountries lie on the far side of Britain, so she has never been used asa corridor through which foreign armies have marched or fought, as hasbeen the fate of countries such as Belgium, Finland and Poland. Should,however, a situation develop in the future in which the United States, orany other American country, wanted to attack Europe, it is probable thatBritain would be the first country to fall. The attacker could then useBritish territory as a base for subsequent operations. Indeed, this hasalready happened, with the compliance and assistance of the Britishgovernment and people. In 1944 Europe was invaded by a force that hada very large North American contingent, and an American commander.

It has already been mentioned that the British Isles lie off the north-west coast of Europe. To be more precise, the 0° meridian passesthrough Greenwich (slightly east of London), wh ile latitude 50°Npasses through the Lizard peninsula, in the south of England, andlatitude 60°N lies in the Shetlands, off the north coast of Scotland. Fromthe south coast to the northernmost point on the Scottish mainland isa distance of just under 600 miles (966 km), while the east and westcoasts are about 300 miles (483 km) apart at their widest point.

INTRODUCTION TO BRITAIN 3

Geographically, the British Isles are made up of a number of islands,and there are also a number of different political components. Veryoften ‘England’ is used as a synonym of Britain, while ‘Englishman’ isemployed as a blanket description for all the inhabitants of the BritishIsles. This, as any Welshman, Irishman or Scot will quickly point out, isincorrect. The United Kingdom consists of England and Wales,Scotland and Northern Ireland. The Isle of Man, in the Irish Sea, and theChannel Islands, off the coast of France (and formerly part of the Duchyof Normandy), are not part of the United Kingdom. They are Crowndependencies, with their own legislative assemblies and legal systems.The Irish Republic, Southern Ireland, is politically entirely separate fromthe United Kingdom, and has been since 1922. The term Great Britain isused to describe the three countries of England, Wales and Scotland.The total land area of the United Kingdom is 93,025 square miles(240,934 sq km) made up as follows: England, 50,052 (129,634);Wales, 7,968 (20,637); Scotland, 29,799 (77,179); and NorthernIreland, 5,206 (13,484). The Isle of Man has an area of 227 square miles(588 sq km) and the Channel Islands, 75 square miles (194 sq km).

England became a united kingdom in the ninth century and Wales,which had formerly been a principality, was incorporated into thiskingdom in the early Middle Ages. England and Ireland were ruled bythe same king by the end of the thirteenth century, bu t in fact much ofIreland remained completely outside English influence. Relationsbetween England and Ireland have rarely been good, as the Irish haveresented English interference with their religious and economic life,while the English have tended to regard the Irish with a mixture ofindifference and superiority. England and Scotland came under one kingwhen James VI of Scotland ascended the English throne in 1603, thoughthe Act of Un ion, which abo lished the Scottish Parliament, was notpassed until 1707. The Sco ts retained their legal system, schools andlocal government structure. In 180 0 the Irish Parliament wasdiscontinued and Ireland, like Scotland, was ruled from Westminster.After years of bitter struggle th e twenty-six counties of Southern Irelandbecame independent in 1922, though the six northern co unties, whichhad a Protestant majority, remained part of the United Kingdom.Northern Ireland had its own parliament in Stormont in Belfast, but in1972, following several years of grave unrest, this parliament wassuspended and direct rule was imposed from Westminster. (SeeChapter 11 for a brief account of relations between England andIreland.)

4 MODERN BRITAIN

Both Wales and Scotland have nationalist movements, but since themid-1970s their influence has declined (in the 1974 election fourteennationalist MPs were returned; in the election o f April 1992 there wereonly seven), while in 1979 a proposal to ‘devolve’ certain governmentfunctions in both Scotland and Wales failed to receive the necessarysupport in referendums held in both countries.

Following the Second World War there were those who felt that thefuture of Britain lay with Europe. In spite of active campaigning,however, they were unable to convince the politicians who were inpower (or, the evidence suggests, the people of Britain), and when theEuropean Economic Community (the EEC) was established Britainremained outside. By the early 1960s opinions had changed, among thegovernment of the day at least, and the United Kingdom applied formembership of the EEC. Negotiations followed, but in 1963 Britishentry was vetoed by President de Gaulle. The application was renewedin 1967, but very little progress was made until 1970, when detaileddiscussions got under way. The Treaty of Accession was signed in early1972 and Britain formally became a member of the Community inJanuary 1973. The terms of accession were attacked by the Labour Party(even though it had been responsible for reopening negotiations in1967) and Labour announced that if they were returned to power theywould ‘renegotiate’ the terms of entry and then hold a referendum onthe question of membership. In February 1974 the Labour Party won thegeneral election and talks commenced shortly afterwards with Britain’sCommon Market colleagues. These talks continued until late spring1975 and in June that year Britain ’s first referendum took place.Opposing continuing membership of the EEC were many members ofthe Labour Party, some Conservatives, the nationalist partiesand the Trades Union Congress (the TUC); in favour were a majorityof members of the government, the Conservative leadership and most ofthe rank-and-file membership, and the majority of British industrialistsand business interests. The referendum was held on 5 June; 17,378 ,581votes (67.2 per cent of those cast) were in favour of Britain remaining inthe EEC, 8,470,073 votes (32.8 per cent) were in favo ur of leaving theCommunity. Following the declaration of the result, many of those whohad supported the antiCommon Market line announced they wouldaccept the decision, including the TUC and most of the Labourministers who had spoken against continued membership. However,European membership has remained a contentious issue in Britishpolitics. In 1986 Britain signed the Single European Act which laid thefoundations of greater unity among memb ers of the European

INTRODUCTION TO BRITAIN 5

Community, but it soon became clear that many members of the rulingConservative Party, and a small but vocal group of Labour politicians,opposed the policy. Interestingly, as the debate developed it becameapparent that a number of prominent Cabinet ministers were againstcloser links with Europe, including the then Prime Minister, MargaretThatcher. In November 1990 Mrs Thatcher was replaced as PrimeMinister by John Major (see p. 19), who declared that he was keen tostrengthen Britain’s European links. However, an increasing number of‘Euro-sceptics’ opposed this policy, being particularly resistant to theMaastricht treaty.

On 15 June 1989 Britain elected eighty-one representatives to sit inthe European Parliament: sixty-six from England, eight from Scotlandand four from Wales by means of a ‘first past the post’ system as usedin UK elections, and three from Northern Ireland by the singletransferable v ote. The Conservative Party won thirtytwo of the seats, theLabour Party forty-five; the remaining four were won by a ScottishNationalist, a Democratic Unionist, an Ulster Unionist and a member ofthe Northern Ireland Social Democratic and Labour Party.

Chapter 2The system of government

The British system of government is the product of centuries ofdevelopment that has followed no precise pattern or rigid lines, butrather a course of trial and error. This has at times led to passionatedisagreements and bitter feuds, and on some occasions to open conflict.As Britain has no written constitution and relies on a mixture of statutelaw, common law and convention (that is, practices and precepts whichalthough not part of a legal code are nevertheless generally accepted),the system of government has remained flexible. Sometimes the systemhas appeared to be too flexible, and different interpretations of the roleof certain institutions have been possible at different periods of time.Thus one will find no exact definition of the duties and powers of thehead of state, beyond the fact that Britain is a monarchy. In theory themonarch’s powers appear to be as absolute as they were in the MiddleAges, but in practice this power is restricted in a numb er of ways.

The system of government that exists in Britain today can perhaps bebest described as a mixed governmental system, with the monarchseeming to be, and Parliament in fact bein g, the senior partner. Themonarchy is hereditary, and so when a king or queen dies he or she isautomatically succeeded by the next in line. Membership of the Houseof Lords is largely hereditary, too, although there are also v ariouscategories of life peers. The lower Hou se, the House of Commons, is,however, elected by the people, and thus represents, or is claimed torepresent, their wishes. Over the centuries the Crown and the Lords—that is, the hereditary elements of the system—have gradually lost powerto the Commons, the representatives of the people.

The monarchy

The British have always been ruled by a monarch, except for a briefperiod during the seventeenth century, and even then the royal line was

8 THE SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT

restored in 1660 shortly after the death of Oliver Cromwell, the LordProtector. Thus the present sovereign, Elizabeth II, can claim unbrokendescent dating back to the Saxon kings, while other ancestors includeCharlemagne, Malcolm II of Scotland and the emperor Barbarossa.Nevertheless, the succession has not always passed peacefully back tothe next in line, and there are claimants to the throne today who basetheir case on descent from the Stuarts, who were driven from power in1688. But there is little danger that latter-day Jacobites will dethrone theQueen, as in addition to her hereditary right she reigns with the consentof Parliament, as has every monarch since William III.

Those who are opposed to the system of monarchy often start byarguing that the system is non-democratic, as the monarch is not sub jectto appointment and dismissal by the people and so can become anautocrat. Wh en it is pointed out that this could no t occur in Britainbecause the powers of the Crown are so limited, a fu rther objection ismade. Why keep the monarchy if it has no function except a ceremonialone? To answer this question we must look at the Queen’s duties andsee what in fact her functions are.

The visitor to Britain will not have to be unduly observant to noticeevidence of the omnipresence of the Queen. Coins and stamps bear apicture of the Queen’s head, the post is carried by the ‘Royal’ Mail, theships in the ‘Royal’ Navy are ‘Her Majesty’s Ships’, while ‘HerMajesty’s Government’ is made up of ‘Her Majesty’s Ministers’ andofficial letters are sent ‘On Her Majesty’s Service’. The variety andnumber of institutions bearing the prefix ‘Royal’ or ‘Her Majesty’s’suggests that the power of the monarch is considerable. But it is obviousthat the Queen is not able to supervise the activities of even a fraction ofthem, and it soon becomes evident that such prefixes appear as asynonym for ‘State’ or ‘British’ when used in official titles, and do notimply that the Queen is in direct control of all the things that are done inher name. This is in fact th e key to the problem: all the actions ofgovernment are carried out in the Queen’s name, and auto maticallyhave her approval, although she has no personal knowledge of them.

The monarch, then, is the personification of the British state. WhenLouis XIV said (or was reputed to h ave said) ‘L’état, c’est moi,’ he wasspeaking as an absolute monarch. When the twentieth-century Britishcitizen says that the Queen is the person ification of the state, he meansthat she is the symbol of the state. This is the true function of themonarchy today—a symbol—an d as such the Queen’s functions arevirtually all ceremonial. She opens Parliament but takes no part in itsdeliberations and is in fact forbidden to enter the chamber of the House

MODERN BRITAIN 9

of Commons, as all monarchs h ave been since Charles I in 1641 rashlytried to arrest five Members of whom he disapproved. No Bill canbecome an Act, that is, have th e force of law, unless the monarch hasapproved it, but the power of veto has not been used for more than twocenturies, and any attempt to block legislation by its use would provokea constitutional crisis o f major prop ortions.

It is in relation to Parliament, however, that the monarchy appears toretain real p ower, for it is the monarch who has the responsibility ofchoosing the Prime Minister and other government ministers. However,in practice, the Queen must choose the leader of the party which hasa majority in the House of Commons. It is the electorate that decideswhich the largest party will be, and the members of the party who selecttheir leader, so the Queen’s freedom of choice is extremely limited.Once a Prime Minister has been appointed it is he or she who choosesthe members of the government, and these men and women are thenpresented to the Queen as ‘her’ ministers.

Until recently the monarch exercised more freedom of action inchoosing a Prime Minister, and there have been several occasions thiscentury when the monarch’s ch oice was not the obvious one. In 1923George V asked Stanley Baldwin to form a government in sucession toBonar Law, when the next in line appeared to be Lord Curzon, theForeign Secretary. The King thought that in the twentieth centurythe Prime Minister should sit in the Commons, not the Lords, andaccordingly Curzon, to his bitter disappointment, was passed over.Again in 1940 George VI chose Winston Churchill to succeed NevilleChamberlain, when his personal preference was for Lord Halifax,because he felt that in wartime the Prime Minister must sit in theCommons. The choice has not always been between a member ofthe House of Lords and a member of the House of Commons. In 1957Harold Macmillan became Prime Minister on the retirement ofSir Anthony Eden, when many people thought that R.A. Butler wasthe stronger candidate. Nor have the Commons always won againstthe Lords, for in 1963 Lord Home was chosen to succeed Macmillan(the favourite was ag ain Mr Butler) when he was still a member ofthe House of Lords. (Lord Home subsequently disclaimed hispeerage, see p. 51.)

It now seems clear that, should a Prime Minister resign or die whilein office, the party to which he or she belonged would insist on electinga new party leader, using the procedures established by the party inquestion, that is, election by MPs in the case of the ConservativeParty; by representatives of the unions, of constituencies and of the


parliamentary party for the Lab our Party; and by all party members inthe case of the Liberal Democrats. The man or woman chosen wouldthen be asked by the monarch to take up the office of Prime Minister. Ifthe Queen exercised her theoretical prerogative of choice in defiance ofthe party’s wishes, it is almost certain that the party involved wouldrefuse to accept her candidate. However, in recent years thereappearance of a viable third party in the form of the SocialDemocrats, who subsequently merged with the Liberal Party to form theLiberal Democrats, has raised the possibility of a ‘hung Parliament’ (noparty having a clear majority) and this has led to a considerable amountof discussion about the role of the monarch if no party were to have aclear majority. In both the 1987 and the 1992 general elections opinionpolls suggested that no party would win an overall majority. In practicein both elections the Conservative Party did win an absolute majority,so the q uestion of coalitions did not arise (this is discussed in moredetail on p. 30). If it had done it seems that the monarch would have hadto wait on discussions between the various political parties in order tosee what combination of groups resulted and then ask the leader of thelargest combination to form a government. There could be difficulties,however. If there was no clear agreement—if, for example, the variousgroupings within a party refused to accept a coalition—the Crownwould have to exercise extreme caution to avoid the charge of becomingpolitically involved. What is certain is that the monarch cannot ask apolitician without parliamentary support to become Prime Minister, assuch a person would be unable to form a government, and it is notpossible to be a Prime Minister without an administration. In theory, theQueen could ask a member of the House of Lords to form a governmentmade up of members of the Lords, but in practice, as we have seen, it isno longer considered acceptable for a Prime Minister to sit in the Lords,and any such action would lead to an enormous outcry and wouldprobably harm the position of the monarch irreparably.

Another interesting point concerning the monarch’s powers is thequestion of the dissolution of Parliament. Parliament is dissolved bythe monarch but can be dissolved only with its own consent. Opinionsdiffer as to whether the monarch is bound to give the Prime Minister adissolution just because he or she has asked for one. It is thought to belegitimate for Prime Ministers to ask for a dissolution if they feel thatthey do not have a large enough majority to allow the government tocarry on its business, as Harold Wilson did in 1966, when his majoritywas three, and again in 1974 when he was head of a minoritygovernment. However, if a Prime Minister requested a dissolution for a

MODERN BRITAIN 11

frivolous reason, or if the opposition parties were split to such an extentthat they could not provide an alternative government, it is possible thatthe monarch would refuse to grant th e request. But in the latter case, ifthe Prime Minister refused to continue, and no other member of theparty agreed to form an administration, and if none of the oppositionparties was capable of forming a government, the result would probablybe chaos and a dissolution. The whole process would undou btedly domuch to discredit Parliament and the cry would go up that the Crownwas being involved in politics.

Politics in this context means, of course, party politics, with theimplication that the Crown would be called upon to express a preferencefor one party rather than another, but in modern times the monarch hasbeen expected to be completely neutral as far as parties andpersonalities are concerned. (It is generally acknowledged that QueenVictoria detested the Liberal leader W.E. Gladstone and distrusted hisparty, but she was nevertheless compelled to accept him as her PrimeMinister on no fewer than four occasions.) At the present time a Labourgovernment is as acceptable to the Crown as a Conservativegovernment (or indeed, any other government). As we have seen thegovernment is Her Majesty’s Government and the ministers are HerMajesty’s Ministers, taking their office from the Crown. Therelationship of the opposition to the Crown is also acknowledged by thefact that it is termed Her Majesty’s Opposition.

Between 1945 and the late 1970s it was generally agreed that Britainhad a ‘two-party’ system of parliamentary government: one party, eitherthe Conservative or the Labour Party, formed the go vernment while theother formed the opposition . The rump of the Liberal Party wasconsidered to be insignificant in party terms. In the 1980s the formationof the Alliance, made up of Liberals and Social Democrats (many ofwhom were former right-wing members of the Labour Party) and which,following th e 1987 election, formally became the Liberal DemocraticParty, has prompted many commentators to suggest that Britain nowhas a three-party system. However, at the present time there is still onlyone official opposition headed by the Leader of the Opposition and paida salary in respect of that position (see also p. 15 ). Thus although thegovernment and the opposition may oppose each other’s philosophiesand policies they both owe loyalty to the Crown, which represents theconstitutional system. The point is further underlined if one considersthe membership of the Privy Council, the body entrusted with profferingad vice to the monarch (see also p. 14). The leaders and many of the seniormembers of both the government and the opposition parties are Privy


Councillors, along with other distinguished perso nages of variedpolitical affiliation (or none at all).

The monarch’s lack of political involvement can have some curiousside effects. Each session of Parliament opens with the Queen’s Speech,which contains details of the government’s programme for the session.Thus if a Labour government was in power the speech might proposelegislation for nationalisation and increased state intervention in theplanning of the whole economy. The next year a change in politicalfortunes at the polls might mean that the Queen’s Speech contained aConservative programme to denationalise industry and reduce stateintervention.

While the Queen undoubtably has views of her own she must ensurethat they remain private; on virtually every controversial issue theQueen and other members of the royal family have to maintain adiscreet silence. If the Queen makes a public statement she does so onthe advice of her ministers, and the statement will have been preparedby them. Just as ministers are expected to advise the monarch oncontroversial matters, so the monarch has the right to advise ministers,and it is probably here that the monarchy retains the last of its politicalpower. Except in the rare event of abdication, the monarch is on thethrone for life, whereas ministers have a much shorter tenure of office.Over the years a monarch can build up a great deal of experience ingovernment: each day state papers and other important documents aredelivered to the palace for perusal by the Queen in her capacity as headof state. She also holds regular audiences with the Prime Minister andother ministers, who are expected to tell her what is happening in theirdepartments and in the government as a whole. Queen Victoria,who came to the throne in 1837 and died in 1901, accumulated aconsiderable amount of ex pertise about the constitutional process, andwas only too willing to proffer advice to her ministers.

A question that has received considerable attention in recent years iswhether the monarchy is too expensive. In 1952 when Queen ElizabethII ascended the th rone Parliament debated the question of the Civil Listand agreed to grant the Queen an annual sum of £475,000. The greaterpart of the Civil List was earmarked for household expenses andsalaries of members of the royal household, though £95,000 was asupplementary provision to take care o f inflation . In 1990 Parliamentagreed to provide £7.9 million a year for a period of ten years, with a built-in rise of 7.5 per cent a year. The Civil List was free of income tax,although the Queen paid tax on income from her private estates. Thefact that the Queen did not pay tax caused considerable controversy and

MODERN BRITAIN 13

in autumn 1992 the Queen announced that she was consulting thegovernment in order to establish a basis on which tax could be levied onher income. At the same time it was announced that certain othermembers of the royal family who received allowances from the CivilList wou ld no longer do so. The Prince of Wales, the heir to the throne,does not benefit from the Civil List—his income derives from theDuchy of Cornwall.

The Queen is granted the Civil List in return for handing over theCrown estates to the Exchequer, and this has happened since the time ofGeorge III. Although the Crown estates officially belong to the Crownno monarch could keep them if for some reason he or she considered theCivil List inadequate. By convention the monarch hands over theestates, and convention in this context has virtual force of law. Nor dothe Crown estates belo ng to the monarch as personal property, for mostof th em date from the time, still preserved in the usage ‘Royal’ and ‘HerMajesty’s’, when the state and the Crown were almost indistinguishable.

Nevertheless, the Queen has a considerable personal fortune, inaddition to jewellery, paintings and a stamp collection that is said to beworth ov er a million pounds. She owns two of the royal residences,Balmoral and Sandringham (when Edward VIII abdicated in 1936 hisbrother, who became George VI, had to buy it from him), thoughBuckingham Palace and other royal palaces, such as Windsor Castle andHolyrood House in Scotland, are maintained by the state. The state alsopays for the Queen’s aircraft, maintained by the Royal Air Force, theroyal yacht, which is part of the Royal Navy, and various administrativeexpenses.

In return for the royal salary—for that is what the Civil List amountsto—the Queen is expected to fulfil her constitutional duties and also toundertake tours and visits in Britain, the Commonwealth and foreigncountries. It is in this role that the Queen and her family have a veryimportant role to play, for the royal family enjoys considerable prestige,both at home and overseas. People seem to be attracted by the aura ofthe monarchy and the glamour that accompanies it, though there hasrecently been criticism of the lifestyle of some of the younger membersof the royal family, particularly in the popular press. This came toa head during 1992, a year which saw problems in several royalmarriages. The Queen described 1992 as an ‘annus horrib ilis’, and therewas much discussion of the future role of the royal family in the mediaand elsewhere. While supporters of the institution maintained that itshould continue as before, there was considerable evidence that to agreat many people changes would be welcome. In particular many


commentators suggested that the privileges pertaining to royalty shouldbe restricted to the monarch and those closest to the succession.

The glamour of monarchy is also seen in its connections with theHouse of Lords and the orders and decorations that are granted in theroyal name. Britain is one of the few countries where the aristocracyretains a certain amount of political power, and the Crown’s role in themaintenance of that power is of co nsiderable importance. In earliertimes the monarch enjoyed the right to grant titles to anyone he or sheliked, and a number of the present members of the House of Lords owetheir seats to the fact that one of their ancestors was a sovereign’sfavourite. Today, peers are created on the advice of the Prime Minister,who will consult the leaders of the other main political parties. TheQueen is also responsible for all other h onou rs that are awarded in hername, such as knighthoods and membership of various orders, thoughonce again these are given largely on political advice. Thereare, however, one or two orders that are reserved for those who haverendered special services to the sovereign. It can be argued that, becauseof its close connection with the aristocracy and its aloofness fromeveryday life, the monarchy contributes to social divisions and it seemslikely that in the next few years its role will change.

The Privy Council

It is the Privy Council’s duty to offer advice to the monarch, and it isthrough the Council that he or she exercises statutory powers. Inaddition to having this advisory function the Privy Council alsodischarges certain other duties not directly concerned with the monarch.Today its functions are almost completely ceremonial, though it isconsidered a great honour to be invited to become a Privy Councillor. AllCabinet ministers receive the title on assuming office for the first time,and distinguished public figures from Britain and the Commonwealthare invited to become Privy Councillo rs on the recommendation of thePrime Minister. Membership of the Council is for life, and there areusually about 300 Councillors at any one time, all of whom are entitledto be called ‘The Right Honourable…’ and to put the letters PC aftertheir names.

The Council is presided over by the monarch (or, in the absence ofthe monarch, by Councillors of State). Officially a quorum is three,although in practice meetings are rarely attended by fewer than fourCouncillors. The Council meets as a whole only on important occasionssuch as when a sovereign dies.

MODERN BRITAIN 15

The Privy Council has a number of committees, and it is out of thesein the past that departments of state have grown—for example, theDepartment of Education and Science. The most important committeeof the Privy Council today is the Judicial Committee. There are alsocommittees concerned with the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man,the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, the Scottish universities, thegranting of charters to municipal organisations, and the baronetage.

Parliament

Parliament consists of a lower chamber, the House of Commons, andan upper chamber, the House of Lords. It sits in the Palace ofWestminster—probably better known as the Houses of Parliament—which is situated between Westminster Abbey and the river Thames.

Parliament has the following responsibilities: it passes legislation, itprovides the finance necessary for the running of the state, and it bringsforward important issues for discussion by the Commons, or the Lords,or both. It also ratifies international treaties and agreements to whichBritain becomes a party, although in theory the making of treaties is theprerogative of the so vereign. Parliament is, in short, responsible forgoverning the country, and this g overnment is carried on by agreementbetween the political parties elected to the House of Commons bythe citizens of the United Kingdom. The majority party forms theGovernment and the largest minority party the Opposition. Thusthe minority parties admit the right of the majority party to run thecountry, while the majority party accepts the right of the minorityparties to criticise the way it is being done. Without this tacit agreementbetween the political parties the parliamentary system would breakdown. It is also important to realise that the Opposition is an alternativeGovernment and its members are potential ministers.

As we have seen there are some who claim that Britain’s traditionaltwo-party system has broken down, so that it is no longer possible toargue that there are clear-cut government and opposition parties.Nevertheless power will ultimately depend on the number of MPs eachof the competing parties has following a general election.

Members of the House of Commons are chosen by the people, atelections, bu t members of the House of Lords sit by right, as peers ofthe realm. To be passed by Parliament a Bill must go through bothHouses, and then it must be approved by the monarch before it becomeslaw. The details of this process are discussed on pp. 37–45.


The two Houses of Parliament are responsible for arranging their ownaffairs, free from interference by the Crown, or any o ther outside b ody,and these privileges, won over the centuries with great difficulty, arejealously guarded. Ultimately who sits in the Commons is decided bythe electorate, and each Member of Parliament is responsible to thevoters of his or her own constituency. However, Members of Parliamentare not deleg ates but representatives, that is, they do n ot have to put intoforce a policy that has been decided by the people who h ave chosenthem. As representatives they can act as they think fit, becomingaccountable for their stewardship only at elections. There have alwaysbeen those who feel that MPs should be more closely answerable to theviews and opinions of the electorate and, on occasion, steps have beentaken to bring pressure on the Members concerned. Indeed, the currentsituation in the Labour Party is that Members of Parliament must applyfor reselection. When this rule was introduced there were those whofeared that many sitting Members would be ‘deselected’ by smallextremist groups within the constituency parties but, in practice, most ofthe sitting members were confirmed.

Until the referendum of June 1975 there was no provision under theBritish system of government for any form of direct democracy. Thedecision to hold a referendum caused disquiet among some MPsbecause they felt that it would undermine the powers of Parliament. Inthe event the voters supported Parliament’s decision on EECmembership and so no conflict arose. It is, however, interesting to notethat since June 1975 suggestions have been put forward for nationalreferendums on other issues, notably the Maastricht Treaty on EuropeanUnion, following the examples of Denmark and France. As yet, none ofthese has been taken up, though in 1979 Scotland and Wales heldreferendums on the issue of devolution (see p. 4). Voters, of course, havethe right of direct access to their MP and can bring matters ofimportance to his or her notice. In this way the individual Memberof Parliament is the vital link between the citizens and g overnment.

The political parties

The electorate choose their representatives in Parliament at ‘generalelections’ or ‘by-elections’. At the former all seats are contested, and ageneral election must be held at least every five years. A by-electionoccurs when a seat in Parliament falls vacant, owing to the death or‘resignation’ of a member, and an election is held to select a memberfor that particular seat. In theory, electors vote for an individual, and for

MODERN BRITAIN 17

many years the ballot paper on which people recorded their vote madeno mentio n of political parties. In fact most people seem to vote for thecandidate of one of the political parties, and the majority of theelectorate, until recently, saw the choice as lying between two parties,Labour and Conservative.

However, at the 1992 general election Members of Parliamentrepresenting nine different parties were returned, though the Labour andConservative parties won far more seats than any other—Labour had271 seats and the Conservatives 336. The next largest party was theLiberal Democrats, with twenty seats. The Scottish National Party andthe Welsh nationalist party (Plaid Cymru) had both enjoyedconsiderable success in the 1970s (in the 1974 election the former hadwon eleven seats), but in the 1992 election only three ScottishNationalists were elected; Plaid Cymru did rather better, winning fourseats. The balance of the 651 Members came from the province ofNorthern Ireland, which returned a total of seventeen Members—nineUlster Unionists, three Democratic Unionists, three Social Democraticand Labour Party, and one from the Ulster Popular Unionist Party.Although the Conservative Party won an overall majority of twenty-oneover all other parties, it got into office on a minority of the votes cast:while 41.9 per cent of the electorate voted for John Major and hiscollegues, 58.1 per cent voted against them. The reason why theConservative and Labour parties have such a large number of seatscompared with the other parties can be found in the voting system,which we shall examine shortly (see p. 26–32).

The Conservative and Liberal parties can trace their origins back tothe Tories and Whigs of the seventeenth century, but it is onlycomparatively recently that the modern parties, with their elaboratebureaucracies of paid organisers and agents, have developed. Until thelast years of the nineteenth century the Conservatives and Liberals werethe only parties elected on a national basis to the House of Commons(there were a number of Irish Nationalists sitting for Irish seats, but theywere concerned primarily with Irish affairs). In 1867, 1844 and 1885working-class men were given the vote and in the 1890s a numberof socialists were returned. By the first decade of the twentieth centurythe Labour Party had become a sign ificant force in British politics.During the inter-war period the Labour Party displaced the Liberals asthe second party in Parliament, though quite a sizeable Liberal ‘rump’persisted until the Second World War.

In 1945, following the end of hostilities in Europe, an election washeld which was won by the Labour Party, by 393 seats to the


Conservatives’ 213. The Liberal Party was reduced to a mere twelveseats. The 1950 election resulted in another Labour victory, althoughwith a much reduced majority, and the following year the Conservativeswere returned to power. The Conservatives won the 1956 and 1959elections, but they were turned out in 1964 by the Labour Party, whichwon with a majo rity of three seats over all other parties. In 1966 afurther election was held which gave the Labour Party a majority ofninety-six. Four years later it was the turn of the Conservatives, whowon by thirty seats, and they held office until February 1974, when theLabour Party became the largest single party in the House of Commons,with 301 seats. If the Conservatives (296 seats) had been able to do adeal with the Liberals (fourteen seats), they could have formed acoalition which would have given them a majority over the LabourParty. But the Liberals were unwilling to ally themselves with theConservatives and the Labour leader, Harold Wilson, formed agovernment. Running the country with a minority government pro ved tobe extremely difficult, and in October a new election was held. In thiselection the Labour Party gained a majority of three seats over all otherparties.

Harold Wilson led the government until 1976, when he handed overto James Callaghan, who had been serving as Foreign Secretary. With amajority of only three Callaghan found that he had considerabledifficulty in getting legislation through the House and so an agreementwas reached with the Liberal Party, the ‘Lib-Lab pact’, whereby theLiberal MPs, although not entering into a formal coalition with thegovernment, agreed to support it in the voting lobbies. In 1 979,however, Mr Callaghan lost a vote of confid ence and the governmentresigned. The Conservatives won the ensuing general election andMargaret Thatcher became the country’s first woman Prime Minister.

The first eighteen months of the Thatcher go vernmen t were difficult,as Britain, along with the rest of the Western world, was suffering froma severe trade recession. Seeing the reduction of inflation as theirnumber one priority, the Conservatives adopted policies aimed atcutting public spending and increasing Britain’s competitiveness inworld markets. An immediate result was a considerable increasein unemployment and by 1982 the Conservative government, and thePrime Minister in particular, were experiencing extremely poor resultsin the opinion polls. In April 1982, however, the Argentinians invadedthe Falkland Islands and the government mounted an immed iateoperation to recapture them. The switch in public opinion wasinstantaneous and when the the British forces marched into Port Stanley,

MODERN BRITAIN 19

capital of the Falklands, in June, Mrs Thatcher was riding high inpopular esteem, a position she maintained into the election in May thefollowing year, which she won with a majority of 144 over all otherparties. At the 1987 election this majority was reduced to 102, but itwas still regarded as a triumph for Mrs Thatcher. It was thereforesomething of a surprise when her leadership was challenged threeyears later.

During 1990 there was ev idence of a certain amount of dissatisfactionin certain sections of the Conservative Party with their leader. In 1989she had been in power for ten years and gave every indication thatshe inten ded to remain in power until the next election and bey ond.However, by 1990 the Conservatives were badly behind Labour inthe opinion polls, while certain aspects of policy associated withMrs Thatcher, in particular the Community Charge (see p. 56) andHealth Service reforms, were causing unrest. There were also leadingfigures in the party who were unhappy with her attitude to the EuropeanCommunity, and in early November her Deputy Prime Minister, SirGeoffrey Howe, resigned. In his resignation statement he criticised boththe Prime Minister’s style and her policies. Almost immediately MichaelHeseltine, who had resigned from the Cab inet in December 1 985,announced that he would stand against Mrs Thatcher for the position ofparty leader and in effect of Prime Minister. In the first round of theelection contest on 20 November Heseltine received 152 votes toThatcher’s 204, but under the rules Mrs Thatcher had to have a 15 percent lead over her challenger, so the contest had go to a second round.Mrs Thatcher immediately declared that she intended to take part inthis, but two days later, on 22 November, she withdrew, apparently onthe advice of her Cabinet colleagues.

Her withdrawal meant that other candidates, previously loy al tothe Prime Minister, were able to declare themselves and the secondballot was between Michael Heseltine, John Major, the Chancellor ofthe Exchequer, and Douglas Hurd, the Foreign Secretary. In thiselection, which took place on 27 November, Mr Major received 185votes, two short of the 187 he required for a majority, but both hischallengers decided to drop out. The next day Mrs Thatcher resignedand the Queen appointed Mr Major, the new party leader, PrimeMinister. At the age of 47 he was the youngest Prime Minister since theEarl of Rosebery, who was 46 when he became Prime Minister in 1894.Mrs Thatcher had enjoyed the longest unbroken period of office sinceLord Liverpoo l, who left office in 1827. In April 1992 Mr Major led the


Conservative Party into a general election and, in spite of being behindin the opinion polls, to its fourth successive victory, by twentyone seats.

The Conservative Party can loosely be described as the party of themiddle and upper classes, the party of the property-owner and thebusinessman. Much of the money used to finance party campaigns, atboth local and national level, comes from large industrial concerns, andmany Conservative MPs sit on the b oards of leading companies.However, a number of studies have shown that a substantial number ofthe working class consistently vote Conservative. The reasons are notentirely clear, but it has been suggested that in some cases people whohave improved their social position vote Conservative as one way ofdemonstrating this. Others, it is thought, vote Conservative because theyfeel that Conservatives have a better understanding of the waygovernment works. This attitude seems to be found mainly in countryareas. The Conservatives draw most of their support from rural areas,small towns and the residential suburbs of large cities. It is also true thatmost of the Conservatives’ support is found in the south of the country.

The Labour Party has always had strong links with the trade unionmovement and much of its financial backing comes from this source.Some unions nominate candidates for particular seats, makingthemselves responsible for electoral and other expenses. This su pport isof considerable importance to the party, as for obvious reasons it cannotrely on assistance from large industrial combines. The Labour Partydraws most of its support from what is usually regarded as the workingclass, but also attracts votes from certain sections of the middle classand a core of intellectuals who are regarded with considerable mistrustby some party members. The traditional Labour voter, however is theindustrial worker, who is also a trade unionist. The Labour Party isstrongest in industrial districts and urban areas. In recent years there hasbeen a considerable shift from the industrial manufacturing sector (seepp. 108–10) which has indicated to some observers that the strength oftraditional Labour support is in inevitable decline.

The Labour Party has always been a somewhat uneasy alliancebetween right-wing and left-wing socialists, and at times this unease hasled to open conflict as left and righ t have argued about issues such aspublic ownership, economic policy and nuclear weapons. Followingtheir defeat in the 1979 general election it is generally acknowledgedthat the Labour Party moved to the left, under the leadership of MichaelFoot, who took over from James Callaghan in 1981. Neil Kinnock, whosucceeded Foot as leader in 1983, came from the left wing of the party,but he gradually moved towards the centre as the decade progressed,

MODERN BRITAIN 21

seeking to attract voters from discontented Conservative and Liberal/Social Demo crat supporters. After a third successive election defeat in1987 he speeded up this process in spite of bitter attacks from somemembers of the Labour Party both inside and outside Parliament,particularly those on the so-called ‘hard left’. In 1992 Labour—andindeed, many others in the country—relying on the evidence of theopinion polls, believed that their time had come, but the Conservativesunder their new leader, John Major, won, albeit with a considerablyreduced majority.

Kinnock resigned almost immediately and was replaced in July 1992by John Smith, who seemed to be inclined to speed up rather than slowdown the move to the centre.

At one time the second large party in Parliament was the LiberalParty During the twentieth century, however, it has been replaced by theLabour Party, for while the Co nservatives seem to have been able toadapt to changing circumstances, the Liberals appear unable to find arole in modern conditions. After an impressive start in the Liberaladministration of 1906 to 1916, the party virtually tore itself apartduring and after the First World War. Even so, the Liberal Party has notdisappeared completely, and according to some optimists the Liberalrevival is merely a matter of time. However, its progress has beenpainfully slow. At the beginning of the 1960s the Liberals had only sixseats in Parliament, although in 1962, against all expectations, they wona by-election in Orpington. In the general election of 1964 theirrepresentation had grown to nine seats, but it was only fourteen tenyears later, a disheartening result when one takes into account that theywon over 18 per cent of the p opular vote.

In 1981 a new force arrived on the British political scene in the shapeof the Social Democratic Party (the SDP), formed by Labour politiciansout of sympathy with Labour Party policies. (They were subsequentlyjoined by a solitary Conservative MP.) The SDP was launched on agreat wave of popular support that was consolidated by spectacularby-election victories at Crosby in Lancashire and Hillhead in Glasgow,while a Liberal with SDP support won in Croydon. For a short time itlooked as if the Liberals and the SDP, joined in an electoral alliance,would carry all before them, but a combination of events, including theFalklands War and the reluctance of many to support the increasinglyclose links between the Liberals an d the SDP, led to a decline in thebacking for the Third Force’. In the 1983 election only six SDPmembers and seventeen Liberals were retu rned to the House ofCommons. Shortly after the election the SDP leader, Roy Jenkins,


resigned, to be replaced by Dr David Owen, who had at one time heldoffice as a Labour Foreign Secretary.

After discussions the Liberals and the SDP agreed that the formalAlliance would continue; between the election of 1983 and May 1986they won three by-elections. However, at the 1987 general election theAlliance won only twenty-two seats, seventeen of which were Lib eral,five Social Democrat. Following the election and some acrimoniousdiscussion among leading figures of both parties it was decided that thefuture lay in a formal merger of the two parties, a suggestion thatreceived strong support from the rank and file of both. David Owen andtwo Social Democrat MPs, however, refused to join the new LiberalDemocratic Party, and remained sitting as Social Democrats until the1992 election. In 1992 the Liberal Democrats, under the leadership ofPaddy Ashdown, won twenty seats.

The year following their election victory was a difficult one forthe Con servatives. As well as problems over the ratificationof the Maastricht Treaty there were disagreements over a number ofother policy issu es, while a significant minority of the party seemeddissatisfied with John Major’s style of leadership. In May 1993 the firstby-election of the parliament was held, the Liberal Democrats wonNewbury from the Conservatives, with a swing of over 28 per cent. Atthe local council elections the same month the Conservatives lost 490seats, while the Liberal Democrats and the Labour Party won 390 and90 respectively. On 29 July another by-election took place and thegovernment sustained a resounding defeat in one of its safest seats,Christchurch, in southern England. At the general election in April 1992the Conservatives had won the seat by a majority of 23,015, but in July1993 the Liberal Democrats won by 33,164 votes to the Conservatives’16,737, a swing of 35 per cent to the Liberal Democrats. An opinionpoll published in The Guardian in mid-September 1993 gavethe Labour Party a lead of eighteen points over the Conservatives, theirbest showing since the 1992 general election; the Liberal Democratswere in third place, but only three points behind the Conservatives.

One of the most interesting features of political life in the 19 90s,therefore, will be th e relationship between th e main parties who opposethe Conservatives, i.e. Labour and the Liberal Democrats. Together theyreceived more electoral votes than the government party, 1 7,560,090,compared with 14,093,007, but because of their unwillingness to acttogether they are unable to turn this advantage into seats in the House ofCommons. Although some members of both parties would welcome anopportunity for collaboration, the overwhelming majority of party

MODERN BRITAIN 23

members on both sides regard the other with considerable distrust. Inautumn 1992 there was an opportunity for the opposition parties votingtogether to defeat the government on the question of the ratification ofthe Maastricht treaty, but although Labour voted against the motion theLiberals refused to join them. In spite of the fact that a number ofConservative ‘Euro-sceptics’ refused to support the government, lack ofunity among the opposition parties meant that the government scrapedhome by three votes. In March 1993, however, th e Liberal Democrats,Labour and a group of dissident Conservatives joined forces to defeatthe government on a minor amendment to the bill to ratify theMaastricht agreement. However, the government won the subsequentconfidence motion. Some commentators consider that the policiesintroduced by Mr Kinnock, which are also favoured by Mr Smith andhis colleagues, are taking Labour close to the ground which wasoccupied by the Social Democrats in the early 1980s. They furthersuggest that, if the party can convince the electorate that the moreextreme policies of what has been termed the ‘loon y left’ have beenfinally rejected, it stands a good chance of attracting votes fromthe Liberal Democrats and ‘moderate’ Tory voters. Others, on the left ofthe party, say that, far from seeking election on a social democraticprogramme, the Labour Party should return to its socialist roots.

The dominant party in Northern Ireland is that o f the Ulster Unionists,and nine of the province’s MPs elected in 1992 belong to the partyThere are also three Democratic Unionists, one Ulster Popular Unionistand four Social Democratic and Labour Party Members. Allthe Unionist parties favour the maintenance of links between NorthernIreland and the rest of the United Kingdom and fervently oppose anyattempt to unite Ulster and the Republic of Ireland. At one time theUnionists were closely affiliated with th e Conservative Party butthe troubles that have afflicted Northern Ireland since 1969 have led to abreach between the Conservatives and the various branches of theUnionist camp. Until the 1992 general election there was also a SinnFéin MP, who supported the nationalist cause and refused to take hisseat at Westminster. In April 1992 the seat was won by the SocialDemocratic and Labour Party.

Of considerable interest in recent years have been the fluctuatingfortunes of the nationalist parties. Although Plaid Cymru (the Welshnationalists) and the Scottish Nation al Party regularly put candidates upfor Parliamen t, during the 1950s and 1960s they rarely attracted manyvotes. However, in the early 1970s support increased and in the electionof October 1974 the Scottish Nationalists won eleven seats while their


Welsh counterparts won three. This, however, represented the high pointof their achievement. In 1975 the government announced that limiteddevolution, a transfer of powers stopping short of self-government,would be introduced for Scotland and Wales and in 1979 referendumswere held in both countries to gauge the popular mood towards theproposals. In the event, only 12 per cent of the Welsh electorate and 33per cent of the Scottish electorate voted in favour of the proposals andthe government concluded that this did not justify the introduction ofdevolution. As a result the nationalist parties withdrew their supportfrom the Prime Minister, James Callaghan—an act that led to his defeaton a motion of no confidence in March 1979 and his subsequent defeatat the polls two months later. Iron ically, the ensuing election yieldeddisastrous results for the nationalists: they lost ten of their fourteenseats, leaving the Scottish Nationalists with two seats against the eleventhey had previously held, and Plaid Cymru with two as opposed to thethree they had represented before the election was called. This patternwas repeated at the 1983 election, while in 1987 the ScottishNationalists won three seats, the Welsh nationalists th ree. In 1992the results were three to the Scottish Nationalists and four to PlaidCymru.

Parliament

Elections The members of the House of Commons (Members ofParliament) are elected by those of their fellow citizens who haveattained the age of 18 and are not specifically disqualified from votingby law (see p. 26). General elections must take place at least every fiveyears, though there is no fixed date on which an election must be held.In practice the choice of the election date almost invariably rests with thePrime Minister of the day, and it is o bvious that he or she will choose atime that will giv e his or her party the maximum advantage. As we haveseen, a Prime Minister with a valid reason for a dissolution (and validreasons are not difficult to find) would encounter no difficulty from themonarch, so within the limits of the five-year rule a Prime Minister hasconsiderable scope for manoeuvre. One factor that may restrict thisfreedom of actio n is the size of the government’s majority, for theinability to carry through a legislative programme can bring downa government more quickly than anything else. Given a reasonablemajority, however, a government can put itself in a strong positionwhen a general election is due. Apart from the great advantage ofselecting the date, the government can arrange its legislation in such a

MODERN BRITAIN 25

way that the period immediately before an election sees measures thatwill make the administration popular with the voters. There is, ofcourse, the danger that if the government is too generous the oppositionparties will immediately suspect that the tho ughts of the Prime Ministerare turning towards the ballot box. Indeed, by the time a governmententers its fourth year, parliamentarians, political commentators and thegeneral public are all keeping a close eye on events in the hope offinding out when the next election will o ccur.

Once the Prime Minister has decided that the time has come for anelection the monarch is asked for a dissolution and Parliament isterminated by royal proclamation. Polling day is seventeen working daysfrom the date of dissolution. As soon as Parliament has been dissolvedthe Lord Chancellor issues writs for the holding of fresh electionsthroughout the country, and these writs are sent to the returning officersin each parliamentary constituency. In urban constituencies thereturning officer is the chairman of the district council; in ruralconstituencies the sheriff of the county performs the du ties of the office.In Scotland the appropriate officer is the sheriff and, in NorthernIreland, the under-sheriff. The returning officer appo ints a deputyreturning officer, usually the clerk of the council, and it is this official whoactually arranges the election. Details of arrangements for the electionmust be published by the returning officer by 4.00 p.m. the day after thewrits have been issued.

The election is now formally under way and all those involved in ithave been informed of the fact. The most important participants are, ofcourse, the voters who are actually responsible for choosing the MPs.Each constituency has a register of voters and this is broug ht up to datein November each year. This enables new electors to be entered in theregister, while people who are no longer resident in the constituencyhave their names removed , for the vote depends on residence, that is,everybody votes in the constituency in which he or she lives. Until 1948some people had two votes: if they lived in one constituency and hadbusiness premises elsewhere they were also entitled to a business vote,while graduates of the older universities could vote for ‘universityseats’. These forms of voting were abolished by the Representation ofthe People Act of 1948, and so it is only from that date that Britain hasaccepted the principle of ‘one person, one vote’. Even today there are afew exceptions to the principle. Apart from those under 18 years of age,peers and peeresses in their own right, persons of ‘unsound mind’ andfelons (those serving criminal sentences of more than twelve months)are not allowed to vote. Also excluded are people who have been


involved in electoral offences. People who are away from home onpolling day, or are serving overseas in an official capacity, can makearrangements to vote by post or by proxy.

A constituency usually consists of about 60,000 voters, although asthe populatio n may change from one election to the next there is aBoundary Commission, which constantly reviews constituencyboundaries and recommends adjustments when necessary Thusconstituencies may change or alter in size, while entirely new seats maybe created, and these changes may also produce a change in votingpatterns. In 1992 there were 524 constituencies in England, thirty-eightin Wales, seventy-two in Scotland and seventeen in Northern Ireland.

If the electors are the most important actors in the election drama,next in order of importance are the candidates. Any man or woman over21 can be a candidate at a parliamentary election, with the followingexceptions: peers and peeresses in their own right, lunatics, felons andthose who have commited electoral offences, that is, the samecategories as are excluded from voting, with the following additions:clergymen of the Church of England or the Roman Catholic Church,undischarged bankrupts an d those holding ‘o ffices of profit under theCrown’. The last includes civil servants and members of the armedforces; if they wish to stand for Parliament they must first resign.

Once he has decided to stand, the prospective candidate must fill innomination papers, which contain his or her full name and occupation,and these are then signed by a proposer, a seconder and eight otherelectors of the constituency in which the candidate is to stand. Thenomination form must be handed in to the returning officer not laterthan the eighth day after the proclamation su mmoning the newParliament. The candidate must also put down a deposit of £500 whichis lost if the candidate does not receive at least 5 per cent of the votes cast.The purpose of the deposit is to discourage frivolous candidatures.

Having declared themselves, candidates must now convince thevoters that they are the best person to be their MP, and indeed if theyare wise they will have been doing so for some time before the election.As has already been pointed out, virtually all the seats at a generalelection are fought on a party basis. The candidates are selected bythe local party organisation, and are then supported by this organisationin their fight for the seat. Both the major parties have a branch in nearlyevery constituency, wh ile the Liberal Democratic Party also hasconstituency organisations, though their coverage is not ascomprehensive as that of the larger parties. If the candidate wins theseat the local party continues its support, often providing an office

MODERN BRITAIN 27

where constituents can be interviewed, and secretarial asisstance. Inboth main parties the local parties are responsible for the selection ofcandidates, although the central organisation can intervene if itconsiders that the choice is u nsuitable or detrimental to the party’sprospects. The local parties, however, guard their independencejealously, and central interference is relatively rare.

In most cases the local constituency party supplies the candidate withan agent, and it is this person’s job to direct the election campaign inthat particular con stituency. Some wealthy constituency organisationshave salaried full-time agents. Those that are less well off rely on a part-time agent, or so meone recruited for th e period of the election. Theagent arranges meetings at which the candidate can meet the public andget his po licies and personality over. The agent is also responsible forarranging ‘canvassing’, the backbone of election work, which consists ofthe candidate and helpers knocking on doors and asking voters for theirsupport. There is a certain amount of disagreement as to how effectivecanvassing is, but few agents would have the courage to suggest that itis unnecessary. Another important duty of the agent is to keep an eye onexpenditure, to ensure that election expenses do not exceed the legal limit,which is £4,330, p lus £0.037 pence for each electo r in a boroughconstituency, or £0.049 pence in a county constituency

The local party is greatly helped if its candidate has been the MP forthe constituency in the previous Parliament. Even if he or she has notbeen particularly effective, the candidate’s name will probably be betterknown than that of any opponent, who may well have visited theconstituency for the first time on the evening of his or her adoptionmeeting. (Candidates do not have to live in the constituency they standfor, though many buy or rent a house there if they are elected.)

Studies have shown that at national elections people tend to vote for aparty rather than for a person, and it is therefore important that thecandidate is identified with the party for which he or she is standin g. Ithas been estimated that when all the candidates in a constituency arestanding for the first time their individual characteristics make adifference of only a few hundred votes. Of course, a few hundred votescan be of great importance in the simple majority vote system, as isillustrated by the following example from Caithness and Sutherland(Scotland) in the 1945 election:


The Conservative was elected, even though the Labour candidatereceived almost as many votes. If the Labour and Liberal votes areadded together it will be seen that nearly twice as many people votedagainst the Conservative as voted for him. It is an interesting feature ofthe British system that it is not uncommon for an MP to represent aconstituency in which more people have voted against than for him orher, though the results are not always as dramatic as in the exampleabove.

Another disadvantage of the majority vote is that it does notaccurately reflect the wishes of the electorate as a whole, as a party canwin a larger share of the popular vote th an its op ponents but still en d upwith fewer seats. This is due to the fact that in many constituencies alarge number of votes are ‘wasted’: a candidate returned with a majorityof one is just as much a Member of Parliament as a candidate who winsa majority of 20,000. Another feature of the system is that a small partymay get a large number of votes at a general election in the country as awhole but if the voters are spread out over more than 600 constituenciesthe number of seats actually won will be low in proportion to thesupport it can muster. These points are illustrated by the election resultsfor 1951, Febru ary 1974 and April 1992.

In 1951, although the Labour Party received more votes than theConservatives, the Conservatives won more seats:

Thus the Conservatives formed the government. In February 1974,however, the result was:

MODERN BRITAIN 29

In this case the Labour Party won fewer votes than the Conservativesbut five more seats. There were also thirty-six MPs who belonged toneither the Conservative Party n or the Labour Party. (The thirty-seventh‘other’ was the Sp eaker.) For a few days it was far from clear what wasgoing to happen. While the commentators discussed the pros and cons ofminority governments and coalitions, the politicians vied with oneanother to give their interpretation of the electorate’s wishes. It was onlywhen the Liberals rejected the idea of entering a coalition with theConservatives that Edward Heath, the Conservative Prime Minister whohad called the election, decided to resign, giving up the seals of office toHarold Wilson.

In April 1992 John Major was returned to power with a majority oftwenty-one seats, though with only 41.9 per cent of the votes cast:

It is because of results like these that there has been increasing pressurein recent years for a change in the electoral system. It has been arguedthat the great advantage of the British ‘first past the post’ system wasthat it gave greater stability—of the twenty-five elections held in thepresent century twenty produced an overall majority. It is interesting tocompare this with Finland, a country where elections are conducted onthe prop ortional representation system, where only half thegovernments since independence in 1917 have enjoyed majoritysupport. Since the Second World War the average life of a Finnishgovernment has been just over twelve months; in Britain during the sameperiod the average has been three years and five months.

Not surprisingly, the most eloquent supporters of the pro portionalrepresentation system of voting come from the smaller parties,particularly the Liberal Democrats. Critics of the system suggest that, in


practice, proportional representation is no more democratic than themajority vote, as it rarely returns a party large enou gh to form agovernment on its own. Thus a coalition must be established, and as acoalition usually means a compromise on policy, members of a coalitionmay have difficulty in fulfilling their election programme. Other criticspoint out that one of the strengths of the British parliamentry system isthat MPs are elected by specific geographical constituencies and onelection are expected to represent the interests of all their constituents,whatever their political inclination. When it appeared that the LiberalDemocrats might hold the balance of power after the 1992 election theirleader, Mr Ashdown, made it clear that electoral reform would be a keyissue in deciding which of the major parties to support. While bothmajor parties declared themselves opposed to such reform, there wasevidence to suggest that they were prepared to modify that view undercertain circumstances. In the event the Conservatives won a clearmajority and it seems that the issue of electoral reform will lapse onceagain, tho ugh in spring 1993 a Labour Party committee reported infavour of a limited form of proportional representation. However, as themajority in favour of reform was small and there were immediateattacks on the findings by prominent members of the party, it does notlook as if Labour will become a champion of proportionalrepresentation overnight.

Until recently it was an interesting feature of British elections thatrelatively few voters changed their opinion from one general election tothe next, and indeed, mo st seemed to vote consistently for one party alltheir adult life. As we have seen, some commentators believe that thispattern is changing. Certainly it is the aim of all the political parties toconvince the voter that it is their policies that are the most appropriateto the needs of the country, and each of the parties produces a greatvariety of propaganda at election time. Virtually all the parties issue anelection manifesto which sets out their aims and policies, and these arediscussed and quoted at great length during the campaign, at publicmeetings, on rad io and television and in the press. Each candidate alsoprepares an election address, which is distributed to each voter in his orher constituency, and consists of a localised version of the party’smanifesto, together with question s of particular interest to theconstituency.

The whole national campaign comes to a head on polling day, whichis customarily a Thursday. Polling booths are open from 7.00 a.m. until10.0 0 p.m., but polling day is not a holiday, so workers have to vote onthe way to work or in the evening. When all the votes have been cast

MODERN BRITAIN 31

they are counted, and the result is announced by the returning officer.Interest is usually concentrated on ‘marginal’ seats, those that are mostlikely to change hands. ‘Safe seats’ are those which are regarded asunlikely to change hands no matter what the national trend is. However,even the safest seats can sometimes fall, as was seen in July 1993, whena Conservative majority of 23,015, in what was considered to be the‘safe’ seat of Christchurch , was turned into a Liberal Democrat majorityof 16,427. However, many commentators point out that by-elections arenot necessarily a good indication of voting intentions at a generalelection, and it is possible that Christchurch will revert to theConservatives at a general election.

Formation of the government Once the election is over the monarchcalls upon the leader of the victorious party to form a government.Having accepted the invitation, the new Prime Minister goes to his orher official residence, 10 Downing Street (given by George I to SirRobert Walpole, the first Prime Minister), and begins the intricatebusiness of choosing the ministers who will help run the country. Firstof all, the Prime Minister will choose the most important ministers,those who make up the Cabinet. There are no hard-and-fast rules as tohow many ministers there are in the Cabinet. In fact the size of theCabinet has been growing throughout the century, in spite of repeateddeclarations by Prime Ministers that they intend to reduce it in theinterests of efficiency.

One problem that faces th e Prime Minister when selecting colleaguesis deciding what areas of government are important enough to warrantrepresentation in the Cabinet. Some ministers, such as the Chancellor ofthe Exchequer, the Foreign Secretary and the Secretary of State forEducation, must obviously be given Cabinet seats, but the decision ismore difficult when it comes to the Secretary of State for Scotland, forexample. There are those who would say that this minister could well beleft out, but with seventy-two seats in Scotland, which couldbe vulnerable to Scottish Nationalists, it would be a brave PrimeMinister who did so. Then there are the obligations that have to be metto the different sections of the party, the left wing and the right wing, orsmaller internal groups. As has been explained, both the large politicalparties are to a certain extent coalitions. This means that the PrimeMinister must select colleag ues from all sections of the party, for if apowerful group is ignored there will inevitably be dissatisfaction. ThePrime Minister must also remember that he or she is also the partyleader, and u ltimately that position depends on party support. So forseveral days the cars of potential ministers block Downing Street while


the Prime Minister examines the hand the voters have dealt, and fromwhich the government must be found. At the end of the period ofinterviewing and consulting, the Prime Min ister will have a Cabinetconsisting of some twenty ministers, and a further seventy to eightyjunior ministers.

When they have been appointed, ministers go to Buckingham Palace,to be received by the monarch and kiss hands on appointment. TheCabinet ministers will also be sworn in as Privy Councillors, if they arenot members of the Council already. Most of the important ministerswill be members of the Commons, but the Prime Minister mustremember that there are obligations to the Lords as well, and someministers will come from the upper House, the most important of thembeing the Lord Chancellor.

If the party that was in power before the election is returned to powerthe construction of government is far easier. However, the PrimeMinister may use the election as an excuse to effect some changes,while it is always possible that the voters may have forced changes byfailing to re-elect a former minister.

Although both the Conservative and the Labour parties havea’Shadow Cabinet’ (the Conservatives prefer the term The Leader’sCommittee’) when in opposition, consisting of the leading oppositionspokesmen on important issues, membership of it does not guaranteethem a place in the government if the party comes to power. TheLiberal Democrats also nominate Members to speak on key issues,though as there are relatively few Liberal Democrat MPs a Membermay have to take responsibility for more than one subject.

The Cabinet The Cabinet consists of the leading ministers of theCrown, although its membership is decided by each Prime Ministerindividually. The Cabinet usually has around twenty members, althoughthere may sometimes be a smaller, unofficial group comprising an‘inner Cabinet’.

Cabinet meetings are usually held every Wednesday morning in theCabinet Room at 10 Downing Street, although in an emergency they canbe held anywhere. Discussions at the meeting are secret, and althoughminutes have been kept since the First World War they are notpublished for thirty years. In certain cases retired senior ministerswriting their memoirs have been allowed access to the Cabinet recordsin order to refresh their memories, and this has sometimes resulted indetails of Cabinet meetings being made known before the period ofthirty years has elapsed, though exministers are expected to observecertain conventions.

MODERN BRITAIN 33

The Cabinet is the body responsible for discussing and d ecidinggovernment policy and, as such, is the heart of the government system.It is presided over by the Prime Minister and it is he or she who isresponsible for directing the course of meetings. Discussion is free andvery often, so we are led to believe, heated, but eventually the Cabinetworks out a policy that is acceptable to all. No vote is taken, but agreementis reached or assu med to have been reached. Once a certain course ofaction has been approved by the Cabinet it becomes government policy,and all ministers accept responsibility for it, even though they may havebeen bitterly opposed in the Cabinet meeting. This concept of Cabinetunanimity and collective responsibility is very important, and anyminister who feels that he or she cannot accept a particular decision isexpected to resign.

Functions and procedure of the House of Commons At first sight aMember of Parliament’s job does not seem p articularly arduous, and itappears that he or she earns a salary of £30,854 for very little actualwork. (Members also receive an allowance of £39,960 for secretarialand research purposes.) On weekdays from Monday to Thursday theHouse of Commons does not meet until 2.30 p.m., and it usuallyadjourns at 10.30 p.m., though if necessary the House can, and does, sitthrough the night. On Fridays the House assembles at 10.00 a.m., andsits until 4.30 p.m., rising early so that MPs can visit theirconstituencies at the weekend.

Attendance in the chamb er, however, is only one part ofparliamentary work. In addition MPs must sit on parliamentarycommittees, deal with the problems of constituents, keep themselvesinformed about affairs at home and overseas, and travel both in Britainand abroad, so conscientious Members will find that they have verylittle spare time.

Many MPs combine their work in Parliament with another job; forexample, many barrister MPs still practise in the courts, while others,particularly on the Conservative side of the House, are engaged inbusiness. There is considerable support for this practice, usually on thegrounds that it h elps Members to keep in touch with the outside world,but there are many who feel that perhaps some members devote toomuch time to interests outside Parliament, and that their parliamentarywork suffers.

Once an MP has been elected he or she cannot resign until the nextgeneral election. However, if for some reason the member is unable tocontinue to serve he or she can apply for the post of Bailiff or Stewardof the Chiltern Hundreds or the Manor of Northstead. These positions


are technically offices of profit under the Crown, though they carry noactual duties, and acceptance of such office disqualifies the holder frommembership of the House. Having left Parliament, the ex-Memberimmediately resigns the stewardship. In some cases, of course, thisprocedure is unnecessary because a Member has been appointed to agenuine office of profit. In December 1985 when thirteen Ulster MPsregistered their opposition to the Hillsb orough Agreement (see p. 160)by giving up their seats at Westminister, each in turn applied either forthe Chiltern Hundreds or for the Manor of Northstead.

One of the first things a newly elected MP will find is that his or her‘seat’ does not exist. The chamber of the House of Commons is too smallto accommodate all the Members, and when an important debate istaking place MPs may have to find places on the stairs or in thegangways. During the Second World War the Houses of Parliamentwere damaged by enemy action and there were those who believed thatthe opportunity should be taken to rebuild the chamber of the Commonson a more generous scale. Winston Churchill, who was responsible forthe rebuilding, insisted that it sh ould be restored as before, on thegrounds that if the chamber was enlarged the atmosphereof the Commons would be lost, and debates would be more difficult tofollow.

The chamber is designed with the two-party system in mind. Thegovernment sits on one side, with the opposition on the other side,facing it. The leading ministers sit on the front bench on thegovernment side of the chamber, while directly opposite them areranged the leadin g spokesmen for the opposition. Behind the ‘front-benchers’ sit the rank-and-file MPs, the ‘back-benchers’.

Between the two rows of benches sits the Speaker, the chairman ofthe House, who is selected from among the Members of Parliament, andon being chosen renounces all party allegiance, to become the servantof the whole House. Because of this non-party position it is customaryfor the Speaker to be re-elected to subsequent Parliaments withouthaving to contest the election. However, on a number of occasions,candidates have stood against the Speaker on the ground that theSpeaker’s constituents have been disenfranchised, as their MP cannottake part in parliamentary debates. It has been suggested that once theSpeaker has been selected by the MPs he or she should be transferred toa titular constitu ency with no electors, but so far no move has beenmade to implement the suggestion. At one time the Speaker wasappointed by the Crown and controlled debates on his or her royalmaster’s behalf. Even today the Speaker is expected to show reluctance

MODERN BRITAIN 35

to assume office, and at the installation ceremony two Members aredeputed to drag the newly appointed Speaker to the chair of the House.While acceptance of the office inevitably means the end of a politicalcareer, it has considerable compensations in terms of prestige for aMember who is prepared to accept the fact that he or she will neverachieve Cabinet rank. On ceremonial occasions the Speaker representsthe House of Commons, and the importance of the institution issymbolised in the fact that the Speaker takes precedence over all exceptthe royal members of the House of Lord s. In 1992 following the generalelection Betty Boothroyd was elected as Speaker, the first female MP tohold the office.

The Speaker is no longer a royal nominee and the Crown has yieldedmost of its power to Parliament, but it is nevertheless still the sovereignwho opens each session of Parliament with the speech from the throne.Each autumn the Queen drives to the Houses of Parliament and ascendsthe throne in the House of Lords. The Commons are summoned fromtheir chamber by th e Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod. On receivingthe summons the members of the House of Commons file throu gh thePalace of Westminster, headed by the Prime Minister and the leader ofthe opposition, to take their place at the bar of the House of Lords. Thecontent of the Queen’s Speech will hold no surprises forthe government of the day, as it is they who have been responsible forcompiling it. For the other people in the chamber, and in the countryoutside, the speech will be of considerable interest, for it will contain anoutline of the legislation the government intends to introduce during thesession. After listening to the speech, the Commons return to their ownchamber for a debate on its contents, during which the oppositionparties will give their reactions to the government’s proposals.

The state opening of Parliament obviously owes much to tradition,and there are many who say that the whole procedure is out of datetoday; some MPs have even suggested that when Black Rod comes tocall them to the Lords they should refuse to go. However, the problemis that so much of the recognised procedure for conducting the businessof Parliament is based on precedent and custom that to rev ise part of itwould entail a revisio n of the rest, and this might well upset the delicatebalance between the different sections of the legislative machine. Inaddition to custom and precedent both Houses of Parliament have theirown standing orders, and it is the duty of the Speaker to bear all theseelements in mind when conducting the business of the Commons. TheSpeaker, or Deputy Speaker, is responsible for supervising debates andthe voting that takes place when the debate is over. The Speaker or her


deputy announces the result, and in the rare event of a tie has the castingvote.

From Bill to Act There are four main classes of parliamentary Bills:Public Bills (Finance Bills), Public Bills (Non-finance Bills), PrivateMembers’ Bills and Private Bills. Public Bills are those which affect thewhole community and can, in theory, be introduced by either thegovernment or the opposition. In practice, since most Public Billsinvolve the spending of money, they are nearly always introduced bythe government. Private Members’ Bills are introduced by individualMPs, while Private Bills deal with the interests of a local authority (thatis, with local government), a company or an individual.

Public Bills Before a Bill is introduced to the House, its mainoutlines and the principles it embodies are discussed by the Cabinet andother ministers involved. Once agreement has been reached on the basicform of the Bill, it is drafted by a team of ministerial experts andlawyers. When the Bill has been prepared, the minister who is responsiblefor it gives notice of its intended introductio n and on the appointed daythe formal first reading takes place. There is no discussion at this stage;the minister merely accepts responsibility for the Bill and the Clerk ofthe House reads out the title. A day is given for the second reading andthe Bill is sent to the printers. Afterwards it is circulated to all Membersso that they can study it in detail.

When the day of the second reading arrives the minister in chargemakes a speech explaining the aims of the Bill and why it has beenintroduced. At the end of the speech it is proposed that ‘the Bill be reada second time’, and it is at this stage that the debate on the Bill begins inearnest. If the Bill is an important one it is customary for the first replyto come from the leading opposition spokesman on the matter inquestion, and this speech will present the party’s views on the issue.The minister and the opposition front bench speak from a position nearthe dispatch boxes, which are kept on the table of the Clerk of theHouse, but back-benchers speak from where they are sitting. Byconvention only front-benchers use notes; other Members are expectedto rise from their seats and give extemporary speeches. The rules ofparliamentary debate are strict and closely adh ered to. Members areaddressed by the Speaker and by their fellow members by the name oftheir constituency, the Honourable Member for—; members of the PrivyCouncil are addressed as ‘Right Honourable’; barristers in addition tobeing ‘Hon ourable’ or ‘Right Honourable’ are ‘Learned’; retiredmembers of the armed forces are ‘Honourable’ and ‘Gallant’. If aMember is referred to by name during a debate it will be a rebuke from

MODERN BRITAIN 37

the Speaker, for a ‘named’ Member will have offended against the rulesof the House and be liable to suspension. Parliamentry procedure alsodistinguishes between words and phrases that are permitted and those thatare not. For example, Winston Churchill once called a fellow member aliar; on being reminded that ‘liar’ was an unparliamentary word,Churchill withdrew it and said that the member was guilty of a‘terminological inexactitude’, which amou nts to the same thing.

The debate con tinues until all those who have a contribution to makehave spoken, or until it is felt that proceedings must be brought to aclose because time is running out. Lack of time is one of Parliament’sgreatest problems, and so usually only a Bill that proposes radicalchanges in the law will be given sufficient time for all those interestedto speak. Even so, Members are expected to keep their contributionsbrief, and an MP who continues for more than ten minutes will find thatother Members are getting restless. Debates are usually b rought to anend by the House rising at 10.30 p.m., but if necessary the House can sitlonger, even all through the night. If a Member propo ses that ‘thequestion now be put’ and the proposal is accepted by at least a hundredMembers the debate is brought to a close.

Sometimes it is felt necessary to speed the passage of a controversialBill by the use of the ‘guillotine’. In that case a timetable is worked outfor the Bill and strictly adhered to, even if all who want to speak on theissues it embraces have not been able to do so. The guillotine cannot beused too frequently because, if it was, members might suspect that thegovernment was trying to limit debate on controversial topics.The Speaker can also intervene to cut short a long-winded or irrelevantspeech, which means that opportunities for ‘filibustering’ are limited.

When the debate is ended the question is put by the Speaker. Those infavour call out, ‘Aye,’ those against, ‘No.’ The Speaker judges therelative strength of these verbal responses and an nounces the result.Frequently, however, there is disagreement with the Speaker’sinterpretation and a division follows. Division bells ring all over thePalace of Westminster (and in at least one public house near by, not tomention some flats and houses in Westminster owned by MPs) andevery MP who hears the bell is expected to drop what he or she is doingand rush to the chamber to vote. Six minutes after the bells have beenrung the doors of the chamber are locked and the Members file outthrough th e division lobbies, the ‘ayes’ to the right and the ‘noes’ to theleft. As the Members pass through the lobbies they are counted bytellers, who then report the numbers to the Speak er so that she canannounce the result of the voting.


In theory MPs have the right to decide into which lobby they will go,but on most occasions they are expected to follow the ‘party line’. Ifthey are members of the party that is in office they are expected to votefor government legislation, while an opposition member is expected tovote according to the directives of the party, which usually meansagainst the government. If Members vote in defiance of the instructionsissued by the party they are likely to find themselves in serious troublewith the whips. Each party has a Chief Whip who, with the assistantwhips, is responsible for maintaining party discipline. (The name isderived from the ‘whipper-in’ in fox hunting, whose job is to ensurethat the h oun ds are kept under control.) The Government Chief Whip isalso the holder of a ministerial post, Parliamentary Secretary to theTreasury. The Chief Whip and assistant whips act as middlemenbetween party opinion and ministers, and play an important role inensuring that communications are kept open between the front benchand its supporters. If controversial legislation is planned it is the duty ofthe whips to make sure that the party will support the leadership and togive ample warning o f any potential rebellion. The Government ChiefWhip is not a member of the Cabinet but attends Cabinet meeting s, sothat Cabinet ministers can be given up-to-date information ab out partyattitudes and morale. The Whips’ Office is also responsible for ensuringthat enough MPs from the party are available if a division is called. Theopposition whips will always try to have sufficient MPs to defeat thegovernment, while the whips on the government side have to ensurethat there are always enough of their Members present to prevent thishappening. Whips also ensure that there is a quorum in the chamber. Ifthere are fewer than forty Members present a Member may challenge aquorum, the division bells are rung, and if enough Members do notappear within four minutes the Hou se is adjourned.

If a member cannot attend a debate which is expected to end in adivision arrangements are made to ensure that this absence will notaffect the vote. This is done by finding a member of an opposing partywho will also be absent and arranging a ‘pair’, so that they cancel eachother out. On certain occasions, such as when a very important debate istaking place, the pairing system is suspended, as all parties expect theirMPs to be in the chamber, or at least within range of the d ivision bells.Each week every MP belonging to a major party receives a letter fromthe office of his party’s whips. The letter (also known as a whip)contains details of parliamentary business for the next week an d informsthe Member how important it is for him or her to be at Westminster. If amajor debate is in the offing all parties will insist on Members

MODERN BRITAIN 39

cancelling engagements outside London, or at least ensure that they canget back in time for the division. So that there is no confusion overwhich items are considered to be of prime importance they areunderlined three times, hence the expression ‘a three-line whip’. A two-line whip is customary if the business is not so pressing, and in that casea Member’s presence is requested unless a pair has been arranged. Aone-line whip indicates that it is thoug ht unlikely that a vote will takeplace.

To ig nore a three-line whip is tantamount to defying the partyleadership. Such action will almost certainly lead to an inquiry, which inturn could lead to expulsion from the party, unless a really convincingexplanation is given. It might be considered that the power exercised bythe whips is a gross interference with the freedom of the individualMPs, but the party system depends upon party unity , and should thisbreak down organised government would soon prove impossible.

In virtually every Parliament there are MPs who leave or are expelledfrom their party. Sometimes the break is final. There are even caseswhere Members have crossed the floor of the House to join anopposition party, though on other occasions the whip is rejected orwithheld only temporarily. If a former party member has not returned tothe fold by the next general election it is probable that the localconstituency party will have adopted a new candidate to fight the seat.The retiring MP then has a choice of withdrawing or standing as anindependent. While, as we have seen, it is difficult for an independent toconduct a campaign against the organisation of the major parties, it isinteresting to note that in a number of cases an MP who has beenrejected by the local party has nevertheless succeeded in carrying theelectorate and has been returned as an independent.

Should the government be defeated on a Bill, or if its majority is low,there will inevitably be cries of ‘Resign!’ from the opposition parties,who will claim that the government has lost the confidence of thepublic.

However, a Prime Minister is not bound to resign if his or hergovernment is defeated on a single occasion, particularly if the defeat isthe result of a snap division, or because bad weather has preventedgovernment MPs from reaching the House. But if the government isdefeated by large majority, or if the motio n on which it has beendefeated is one of confidence, resignatio n is virtually inevitable. Thuswhen on 28 March 1979 James Callaghan, the Labour Prime Minister,was defeated by 311 votes to 310 on the motion that This House has noconfidence in Her Majesty’s Government’ he was faced with two


options. He could either have resigned and advised the Queen to ask theLeader of the Opposition (Margaret Thatcher) to form a governmentfrom among the members of the Conservative Party, or sought adissolution of Parliament, to be followed by a general election. Hedecided to opt for a dissolution, an d in the ensuin g general election wasdefeated—the Conservatives winning 339 seats to Labour’s 268.Callaghan’s defeat on a confidence motion was the first by agovernment since 1924 when his Labour predecessor, RamsayMacDonald, suffered the same fate.

In practice, a government with a comfortable majority can bevirtually certain of getting it’s Bills passed , particularly if th ey aredealing with important issues. The Thatcher government whichsucceeded Callaghan’s certainly had no problems in introducing a largenumber of controversial measures into the House and getting thenecessary legislation passed. It did, however, encoun ter a certain amountof opposition to some measures from the House of Lords (in spite of thatchamber’s built-in Conservative majority) and were forced to backdown on a number of issues. Their lordships blocked a number of Bills—including some of the legislation relating to the abolition of the GreaterLondon Council (see p. 54) althou gh in this case the legislation cameback to the Commons for re-endorsement (see p. 48).

After the second read ing the Bill moves to the committee stage, whenit is taken apart and discussed in detail, clause by clause. ImportantBills, including all finance Bills, are considered by a committee of thewhole House. When this occurs the mace, the symbol of the Speaker’sauthority, is placed below the Clerk’s table, and the Speaker vacates thechair, to be replaced by a chairman who conducts the ensuing discussionin a more informal manner than when the House is debating a motion.The committee ends when the motion That the chairman do reportprogress and ask leave to sit again’ has been passed. The mace is thenrestored to its usual position and the Speaker resumes the chair. Lessimportant Bills are dealt with by the five or six standing committees.These committees consist of between twenty and fifty MPs selectedfrom all parties, in the ratio in which their parties are represented in theCommons. Committees usually sit in the morning, in special rooms inthe Palace of Westminster, and tend to be very time-consuming.The committee reports back to the House after it has considered theBill, and it is at this stage that the amendments proposed by thecommittee are either accepted or rejected by the proposer, while furtheramendments can also be put forward. Not infrequently a Bill is referred

MODERN BRITAIN 41

back to the committee for further discussion. (standing committees mustnot be confused with select committees (see p. 45).

After the committee stage th e Bill is given a third reading, and if it ispassed it goes to the House of Lords. Here it goes through the samestages as it did in the Commons, though if the Lords proposeamendments that alter the nature of the Bill it must be returned to theCommons for further discussion. The Lords may not reject a financeBill, nor can they delay any other Bill for more than one session. Theimplications of this are discussed in the section on the House of Lords(p. 48). If a Bill has been initiated in the House of Lords it must then goto the House of Commons for discussion.

Once a Bill has been passed by the Lords it is giv en the royal assent.The assent is usually given in Letters Patent and then announced by theSpeakers of both Houses. Once this has been done the Bill becomes anAct. Although in theory the sovereign can refuse to give consent to aBill, in practice the right has not been exercised since the earlyeighteenth century, during the reign of Queen Anne.

Private Bills. Private Bills are usually promoted by local authorities,though personal Private Bills can be put forward by any citizen or groupof citizens. However, largely owing to the expense of briefing a lawyerto defend the Bill in committee and the cost of getting a Bill drawn upin the first place, personal Private Bills are rare today. Private Billsintroduced by local authorities usually deal with land purchase, andoften concern the taking over of graveyards or obtaining the necessarypowers for development.

Private Members’ Bills are Bills introduced by individual Members ofParliament. At the beginning of each session a ballot is held, and MPswho come high enough in this are permitted to introduce a Bill on amatter that is of particular interest to them. A number of Fridays are setaside for the discussion of Private Members’ Bills, but only those whocome reasonably high in the ballot will stand much chance of gettingtheir Bill debated. Some of these Fridays are reserved for the firstreading of Private Members’ Bills and the remainder for later stages, soeven if a Member gets his Bill through the first reading it may get nofurther.

Apart from time there are other factors that work against PrivateMembers’ Bills. In the first place the Bill must be drawn up, a difficulttask requiring expert advice, becau se a badly worded Bill will be torn topieces by critics. Even when a Member has a Bill, and parliamentarytime to introduce it, the troubles of the wouldbe legislator are not over.One of the rocks on which many Private Members’ Bills founder is the


‘counting out’ of the House, for there are no party whips to ensure thatthere is a quorum. This is a common way for opponents of a Bill to stopits progress, for attendances on Fridays are often very poor. Anotherproblem may be that, instead of there being too few MPs interested inthe Bill, there are too many. As we have seen there are relatively fewdays available for the discussion of Private Members’ Bills, and if theopponents of a controversial Bill can make the debate stretch out, theend of the session may be reached before the Bill has been passed. ABill that has not completed its passage through Parliament in onesession must be reintroduced and the whole process begun all overagain. The only way to get over this difficulty is for the government toallow parliamentary time to enable a Bill to be discussed. PrivateMembers’ Bills dealing with controversial matters that the governmentof th e day is, for one reason or another, unwilling to introduce, but towhich it is broadly speaking sympathetic, may therefore be debated andpassed outside the time reserved for Private Members’ Bills.

If Members are unlucky in the ballot for Private Members’ Bills theystill have an o ppo rtunity to introduce a Bill under the ‘ten-minute rule’.Any Tuesday or Wednesday, at the end of Question Time, an MP maypropose a Bill and speak in favour of it for ten minutes. After this anyother Member can speak against the Bill for the same length of time. TheSpeaker then ‘puts the question’, and if the House accepts it this firstreading is considered complete. The problem now faced by the proposeris to find the time for the next stages of the Bill. If it can be classified as‘unfinished business’ it can be dealt with during the Debate on theAdjournment, provided that no other Member objects, for the oppositionof a single MP is enough to stop it on this occasion. The main purposeof the adjournment debate is to allow Members to raise importantbusiness. At 10.30 p.m. the House completes the business it has beendiscussing, and the motion That this House do now adjourn’ isproposed, which leads to a further debate on some question ofgovernment policy, or any other matter not requiring legislation. Othermotions to adjourn may be on matters of great public importance whichcannot be debated at any other time. A member of the government canput forward such a motion immediately after Question Time, before anyother item on the Order Paper (that is, the order of business for the day)is taken. Any other Member may also propose an emergency motion atthe same time, but if this motion is to be accepted it must be supportedby at least forty other Members. If the support required can be obtainedthe motion is debated at 7.00 p.m., and takes precedence over all otherbusiness. An emergency debate can, if necessary, continue after the

MODERN BRITAIN 43

normal time for the adjournment of the House at 10.30 p.m.; however,such debates take place only if the Speaker is co nvinced that a case forurgency has b een made.

Question Time gives the individual MP another opportunity toinfluence the conduct of the government. Question Time takes place atabout 2.40 p.m. every day immediately after Private Business, and lastsfor about an hour. Two days’ notice of questions must be given, andmost questions are answered in writing. If they wish, however,Members can insist that the minister to whom the question has been putanswers it orally in the House of Common s. Wh en the question hasbeen answered the Speaker allows supplementary questions, and often askilled questioner will reserve the full force of the question for thesupplementary, thus hoping to catch the minister off guard.If the Member is still not satisfied after pursuing the matter through asupplementary, notice can be given that it will be raised again on theadjournment.

Parliamentary questions are of considerable importance in the Britishsystem of government, because they give individual Members a chanceto keep a check on the executive. All ministers, from the Prime Ministerdownwards, are liable to be questioned, and on some occasions anapparently harmless question has revealed a highly unsatisfactory stateof affairs. More than once a minister has had to resign as a result ofinformation that was first brought to light by a parliamentary question.Not all questions are of such a dramatic nature, however, and many arethe result of a constituent complaining of an injustice to the local MP, whothen follows the matter up with a question to the minister concerned.

In 1978 a Select Committee on Procedure recommended theestablishment of a series of select committees which would coverall the main departments of state. It was suggested that the committeesshould be given wide powers of reference and have the right to appointspecialist advisers. The committee also recommended that committeemembers should be appointed independently of the party whips. Theproposals were accepted in 1979, and in 1980 fourteen committees wereset up covering Agriculture; Defence; Education, Science and the Arts;Employment; Energy; the Environment; Foreign Affairs; Home Affairs;Scottish Affairs; Social Services; Trade and Industry; Transp ort; theTreasury and the Civil Service; Welsh Affairs. The membership ofthe committees is made of MPs in proportion to the size of each party inthe House of Commons. The main role of the committees is to look intothe activities of the department they are ‘shadowing’ and b y issuingreports to influence the activities of ministers. It is generally held that


because the committees have limited powers they have not been asinfluential as some of their supporters had hoped. However, in certaincases a skilful committee chairman, using well informed expertadvisers, has shown that the power of the select committee should notbe ignored.

All the business of the House as outlined above takes place in public,except on rare occasions when matters of national security arediscussed. A record is kept of all debates and questions and these areprinted in the official report, known as Hansard, after the p rinter whowas appointed to do the job in 1812.

Since June 1975 radio transmissions have taken place from both theHouse of Commons and the House of Lords. In 1983 the Lords agreedto permit the televising of debates for an experimental period, and in1985, and again in 1986, the perio d was extended. The same year theCommons voted once again ag ainst televising the proceedings of theirHouse. In 1989 the first television shots of the House of Commons werebroadcast and in July 1990 the House voted by 131 votes to 32 to maketelevision broadcasts from their chamber permanent. It is interesting tospeculate on the role of television in the dramatic events of November1990 leading to Mrs Thatcher’s resignation, notably the live broadcast ofSir Geoffrey Howe’s resignation statement. Although Sir Geoffrey didnot have a reputation as a great orator, the impact of his thoughtfullyworded and carefully delivered speech on a packed House of Commonswas considerable. As indeed was Mrs Thatcher’s last speech as PrimeMinister a short time later, an occasion which she herself declared shewas enjoying.

The House of Lords

The upper chamber of Parliament is known as the House of Lords andits membership is made up of the lords temporal, who are hereditarypeers and life peers; and the lords spiritual, the bishops of the Church ofEngland. The largest group are the hereditary peers, that is, men (and afew women who are peeresses in their own right) who possesshereditary titles. They fall into several different categories. In the firstplace there are the royal dukes, members of the royal family who haveseats in the Lords but who in fact rarely participate in debates. Nextcome the non-royal dukes, the senior of whom is the Duke of Norfolk,hereditary Earl Marshal of England, whose title dates from 148 3. Dukesare followed by marquesses, who are comparatively rare, and then comeearls, viscounts and barons. All these titles pass to the next male in line

MODERN BRITAIN 45

on the death of the holder; if there is no heir the title d ies out. Althoughthe aristocracy has existed since Norman times few o f the present titlesare very ancient, virtually all of them being post-1600. At one time kingsfound titles a convenient way to reward favourites, while at someperiods of history titles have been sold openly, or with very little attemptat concealment. The early Stuarts, for example, used the sale of titles tobolster their revenue when Parliament was reluctant to grant themmoney.

At present some 1,200 people have the right to sit in the House ofLords (about 400 are life peers, twenty-six are bishops and archbishopsof the Church of England and the rest are hered itary peers), though notall of them choose to do so. In addition to th e royal dukes a number ofother peers apply for, and are granted, leave of absence. There areprobably fewer than 200 peers who regularly take part in debates,although others will attend if they are particularly interested in thesubject that is under discussion. The creation of peers is the prerogativeof the sovereign, but in practice it is the Prime Minister who decideswhether new peers are to be created, and who they should be.

Life peerages were introduced in 1958. As the name suggests, lifepeers hold their title for their life-time and the title becomes redundantupon their death. Although it is the Prime Minister who draws up thelists of new peers it should not be thought that he or she recommendsonly memb ers of his or her own party to the mon arch. When new peersare created—for example, in the Dissolution (of Parliament) Honours orin the New Year Honours—the other party leaders are asked to maketheir recommendations. Nevertheless, party politics plays an importantpart in the Lords and one of the problems faced by a Labouradministration is that there is a massive Conservative majority in theupper Ho use.

Churchmen have sat in the Lords since the earliest days, and at onetime the abbots from the leading monasteries attended as well as thebishops. Today the lord s spiritual consist of twenty-six Anglicanbishops: the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, the Bishops ofLondon, Winchester and Durham, and twenty-one other bishops inorder of seniority. The bishops sit as representatives of the establishedChurch , the Church of England. There is no provision for otherchurchmen to sit in the Lords, though when she was Prime Minister MrsThatcher made the then Chief Rabbi a life peer.

The ten law lord s, who comprise the supreme judiciary of GreatBritain, sit in the Ho use by virtue of being Lords of Appeal in Ordinary


They are life peers and when they retire as law lords they retain theirseats. Their functions are dealt with in Chapter 4 .

Unlike MPs, members of the House of Lords are not paid a salary,although they can claim expenses for each day they attend debates. TheHouse of Lords sits shorter hours than the Commons, and does not siton Fridays.

The House of Lords is presided over by the Lord Chancellor, who sitson the Woolsack (a large cushion stuffed with wool from Britain andthe Commonwealth; wool was Britain’s most important export in theMiddle Ages) and fulfils the same role as the Speaker in the House ofCommons. However, unlike the Speaker, the Lord Chancellor is anactive politician, appointed by the Prime Minister and with a seat in theCabinet. The Lord Chancellor is also head of the legal profession andhas important functions associated with this position, as we shall seewhen we look at the legal system (see Chapter 4 ). When the LordChancellor wishes to participate in a debate the Woolsack is vacated,and another member of the House, usually the Chairman ofCommittees, takes over the responsibility of presiding over the House.

Functions of the House of Lords The House of Lords has two mainfunctions: it is the second chamber of Parliament, with the right to discusslegislation; it is also the highest court in the land. Until the beginning ofthe twentieth century the House of Lords was theoretically equal instatus to the House of Commons, though in fact it was clear that allmajor decisions were made by the lower House. The last Prime Ministerto sit in the Lords was Lord Salisbury, who resigned in 1902.

In 1911 the Parliament Act was passed, which placed limitations onthe power of the Lords. The Act said that the Lords could not in futurereject a Bill that had been passed by the Commons, although they coulddelay it for two years. Money Bills had to be passed within a month oftheir coming from the Commons. (The Act also contained some clausesnot directly related to the issue of the Lo rds, including prov iding asalary for MPs and effecting a reduction in the life of Parliament fromseven to five years.)

However, the 1911 Act did not seem to have the desired effect, as theLords still obstructed Bills, and even today, when the delaying power o fthe Lords is only a year (since 1947), some Bills are halted by the upperHouse simply because the Commons have not the time to discuss themagain. (A Bill rejected by the Lo rds must go all the way through theCommons again, even though it has already been passed there once.) Ofcourse, the government will find time for a Bill that it considersimportant, but some measures are in effect killed by the Lords. Private

MODERN BRITAIN 47

Members’ Bills in particular often run into difficulty in the upper House.Few peers would want to risk a head-on collision with the Commons,but they have a number of ways in which they can delay governmentbusiness if they wish—ways that are more subtle than outrightrejection. In 1967 proposals were put forward for reducing the power ofthe Lords, and in 1969 a proposition was debated that would haverestricted the voting rights of hereditary peers. However, when itbecame ob vious that to get the proposed Bill through would entail amajor parliamentary battle, lasting months, the plans were dropped. Wehave also seen (p. 6) that not even a Conservative Prime Minister cantake the Lords for granted.

So the House of Lords survives, and there are many who wouldsupport its existence. It is often claimed that the Lords provide a usefulsecond opinion on legislation; amendments can be sug gested and newopinions expressed. Another argument in favour of th e Lords is that, asthey have more time than the Commons, they can discuss a Bill in fargreater detail. It is also frequently suggested that this discussion can befreer than it is in the Commons, because the Lords do not haveconstituencies to worry about, or electors to offend, and so they canspeak more freely on controversial issues. This is a rather peculiarargument, for it draws attention to the fact that the Lords representnobody but themselves. It also raises the whole question of whetherParliament should take public opinion into account, and of whetherParliament is, or should be, responsible to the people—a question ofvital importance to a democracy.

The introd uctio n of life peers in 1958 pro duced another argument infavour of the retention of the House of Lords. It was suggested that theLords might become a forum of experts, and that distinguished peoplewho did not have the time or inclination to fight an election or nurse aconstituency could still be recruited to give the country the benefit oftheir experience. This is an interesting argument in theory, but it has notbeen borne out in practice. Although it is true that some eminentdoctors, scientists and academics have become life peers, most havebeen chosen from the ranks, or at least the fringes, of the politicalparties. Nor does the argument explain why hereditary peers shouldretain the right to sit in the House of Lords.

As far as the Prime Minister is concerned the House of Lordscertainly has its uses. It can serve as a dumping ground for Members ofParliamen t who have safe seats but little political value. Theennoblement of such a person vacates the seat, which then can beallocated to a potential minister. The Lords can also be used by the Prime


Minister to b ring new blood into the government when a by-electionmight prove embarrassing. The Prime Minister can make the candidatefor the position a life peer, thus providing a seat in the House of Lords.For example, in the 1992 election Linda Chalker, the OverseasDevelopment Minister, lost her seat. John Major, the Prime Minister,immediately made her a life peer and she retained her job in thegovernment as Baroness Chalker.

An argument frequently put forward in favour of the retention of theHouse of Lords is that the Lords safeguard the constitution. Accordingto this argument it is claimed that the Commons could, if they were soinclined, change the whole system of government in an afternoon by asingle majority vote. This argument means, of course, that the Lords,who as we have seen represent only themselves, exist to protect theBritish people against their elected representatives. Should the Lords beabolished it might be thought necessary to introduce safeguards into thesystem to limit the power of the Commons, but these could probably bearran ged without much difficulty. In some countries, for instance,constitutional changes require the approval of the people in the form ofa referendum, while in others such legislation can be passed only if therepresentative chamber approves the measures by a large enoughmajority, usually of the order of two-thirds. There seems no reason whysimilar procedures could not be adopted in the United Kingdom,particularly as the referendum device has already been used in relationto membership of the European Community.

Until recently, peers who inherited titles were forced to accept themwhether they wanted to or not. Thus politicians who were making a namefor themselves in the House of Commons might suddenly find that theywere elevated to the House of Lords, where they would get prestige andthe guarantee of a seat in one of the legislative chambers but wouldstand little chance of gaining the highest political office. A number ofpeople who found themselves in this situation had complained bitterlyabout it but had resigned themselves to what they considered to be theinevitable. However, in the early 1960s Mr Anthony Wedgwood Benn,a prominent Labour MP, found himself transformed overnig ht intoViscount Stansgate on the death of his father. In spite of his objectionshe was told that he had no option but to give up his parliamentary seatin Bristol and take his place in the House of Lords. He accordinglyvacated his seat, but at the ensuing by-election he stood as a candidateand was returned with a comfortable majority. He then tried to take hisseat in the Commons, but was refused admittance to the chamber. Anelectoral court subsequently awarded the seat to the Conservative who

MODERN BRITAIN 49

had been runner-up. Wedgwood Benn’s campaign, however, hadaroused considerable interest and sympathy, and in 1963 the PeerageAct was passed. Under the terms of this Act a person who inherits apeerage is permitted to disclaim it for his lifetime, and on his death itpasses to the next in line. The first person to take advantage of the Actwas, of course, Lord Stansgate, who speedily returned to the Commons,and in due course became a Cabinet minister, standing in 1981 for thepost of deputy leader of the Labour Party.

Shortly after the Peerage Act was passed a prominent Conservative,Viscount Hailsham, renounced his title in the hope of becomin g leaderof the Conservative Party and Prime Minister on the resign atio n of HaroldMacmillan. As Quintin Hogg he was elected MP for Marylebone, but inthe event the leadership went to another member of the Lords, the Earlof Home, who became Prime Minister as Sir Alec Douglas-Home.Subsequently both these gentlemen have returned to the Lords as lifepeers, as Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone and Lord Home of theHirsel. In 1979 Lord Hailsham was appointed Lord Chancellor, a posthe retained when Mrs Thatcher was returned to power in 1983.

Ministries

Members of the cabinet are usually in charge of a ministry ordepartment of state. In the 197 0s a number of ‘super-ministries’ wereestab lished, some of which incorporate smaller ministries which at onetime had a separate existence. For example, the Department of theEnvironment includes ministries responsible for local government andhousing. Each of the ‘super-ministries’ is headed by a Secretary of State,who is assisted by a nu mber of junior ministers, ministers of state andunder-secretaries of state.

Each ministry is staffed by civil servants under a permanent secretary.The civil servants are responsible for advising their ministers and forputting the decisions taken by the politicians in Parliament into effect.In theory civil servants do not take decisions themselves, but in practicethey wield considerable power. Much of their power comes from thefact that, while the minister holds the job for a relatively short period oftime, the civil servant is a permanent official who over the years canacquire considerable expertise in a particular field. Many people haveexpressed considerable misgivings about the growth in the influence ofWhitehall (the area of London where most of the important ministriesare found), and one of the tasks of the Fulton Committee which reportedin 1968 was to see whether far-reaching reforms were required. A


number of Fulton’s recommendations were put into effect, althoughthere seems little evidence that farreaching changes have taken placeregarding either recruitment or patterns of service. In 1979 the Thatchergovernment, like others before it, announced that it intended to carryout a radical review of the entire civil service with the aim of reducingthe number of positions in government service. This was coupled withthe intention of th e government to ‘priv atise’ many of the state-ownedservice and manufacturing industries (see also pp. 111–12). LordRayner, a prominent businessman, was brought in to advise on reformof the civil service and in 1982 he presented a report which led to anumber of cost-saving initiatives, though whether any far-reachingchanges in the culture of the civil service were achieved is open toquestion. Lord Rayner’s successor, Sir Robin Ibbs, drew up a moreradical programme in the mid-1980s which among other thingsrecommended the establishment of executive agencies providing goodsand services for a much reduced policy-orientated civil service. Theexecutive agencies would be expected to operate on a commercial basis,with considerable freedom of action.

Royal Commissions

The reader will find reference to a number of Royal Commissions inthis book. Royal Commissions are committees set up by thegovernment to investigate and make recommendations on v ariousmatters. They invite evidence from interested individuals and bodies;this is sifted and then examined and a report is issued. The governmentis not bound to accept the advice of a Royal Commission. It isinteresting to note that Mrs Thatcher was sceptical of the value of RoyalCommissions; none was set up during her period of office.

Chapter 3Local government

For many years the traditional units of English local government werethe parish, the borough and th e county. As is the case with so manyother British institutions, they originally fulfilled functions far differentfrom those that they were later called on to undertake. The parish was inits early days an ecclesiastical unit, the centre of which was the parishchurch. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries it acquired civilfunctions, such as the maintenance of highways and care of the poor.Borough status was granted by the Crown. Apart from the prestige ofreceiving a charter, the honour was a coveted one because it gave townsa certain amount of independence. Boroughs h ad their own courts, andthey could also hold markets and sent representatives to Parliament. Thecounty was originally the territory granted to an earl by the King inreturn for feudal service. In spite of the fact that a feudal lord’s fief isnot necessarily the most suitable basis for modern administrativepurposes, the basic outline of the English counties, particularly in thesouth of the country, has varied little from the Middle Ages.

In 1835 boroug hs became th e first local government units to aquiresome degree of democracy. The Municipal Corporations Act providedfor a system of local councillors elected by local ratepayers, wh ile aquarter of the council were ‘aldermen’, elected by the councillors. TheLocal Government Act of 1888 introduced a system of county councils,elected by a ratepayer franchise as in the boroughs. The Act alsoclarified the relationship between local and national government andbetween county and borough councils. Although the idea of an electedcounty council was new, the areas of the counties remained much thesame as they had prior to 1888, the only major chang e being that someof the larger counties were subdivided. Thus shortly after the Act waspassed sixty-two county councils had been formed from the fifty-twogeographical counties.

52 MODERN BRITAIN

The structure of local government established in the nineteenthcentury remained in force until well into the twentieth. In 1966,however, a Royal Commission on Local Government was appointed andits report was published in 1969. In essence it proposed a sweepingaway of the old local authorities, replacing them with a system of fifty-eight unitary and the three metropolitan authorities. The Maud Report,as it was called, after its chairman, Lord Redcliffe-Maud, was muchdiscussed at national and local level. In 1970 the Labour governmentproduced a White Paper in which it accepted the proposals of thecommission, although with a number of modifications. But beforethe government could make these reforms law, Labour were defeated atthe general election of July 197 0. The incoming Conservatives producedtheir rev ised plans for the the reform of local government in February1971, and in 1972 the Local Government Reorg anisation Actestablished a n ew pattern of lo cal authorities which came into effect on1 April 1974.

The local authorities set up in 1974 included the Greater LondonCouncil (responsible for local government in the capital), sixmetropolitan counties, made up of the largest conurbations, and thirtynon-metropolitan counties. Both the metropolitan and the non-metropolitan counties were subdivided into d istricts, of which thirty-sixwere in metropolitan counties and 296 in nonmetropolitan counties.Although the legislation setting up the the new system of localgovernment was introduced by the Conservatives, their successors adecade later felt that further reform was necessary. They argued that themetropolitan counties were too large and unwieldly to operateefficiently and announced that they were proposing to abolish thecouncils and redistribute their powers to the constituent districts. Inspite of bitter opposition from the councils, which argued that thelegislation was inspired by party rather than financial considerations—the majority of councils were Labour-controlled—and some unexpectedresistance from the Lords (see p. 41) the govern ment prev ailed, and in1986 the metropolitan councils and the Greater London Councildisappeared.

At the beg inning of the 1990s county councils were responsible forplanning, roads, p ublic transport, waste disposal, consumer protectionand police and fire services. County councils and district authoritieswere responsible for education, youth employment, the personal socialservices, libraries, housing and local planning. Museums and artgalleries, conservation areas, airports and the acquisition and disposal ofland for planning purposes were subject to control by bo th district and

LOCAL GOVERNMENT 53

county authorities. However, plans are under discussion to reduce thepowers of local authorities in a number of these areas—for example,education (see p. 94) and control o f the police service (see p. 71). It hasbeen interesting to note that one of the tendencies of the Conservativegovernment has been to reduce the real powers of local authorities andto increase those of central government. This has sometimes been d oneby taking power away from elected councillors and appointing officialsin their place, as is the inten tion with the new police authorities, andsometimes by cutting out the local auth ority level of responsibility, aswith sch ools and some other educational institutions. In the oldmetropolitan areas control of the police, fire service and publictransport was vested in joint boards comprised of councillors nominatedby d istrict councils.

Since 1974 Scotland has been divided into nine regions for localgovernment purposes, with a second tier of fifty-three districts there arealso local authorities with responsibility for the island communities ofOrkney, Shetland and the Western Isles. Local government in Wales isin the hands of eight counties, instead of the thirteen that existed prio r tolocal government reform. Northern Ireland has twenty-six districtcouncils, while services such as education, housing, education andplanning are administered centrally from Belfast, the capital of theprovince.

Local councils consist of a number of elected councillors presidedover by a chairman. Some districts have the ancient rank of borough,now purely a ceremonial title, and some are known as cities. In boroughsthe chairman is granted the courtesy title of Mayor while in certain largeor ancient cities he is the Lord Mayor, (in Scottish burghs the titles areProvost and Lord Provost). Councillors hold office for four years; incounties they stand for electoral divisions, in districts for wards.

Until 1990 expenditure by local authorities was financed from thefollowing sources: grants from central government, local rates and rentsfrom council houses and and flats, dividends and interest. Rates were aform of tax levied on occupants of nonagricultural land and buildings.The amount each ratepayer contributed was calculated by multiplyingthe rateable value of his or her property (that is, roughly the amountthe property would bring in if rented out) by the rate poundage(a percentage fixed by the authority according to its anticipated needs).Rates were paid by the head of the household, and alth oug h otherpeople in the house might contribute to the sum required, there was noobligation upon them to do so. This meant that if a person lived alone

54 MODERN BRITAIN

the rate bill might well be the same as that of a family next doorconsisting of a wife an d husband and three grown-up children.

Because of its perceived unfairness the rates system came underincreasing criticism and in its manifesto for the 198 7 election theConservatives put forward a proposal to replace the rates with aCommunity Charge. As this was basically a charge on a per capitabasis, the new charge was swiftly christened the ‘Poll Tax’ by itsopponents. Although the poll tax did away with the unfairness of therates it introduced a new source of contention in that it was set as afixed charge regardless of a person’s income or wealth. Thus manybetter-off members of the community who h ad been paying a heavyrates bill on a large house found that the amount they paid for localgovernment services was substantially reduced, while poorer peopleoften found their bills increased. The Community Charge was firstintroduced in Scotland in 1989 and raised a storm of protest from theScottish National Party and the Labour Party, with many individualMPs encouraging people not to pay the tax. The government claimedthat there was no major problem and proceeded to introduce the chargein England and Wales.

It soon became clear that it had seriously underestimated the level ofthe charge in many areas and as a result it came under serious criticismfrom both Labour and Conservative-controlled councils. There was alsostrong protest from the general public, and a number of demonstrationstook place, some of which degenerated into violence. Under the termsof the legislation the Secretary of State for the Environment wasempowered to ‘charge-cap’ local authorities who were co nsidered to beoverspending, and this was done in a number of cases. The councils thatsuffered were usually controlled by the Labour Party, with the result thataccusations of bias were added to the mounting criticism. Nor was thepoll tax the only problem of local government finance. In January 1990a new business rate, the ‘uniform business rate’ was introduced, whichled to a large increase in the amount that businesses were expected topay, particularly in the south of England.

In the local government elections of May 1990 the Conservatives lostover 200 seats. Many members of the Conservative Party began openlyto criticise the leadership over its handling of local government finance,but Mrs Thatcher and her closest colleagues refused to back do wn. InNovember 1990 Michael Heseltine challenged Margaret Thatcher forthe leadership of the party, taking as one of his main themes the need toreform the poll tax. After the first ballot and the withdrawal of MrsThatcher from the contest (see p. 19), all the contenders spoke of the

LOCAL GOVERNMENT 55

need to look at the poll tax. Shortly after Mr Major took over thepremiership he announced that the whole system would be reviewed

The new Council Tax came into effect on 1 April 1993. The CouncilTax is based on the relative value of a property as assessed by theValuation Office Agency, which is part of the Inland Revenue. Eachhome is placed in one of eight Council Tax valuation bands, which arebased on the estimated sale price of the House on 1 April 1991. Theeight bands range from un der £40,000 to over £320,000. There is onlyone Council Tax bill for each dwelling, which is paid by the owner ortenant. The Council Tax has been criticised by the opposition parties onthe grounds that it merely represents a return to the rates system—manyhave asked why it is not possible to introduce a version of localincome tax.

Chapter 4The legal system

The legal system of England and Wales has evolved over a considerableperiod of time. Its origins can be traced back to before the NormanConquest of 1066. Whereas in many countries there is a criminal codeand a civil code, in England and Wales the two main elements of laware common law, which is largely dependent on precedent, and statutelaw, which consists of Acts of Parliament (though the div ision betweencriminal and civil law is fully recognised). Scottish law differs from thatof England and Wales in a number of important respects, and theprocedure and officials of the Scottish courts are peculiar to thatcountry.

Courts in England and Wales

Crimina l courts

Since the Courts Act of 1971 came into force at the beginning of 1972,there have been two levels of criminal courts in England and Wales.Magistrates’ courts are (except in London and a few large towns)presided over by lay Justices of the Peace (JPs), who sit on the bench part-time, and receive no salary for their services. The jurisdiction ofmagistrates’ courts is local, counties being divided into petty sessionaldivisions, while each town of any size has its own court. The court hasthree main functions. First, it hears and determines charges against peopleaccused of summary offences, that is, offences that are not seriousenough to go before h igher courts. The magistrates’ co urts may also trycertain indictable offences, offences of a more serious nature, with theagreement of the accused. Normally indictable offences are tried by acourt with a jury, but in some cases the accused person may prefer tohave the case dealt with by the two to seven magistrates sitting on the

58 MODERN BRITAIN

bench in the lower court. This may be to the advantage of the accused ifhe or she is found guilty, as the sentences imposed by a magistrates’court are less than those of the higher court. On the other hand, there isa chance that a jury will take a more sympathetic view of the offencethan the magistrates, and decline to convict. About 98 per cent of allcriminal cases are disposed of in the magistrates’ courts.

The second function of the magistrates’ court is to conduct apreliminary hearing, to decide whether there is sufficient evidence tocommit the accused for trial in a higher cou rt. Thirdly the magistrateshear cases involving children. Juvenile courts hear cases in whichchildren under 14 are brought before the court as being in need of careand protection. They also administer justice in criminal proceedingsbrought against yo ung people between the ages of 14 and 17.

In addition to these judicial functions, the magistrates act as licensingauthorities for public houses, restaurants, betting shops and other publicplaces.

Magistrates There are about 30,000 lay magistrates, sitting in nearly700 different centres. As the magistrates rarely have any formal legaleducation there are frequently considerable discrepancies betweensentencing policy in different parts of the country. Some studies haveshown that while the magistrates in one court will be particularly hardon one offence, magistrates in another place will adopt a far moreliberal attitude. Factors such as this have led many people to criticise thesystem, and to suggest that magistrates’ courts should be replaced bycourts presided over by professional lawyers. However, the lay Justiceof the Peace has a history dating back to the fourteenth century, andthere are many, including most magistrates, who would be loath to seethe office disappear.

In spite of the fact that magistrates are unpaid and receive onlya small allowance, there is no shortage of people who would like to siton the bench. Appointments are made b y the Lord Chancellor on therecommendation of a local committee for each area, and in theoryanyone without a criminal record can become a JP. In practice, mostmagistrates tend to be recruited from the middle class, and until recentlymany were retired from full-time work. Thus one was far more likely tofind a retired doctor or army officer presiding over a magistrates’ courtthan a plumber or engine driver, retired or still at work. (Recently,however, there has been a conscious effort to recruit magistrates underthe age of 50 to the b ench.) Nor has the old role of the Justice of thePeace as a country gentleman been entirely forgotten, and manymagistrates, especially in country areas, are appointed on what appears

THE LEGAL SYSTEM 59

to be an almost hereditary basis. A large number of JPs are people whoare, or have been, prominent in local government or ‘public life’, andappointment to the bench is often regarded as a recognition of publicservice, as it confers considerable social prestige.

Since 1966 it has been compulsory for newly appointed justices toparticipate in training courses, and to attend court as observers beforeactually taking their seat on the bench. Even so, the magistrate stillrelies a great deal on the guidance of the magistrates’ clerk, who is alawyer appointed as legal adviser to the bench, and in all except thesmallest courts is a fulltime official.

Stipendiary magistrates In London and a few o f the largerprovincial cities there are full-time stipendiary magistrates (as well asJPs) who sit alone. The stipendiary magistrates—there are thirty-sevenin London and a further eleven in other cities—are trained lawyers and,unlike their lay counterparts, they receive a salary. Suggestions havebeen made that th e use of stipendiary magistrates should be extended,but the proposal has been resisted by the legal profession which claimsthat there are not enough lawyers, and the lay magistrates, who arereluctant to see their powers reduced.

Crown co urts In 1966 the government established a RoyalCommission to prepare a report on Assizes and Quarter Sessions, underLord Beeching. In 1969 the report was published and as a result theCourts Act was passed in 1971. By this Act the ancient Courts of Assizeand Quarter Sessions, which had their origins in the thirteenth century,were abolished, and in their place Crown courts were set up.

Under the old system Quarter Sessions were held in each of thecounties of England and Wales, in ninety-three boroughs and GreaterLondon, and in the City of London. In the counties cases were heardbefore magistrates who sat under a legally qualified chairman. In theboroughs, with their own Quarter Sessions, the proceedings werepresided over by a Recorder who was responsible for passing sentence,although guilt or innocence was decided by a jury of twelve. Juries werealso found in the Courts of Assize, which were branches of the HighCourt, presided over by a High Court judge. The Courts of Assize wereheld in assize towns (usually the county town of each county) and inother large towns or cities. For the purpose of the assize the country wasdivided into seven ‘circuits’. The judge allocated to the circuit visitedeach assize town in turn; each town was visited at least once, the largerones twice. The assize court for Greater London was the Central CriminalCourt, sitting at the Old Bailey, which was in continuous session.

60 MODERN BRITAIN

The system of Crown courts retains the circuits, but they have beenreduced from seven to six. The circuits and their administrative centresare: south-eastern (London), Midland and Oxford (Birmingham), north-eastern (Leeds), Wales and Chester (Cardiff), western (Bristol) andnorthern (Manchester). The Crown courts are served by a bench ofcircuit judges and also by judges of the High Court. According to theAct of 1971, towns with Crown courts are divided up in to ‘first tier’,‘second tier’ and ‘third tier’ centres. In first-tier centres both High Courtand circuit judges deal with criminal cases and the High Court judgesalso hear civil cases. In second-tier centres the High Court and circuitjudges deal only with criminal cases, while in third-tier centres there areonly circuit judges trying criminal cases.

The bench of circuit ju dges introduced by the Courts Act is made upfrom the county court bench, the full-time judges sitting in criminalcourts such as the Old Bailey, and a number of new appointments. Thequalification for becoming a circuit jud ge is to have been a barrister(see p.67) fo r ten years, or a Recorder (a part-time judge) for at leastfive.

Like the assize courts, Crown courts have a jury of twelve and tryindictable—that is, more serious—criminal offences. They also act asappeal courts for people convicted of an offence in a magistrates’ court.A person found guilty in a magistrates’ court can plead against eitherconviction or sentence, although if he or she has already pleaded guiltyin the lower court he or she may appeal only against the sentence.Appeals from the Crown courts go to the Criminal Division of theCourt of Appeal, and in some cases from there to the House of Lords.

Court Procedure Although it is possible for any private citizen toinstitute criminal proceedings, in practice prosecutions are usuallyinitiated by the police. In serious or contentiou s cases details are sent tothe Director of Public Prosecutions, who decides whether the caseshould proceed or not.

Arrests are usually made by police o fficers—although in law anycitizen is empowered to make an arrest—with or without a warrant. Theactual decision to prosecute rests with the Crown Prosecution Service,which is divided into thirty-one geographical areas, each headed by aChief Crown Prosecutor. The prosecutors are appointed by the Directorof Public Prosecutions, who heads the service and is responsible tothe Attorney General, a member of the government. In certain cases theAttorney General must give consent for a prosecution to take place.

Under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act which came into forcein January 1986 a person can be detained in custody without charge for

THE LEGAL SYSTEM 61

up to ninety-six hours. Once charged, a defendant can be freed on bail,although if the police consider that he or she might disappear they areentitled to object to the bail and ask for the defendant to be kept incustody. The decision, however, is left to the magistrate. If a person isfreed on bail, security must be given, either by the accused or bysomeone acting for him or her. In serious cases the accused is usuallyremanded until the case against him or her has been prepared. If aperson who has been detain ed considers the detention unlawful he orshe can apply for a writ of Habeas Corpus, which requires good causefor the detention to be shown before the courts.

English criminal law assumes that a person is innocent until provedguilty. It is the responsibility of the prosecution to show beyond anyreasonable doubt that the defendant has committed the offence of whichhe or she is accused. If this cannot be done a verdict of ‘not guilty’ mustbe returned. Everyone accused of an offence has the right to employ alegal adviser to present their case, and if they cannot afford to do sothey may be provided with legal aid at public expense. All criminaltrials, with a few exceptions, such as those inv olving o fficial secrets, areheard in open court, and the trial is conducted according to strict rulesof procedure. Evidence must be given in the presence of the accused,and the defendant, or his or her counsel, has the right to question all thewitnesses. The prosecution may also question the defence witnesses,but they cannot cross-question the accused unless he or she decides togo into the witness box.

As the terms ‘prosecution’ and ‘defence’ suggest, an English trial is acontest, in which both sides try to convince the jury that the case theyare presenting is the truth. The judg e acts as referee in this contest, andwhen one side thinks that its opponents are breaking the rules it canappeal to th e judge for a ruling. The judge’s powers of interference arelimited, and he or she may intervene only in order to check an over-zealous barrister, to advise on a point of law, or to clarify an obscurepoint. Should the judge interfere too actively, or show partiality to oneside or the other, this may form the basis of an appeal in a higher court.

When the prosecution and defence have concluded their cases, andboth sides have presented their final speeches, it is the judge’s duty tosum up. In the summing-up speech the judge is expected to outline thecase and explain the legal issues involved to the jury. Once the judgehas summed up, the jury consider their verdict, and in serious cases thiscan take quite a long time. Should it become apparent that the jurycannot decide on a verdict they will be discharged and a new jury willbe selected to hear the trial all over again. However, in the vast majority

62 MODERN BRITAIN

of cases the jury are able to come to a decision. Until 1967 the verdictof the jury had to be unanimous, but since then majority decisions areacceptable, provided there are not more than two dissentients. If averdict of ‘not guilty’ is arrived at, the accused is freed at once. If he orshe is found guilty it is the judge’s respon sibility to pronouncesentence. This may be done at once, or the judge may in certain casesadjourn the court so that he or she has time to consider what penaltyshould be imposed.

Criminal appeal A person convicted in a magistrates’ court canappeal against conviction or sentence to the Crown court. There is alsoan appeal in some cases to the High Court. Appeals from the Crowncourts against conviction or sentence are brought in the Court of Appeal(Criminal Division). An appeal against conviction is brought on a pointof law—if, for example, it is felt that the judge at the trial misinterpreteda legal point—or on a question of fact. Appeals against sentence dependon whether the sentence was at the discretion of the judge. The Court ofAppeal (Criminal Division) consists of three judges, either LordsJustices of Appeal or judges of the High Court. They are usuallypresided over by the Lord Chief Justice or a Justice of Appeal. Appealfrom the Court of Appeal to the House of Lords is permitted if it is feltthat a point of law of general public importance is involved. Aprosecutor or defendant can also appeal to the Lords over a decision ofthe High Court in a criminal case.

Civil courts

Civil actions are tried before county courts, before High Court judgessitting in Crown courts, or in the Hig h Court itself. Until they wereabolished assize courts heard civil actions after all the criminal cases onthe list had been disposed of. Magistrates’ courts also have some limitedcivil jurisdiction. They can deal with matrimonial proceedings forseparation (but not divorce), maintenance orders, adoptions andguardianship.

The county courts were established in 1846 to handle civil cases. Atpresent their jurisdictio n is limited to actions founded on contract and tort(a private or civil wrong) up to a specific limit and certain actionsrelating to the recovery of land. Cases outside these limits are heardbefore High Court judges sitting either in Crown courts in first-tiercentres or in the High Court itself.

The High Court of Justice is divided into the Chancery Division,the Queen’s Bench Division and the Family Division. Until the

THE LEGAL SYSTEM 63

Administratio n of Justice Act 1970 the third division was Probate,Divorce and Admiralty—strange bed-fellows, but with the commonfactor that the cases they heard were originally all based on Roman law.The Family Division of the High Court now deals with all jurisdictionaffecting the family: divorce, wardship, guardianship and probate (theratification of wills). Maritime law is the responsibility of a speciallyconstituted court of the Queen’s Bench Division. Although thejurisdiction of the High Court in general covers all civil and somecriminal matters, the work is shared out among the different divisions.In the same way, although the sixty-eight puisne judges of the HighCourt can in theory sit in any division, in practice they are all assignedto a particular one.

The Lord Chancellor (see also pp. 47–8) is president of the Court ofAppeal and the Chancery Division. At the head of the Queen’s BenchDivision is the Lord Chief Justice of England, who is next to the LordChancellor in the legal hierarchy. The most important judge in theFamily Division is the president.

High Court judges sit alone when hearing cases of first instance.Appeals from inferior courts are heard by one to three judges nominatedby the Lord Chancellor. Appeals from the High Court and county courtsare heard by the Court of Appeal (Civil Division). The Lord Chancellor,the Lord Chief Justice, the president of the Family Division and theMaster of the Rolls are ex officio members of this; the ord inarymembers are fourteen Justices of Appeal.

A case which has been dismissed by the Appeal Court can be taken tothe House of Lords. In a case in which an important legal principle is atstake the Lords can give permission for an appeal, even if the AppealCourt has not done so. The judicial function of the House of Lords isvested in ten Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, under th e presidency of theLord Chancellor. The quorum is three, although it is usual for a groupof five or seven law lords to hear the case.

Most civil disputes are settled by the respective solicitors (see p. 66)before the case comes to court. When matters cannot be settledamicably ‘out of court’, however, expensive litigation ensues. An actionis usually started by the plaintiff (the aggrieved person) serving a ‘writof summons’ on the defendant. This writ informs the defendant that theplaintiff has a claim against him or her and sets down what the claim is.If the defendant intends to defend the case by contesting the claim, heor she ‘enters an apppearance’ by informing the court of his o r herintention, and the relevant documents are then sent to the court. Anyonenot wishing to go to the trouble and expense of bringing a court case

64 MODERN BRITAIN

can, if the other party agrees, have a commmercial dispute settled byarbitration.

Civil actions are for the most part tried by a judge sitting without ajury. In the case of actions such as defamation (of character) or falseimprisonment, however, either party to the dispute can request a trial byjury. When a jury is present it decides not only questions of fact, butalso the amount of damages to be awarded. As juries sometimes awarddamages out of all proportion to what is justified, it has been suggestedthat the responsibility for assessing damages should be given to thejudge, as it is in other civil cases where there is no jury present. The courtis also responsible for deciding who should pay the costs of an action, aquestion of great importance, as litigation is extremely expensive.In general the loser may expect to pay the costs of both sides, althoughin many cases the winner has to meet some of his or her expenses evenwhen a co sts order has been given in his or her favour.

Other courts

Coroners’ courts, presided over by a lawyer or doctor, are common lawcourts, which are called when someone dies in suspiciouscircumstances. The coroner’s task is to establish the cause of death, andin cases in volving violent death an inquest must be held. Administrativetribunals exist outside the hierarchy of the courts and are set up by Actof Parliament or other statute. Examples of administrative tribunalsinclude the Land Tribunal, which deals with property values, and renttribunals, which are concerned with determining fair rents.

The legal profession

The legal profession has two branches: barristers (known as advocatesin Scotland) and solicitors.

Solicitors

If a person requires legal advice he or she will go to a solicitor, who fora fee will provide the guidance required and advise on a course ofaction. Much of the work carried out by a solicitor co ncerns routinematters, such as buying and selling houses, executing wills andchecking documents and contracts, but solicitors are also involved inboth criminal and civil cases in courts of law. Normally a personaccused of a crime or sued for damages will seek the assistance of a

THE LEGAL SYSTEM 65

solicitor, who will explain the legal issues involved and take whateveraction is necessary on behalf of his or her client. A solicitor is notpermitted to plead in the higher courts, so if the case is to be heard inone of these he or sh e must brief a barrister on the client’s behalf.

In order to become a solicitor it is necessary to take ‘articles ofclerkship’ (serve an apprenticeship) with an established solicitor for aperiod of time between two and five years. The actual time spent as anarticled clerk depends on the educational qualifications of theindividual. A university degree in law confers exemption from certainexaminations. However, to qualify as a solicitor, an articled clerk mustpass the Law Society examinations. Once this has been done he or shebecomes a member of the Law Society , the professional organisationfor solicitors in England and Wales.

Barristers

The barrister (who has the right of audience before any court or tribunalin England) conducts proceedings in the higher courts and also adviseson legal problems that have been submitted by solicitors. It is notcustomary for a prospective client to approach a barrister direct. As wehave seen, the solicitor acts as an intermediary. In o rder to become abarrister it is necessary to have reached a certain educational standardand to have passed an examination set by the Council of LegalEducation. A prospective barrister must gain admittance to one of thefour Inns of Court: Lincolns Inn, the Inner Temple, the Middle Templeor Gray’s Inn. Before being ‘called to the Bar’, that is, being acceptedas a barrister, the candidate must ‘keep’ eight terms at the Inn. Thismeans that he or she must dine in the company of fellow members at theInn a specified number of times and also pass the Bar examinations.After being ‘called’ the new barrister is expected to keep another fourterms and gain experience under the supervision of a practisingbarrister.

A barrister who has built up a substantial practice as a ‘junior’ maybe tempted to ‘take silk’ and become a Queen’s Counsel (QC) byapplying to the Lord Chancellor for a patent. While this will meanearning higher fees than a junior would receive, the QC is excluded fromappearing in less important, but still financially rewarding, cases.However, a sucessful QC can command large fees and will also enjoyconsiderable prestige both within the legal fraternity and outside. It isalso a logical step up the ladder for an ambitious lawyer, for most of thehigher judicial offices are held by QCs.

66 MODERN BRITAIN

Recently there has been a certain amount of criticism of the legalprofession, perhaps the most serious being the charge that by operatinga ‘closed shop’ solicitors and barristers can both claim exorbitant fees.The lawyers reply to charges such as this by pointing out that theinterpretation of the law is a complex business, requiring a great deal ofhighly skilled work. While this may well be true, in many cases theexpense of retaining a solicitor, and perhaps a junior barrister and a QC,means the costs of litigation are too high for the average person. Thismay be a good thing in that it prevents the law courts being jammed bya large number of trivial cases, but it also means that a person with alegitimate case can be deprived of justice because the cost of obtainingthis justice is so high.

An area that has long been a source of irritation has been that ofconveyancing—the transfer of the legal title of a house when someonesells. For years this has been a solicitors’ monopoly and many firmshave charged fees that were thought to be out of all proportion to thework involved. During the last few years there has been a great deal ofdiscussion both within and without the legal profession on this matter,and there has been some movement towards reform. The scale of feeshas been scrapped, so that it is up to individual firms to fix their rates,and the introduction of ‘licensed conveyancers’—agents with no legaltraining, in the sense that solicitors have, but with expertise inconveyancing—has been encouraged in some quarters.

Judges

The En glish judiciary prides itself on its impartiality and its freedomfrom political involvement. Judges are app ointed by the Lord Chancellor,the senior judge in the country and head of the legal profession, fromthe senior members of the Bar (or Recorders from Crown courts), andthey are non-political appointments. On a number of occasions judgeshave made legal decisions that have proved acutely embarrassing to thegovernment of the day, for Acts of Parliament that have beenambiguously drafted may be interpreted by the courts in a manner fardifferent from that intended by the legislators.

The only way to remove a judge is by a petition to Parliament. Asthere is no official retiring age there is a danger that some judges maygo on exercising their judicial functions when their intellectual powershave begun to decline. There is also a tendency for some of them to takeadvantage of their position to pontificate on wh at they consider to be theevils of modern society

THE LEGAL SYSTEM 67

There has also been criticism of the fact that judges are responsiblefor passing sentence even when they have very little knowledge of thedefendant’s background, or of the nature of the punishment which theyare prescribing. As judges are trained solely as lawyers they tend tohave little knowledge of psychology or criminology, and may indeed,be rather critical when experts in these sciences appear in court aswitnesses. Another criticism of the judiciary is that it is stillpredominantly male: in 1992 only one judge in the Court of Appeal wasa woman, out of twenty-six, there were no women judges in theChancery Divisio n, only one in the Queen’s Bench Division and two inthe Family Division.

As we have seen, when barristers ‘take silk’ they become a Queen’sCounsel, with the right to use the letters QC, for example Peter BrownQC. Should a QC then be selected as a ‘circuit judge’, he will be knownas ‘His Honour Judge Brown’. If on the other hand he becomes a judgein the High Court, he will be referred to as The Honourable Mr JusticeBrown’, and he will also be knighted. If he is promoted to the AppealCourt he will be addressed as ‘Lord Justice Brown’ (although he is not amember of the peerage) or the ‘Right Honourable Sir Peter Brown’. Asa ‘Lord of Appeal in Ordinary’ he would become a life peer, with a seatin the Lord s and the title of The Right Honourable Lord Brown’.

The jury

The modern jury in England and Wales consists of twelve men orwomen, betweeen the ages of 18 and 65. They have the responsibility ofdeciding whether their fellow citizen who is on trial is guilty orinnocent of the offence of which he or she is accused. After hearing allthe evidence in the case the jury listen to the judge’s summing up, andthen withdraw to consider their verdict, but the law now allows majorityverdicts, provided there are no more than two dissentients in a jury oftwelve. Should a jury be unable to agree, a new trial must b e held,although in practice this rarely happens. Juries serve in both criminaland civil courts, deciding questions of fact and, in the case of theformer, the damages which should be paid to the injured party. Juries donot fix penalties, although when the death penalty was still in force formurder the jury might make a plea for leniency for someone who waslikely to be condemmed to death as a result of a verdict of ‘guilty’.

There are those who claim that the whole concept of a jury is out ofdate, and that trial by jury should be replaced with trial by experts, as infact happens in civil cases where a judge sits alone. Critics of the jury

68 MODERN BRITAIN

system point to the extravagant damages that juries sometimes award incivil cases. They also claim that juries are subject to prejudices to suchan extent that many verdicts are decided almost before the first evidenceis presented, particularly in cases involving crimes against the person.The juror is, of course, supposed to be completely impartial and to haveno advance knowledge of the case, but it is very difficult to secure theseconditions. Another criticism of juries is that it is easy for organisedcriminal gangs to bribe or threaten jurors in order to influence theirverdict. In the days when unanimous verdicts were required it was onlynecessary for one member of the jury to be intimidated to make itimpossible to obtain a verdict.

Scotland

As Scotland was an independent kingd om until 1707 its legal systemdiffers from that of England and Wales in a number of respects.However, since the early eighteenth century many of the statutesintroduced by Parliamen t also apply to Scotland, which means that inmany cases Scottish law is in line with that of England and Wales.Nevertheless, differences of organisation and procedure are stillmarked, while sometimes a law that exists in England and Wales maynot apply in Scotland and Wales, and vice versa.

The courts of summary jurisdiction in Scotland are the burgh(or p olice) courts, presided over by town councillors, and the Justice ofthe Peace courts, which are found outside urban areas and are presidedover by judges, sitting in their capacity as Justices of the Peace. Sheriffcourts, which serve counties or combinations of counties known as‘sheriffdoms’, hear both civil and criminal cases. The supreme criminalcourt of first instance (that is, the court that tries and sentences anoffender) is the High Court of Judiciary. Cases in them High Court areheard by the Lord Justice General, the Lord Justice Clerk or one of theLords Commissioners of Justiciary. Th e court is based in Edinburgh,but the judges also go on circuit. Appeals in criminal cases are directedto the High Court. There is no appeal to the House of Lords.

The main courts of civil jurisdiction in Scotland are the sheriffcourts, while the highest civil court is the Court of Session. The sheriffcourts can handle virtually all cases, actions being heard by the sheriff.Appeals can be made to the Sheriff Principal (the leading sheriff in asheriffdom) or to the Court of Session. The Court of Session has twoparts, an Outer and an Inner House, the former b eing a court of first

THE LEGAL SYSTEM 69

instance, the latter mainly an appeal court. From the Inner House anappeal can be made to the House of Lords.

The police

In 1957 there were 126 police forces in England and Wales and twentyin Scotland. They ranged in size from the Metropolitan Police Force,responsible for policing Greater London, which had 16,419 officers, toone of the Scottish forces which had sixteen. During th e 1960s, largelyas a result of recommendations made by the Royal Commission on thePolice which reported in 1962, a large number of amalgamations tookplace. In 1992 there were fifty-two police forces in Britain, most of themestablished in a county basis.

The oldest police force in the country is the Metropolitan Police,founded by Sir Robert Peel, the Home Secretary, in 1829. Peel’s menwere responsible for maintaining order in the capital, and althoughdistrusted and reviled at first, they soon became so successful that theywere imitated in other p arts of the country Whereas the MetropolitanPolice Force was responsible to the Home Secretary, police forces inother areas were established by local bodies. Although proposals havebeen made at times that a national force should be set up, there has beenlittle support for the idea from either police or public. At present eachlocal force is maintained by a police authority, made up ofrepresentatives of the councils covered by the force, and localmagistrates, but this is currently under review. It is the responsibility ofthe police au thority to appoint a chief constable and his immediatesubordinates and to provide the equipment to enable the police to carryout their duties. The Home Secretary in England and Wales and theSecretary of State for Scotland exercise a certain amount of control overpolice forces, having the final say in the ap pointment of chief constablesand making general regulations covering administration, pay and termsof service. They also appoint the chief inspectors of constabulary, whowith their deputies are responsible for inspecting the forces throughoutthe co untry (outside London), reporting back to the appropriateSecretary of State.

Relations between police and public, particularly in inner-city areas,have given rise to a great deal of discussion over the last decade, andattempts have been made to introduce new methods of policing and alsoto ensure that police forces are made accountable. Riots in cities such asBristol, Birmingham and several parts of London, together with policetactics du ring the miners’ strike of 19 84/5, alarmed many people who felt

70 MODERN BRITAIN

that the existing control systems were inadequate. In 1985 a newcomplaints procedure was established which, for the first time, took theadjudication of disciplinary proceedings out of the hands of the policeforces themselves and put them into the hands of the new PoliceComplaints Authority. In 1991 a Royal Commission on Criminal Justicewas set up under under Lord Runciman, following a number of caseswhere questionable police procedures had caused convictions to be setaside. The Commission reported in July 1993 and made, in all, 352recommendations as to how the criminal justice system could beimproved, including a proposal for establishing an independentauthority to look into miscarriages of justice and various suggestions toimprove the accountability of the police.

Chapter 5The welfare state

It was not until relatively recently that society felt that it had anobligation to provide protection for those of its members who weresick, old, unemployed or suffering from some other form of deprivationor hardship. During the Middle Ages the feudal system in rural areasand the ‘guild’ in the towns provided some degree of protection. Incountry districts every man had an overlord who looked after the interestsof his underlings, although, of course, the feudal system was heavilyweighted in favour of the upper classes. The rights of serfs were eithervery limited or nonexistent. In towns the guilds, which were establishedto protect the standards of certain trades and to regulate admission to theranks of skilled craftsmen, also gave assistance to members who were indifficulties. For the destitute and landless there was little or noprovision; they were dependent on alms from those who were morefortunate than they, or from the monasteries and convents.

During Tudor times some attempts were made to deal with theproblem of the poor and unemployed. At the end of Elizabeth I’s reign aPoor Law was passed, and this was to remain the backbone of sociallegislation in England until 1834, when the Poor Law Amendment Actwas introduced. The Poor Law was, as it was intended to be, a harshAct, designed as much as anything to discourage people from relying onpublic funds. The fact that the Poor Law remained basically unchangedfor over 200 years is not a testimony to its humanity an d effectiveness—rather it shows the attitude of the times. In the opinion of most leadingpoliticians, industrialists, landowners and churchmen, it was not thebusiness of the government to interfere with the running of factories andmines or the building of houses. According to this attitude, poverty wasthe result not of low wages but of fecklessness and a lack of incentive towork. So industrialists of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuriescontinued to build insanitary houses for their workers, forced them towork long hours in shocking conditions and paid them minimal wages.

72 MODERN BRITAIN

In all this they were aided and abetted by governments which refused topermit working men to organise and to form trade unions to protestagainst their conditions.

Although a number of imp ortant and beneficial reforms wereintroduced during the first decade of the nineteenth century, they wereconceived in a paternalistic manner, while the attitude that poverty wasthe fault of the poor was still very much in evidence. Nowhere is thismore clearly seen than in the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834, whichset up workhouses in place of the ‘outdoor relief’ introduced by theElizabethan Poor Law. The theory behind the workhouses was thatconditions inside their walls should be more unpleasant than any workavailable outside, thereby discouraging all but the completely destitutefrom entering the institution. The harsh regime of the workhouse wasdesigned to stop able-bodied but lazy men fro m going on relief; inpractice all the inmates had to suffer the strict rules, which led to theseparation of families, inadequate food (Oliver Twist was not the onlyone who wanted more) and insanitary conditions. It is not surprisingthat before long the workhouse came to be regarded with fear andloathing by the poor, to be avoided at all costs.

Because of the failure of the state to provide security against sicknessor unemployment, except in the form of the workhouses, by the middleof the nineteenth century a number of Friendly Societies had beenformed. These societies provided financial assistance and medical carein cases of sickness and also a funeral grant so that members who diedcould avoid the indignity of a pauper burial.

Another area where the authorities were slow to act was public health.In spite of the fact that towns were increasing in size at a prodigious rateat the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenthcenturies, there were few regulations governing building standards. Theresult was that slums of ‘back-to-back’ houses, without proper drainageor ventilation, became common-place in many industrial cities.Cramped living conditions and indifference to proper methods ofrubbish and sewage d isposal led to a number of serious outbreaks ofinfectious disease during the ninteenth century—for example, cholera in1831–2 and 1848–9, and smallpox in 1881. Following the first choleraepidemic, a number of towns established boards of health, but it was notuntil the Public Health Act of 1848 that a national General Board ofHealth was set up. In 1875 a second Public Health Act introduced anation-wide system of public health, under the control of the LocalGovernment Board. In the same year an Act was passed which providedfor the clearance of slum districts, while a n umber of other Acts of the

THE WELFARE STATE 73

1870s and 1880s relating to education, trade unions and ho using showedthat the government was belatedly recognising that it hadresponsibilities towards the community as a whole.

By the end of the nineteenth century there were a number of Actsproviding protection from the worst excesses of the industrial system.However, it should be stressed that many of the Acts had been acceptedonly after a long and bitter struggle both inside and outside Parliament.The social legislation of the nineteenth century was in most casesthe work of a few men and women who had to struggle against theindifference, and frequ ently the hostility, of parliamentarians of bothparties.

Between 1906 and 1914 the Liberal Party was instrumental inintroducing a far-reaching programme of social reform. Here again thequestion of motives arises. Opinions differ as to how far the Liberalswere really interested in improving the welfare of the less well-offmembers of society, and how far they were continuing the paternalismof the previous century. Whatever the motives behind the reformsintroduced by the Liberal administration that held office in the yearsbefore the First World War, they were to have considerable impact onthe country. Particularly important were the Old Age Pensions Act of1908 and the National Insuran ce Act of 1911. Other measures includedthe setting up of labour exchanges, legislation to improve the positionof trade unionists and a minimum wage for coal miners. Reformsaffecting education covered the provision of school meals and a medicalservice for schoolchildren.

Despite reforms such as these, until the First World War thegovernment intervened very little in the life of the average citizen.Many peop le were totally unaffected by the welfare legislation justdescribed, while some still regarded the provision of aid tothe unemployed and sick as aiding and abetting laziness and dishonesty.During the war the government became much more involved inthe personal life of citizens, as virtually the whole country wasmobilised to meet the challenge of total war. Regulations wereintroduced which affected the whole population, including the Defenceof the Realm Act, which gave the government powers that were almostdictatorial in the interests of safeguarding the country and winningthe war.

After the war the state’s powers of intervention were cut back tosome extent, but there was no return to the conditions of 1914. Forsome, Lloyd George’s promise to build a country ‘fit for heroes to livein’ implied that a far-reaching programme of social reform would be

74 MODERN BRITAIN

undertaken; but in spite of a widening of the scope of the NationalInsurance Act, and legislation to build more houses, developmentsduring the inter-war years were disappointing. Indeed, the economiccrises of the 1920s and 1930s showed only too clearly that the actiontaken to provide unemployment benefits was of limited value when itwas a qu estion of dealing with 2–3 million workers without jobs.Housing was provided by local councils at cheap rents that weresubsidised by the state, but, even so, demand outstripped supp ly, andhousing conditions in many industrial cities were extremely poor.

It was during the Second World War that the blueprint for the welfarestate was produced by a committee under the chairmanship of SirWilliam Beveridge. The Beveridge Report, published in 1942, outlineda comprehensive scheme of social security, designed, as Beveridgesaid, to attack want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness. TheBeveridge plan proposed a complete break with the old Poor Lawoutlook, which was still prevalent in British welfare circles, and thesubstitution of an entirely new concept. The plan was ‘first andforemost a plan of insurance’, towards which individuals paid acontribution, and from which they received benefits when needed, as ofright. The p lan also provided for child allowances, a national healthservice and an end to mass unemployment. There was a tremendouspublic response, and in 1944 a draft Bill was published. A Ministry ofNational Insurance was set up the same year. In June 1945 Churchill’scaretaker Government passed a Family Allowances Act, but as it wasdefeated at the general electio n in October it was unable to follo w it upwith further legislation.

The Labour Party had accepted the main principles of the BeveridgeReport shortly after it was published and after coming to po wer lostlittle time in introducing the necessary legislation. The FamilyAllowances Act already mentioned came into effect in August 1946 andprovided a weekly allowance of five shillings (25p) for every childexcept the first. The allowance is now known as child benefit; it is paidfor all children under the age of 16, and in 1992 was paid at the rate of£9.6 5 for the first child and £7.80 per week for subsequent children.

The National Insurance (Industrial Injuries) Act providedcompensation for those injured at work but was to large extentovershadowed by the main National Insurance Act which became law in1946. By the terms of this Act the entire adult population, that is,everybody between the school-leaving age of 15 and the retirement ageof 65, was compulsorily insured for sickness benefit, unemploymentbenefit, retirement pension, widow’s pension, maternity grants and


allowances, and death grants. As in the case of the 1911 Act,contributions came from employees, employers—except, of course, inthe case of self-employed and non-employed persons—and the state.But the contributions were to be administered by the recentlyestablished Ministry of National Insurance (now the Department ofSocial Security), not by Friendly Societies and insurance companies aspreviously.

The National Health Act was also passed in 1946, although it did notbegin to operate until July 1948. Its aim was to provide the nation witha complete range of medical services, including those of specialists,dentists and hospital staff, as far as possible without charge to the patient.The cost of the National Health Service (the NHS) was to be met out ofgeneral taxation, while a proportion of the receipts from NationalInsurance would also contribute towards its unkeep. The Acthad far-reaching implications, for by providing, or seeking to provide, acomprehensive service for every member of the community, itcompletely change the structure of medical care in the United Kingdom.

Hospitals which had previously been administered by localauthorities or voluntary societies were brought under the control offourteen regional hospital boards in England and Wales. In Scotland andNorthern Ireland complementary but distinct National Health Actsestablished hospital boards, five in the former and one in the latter. Theday-to-day ru nning of hospitals was made th e responsibility of hospitalmanagement committees, with overall control being exercised bythe Minister of Health. The original Bill had proposed that doctorsshould come under the control of local authorities, but the doctors’professional organisation, the British Medical Association, protested soviolently that executive councils were established instead. The 138councils were responsible under the Ministry of Health for keepingrecords, paying doctors and dentists for their services and overseeingthe running of the ‘family practitioner services’ at the local level. Thethird main division of the NHS was the local health services, whichprovided facilities for the maintenance of health. These local healthservices included home nursing, child welfare, health visiting andambulances.

A year after the NHS was introduced it covered 95 per cent of thepopulation and cost almost £400 million a year to run. It is estimatedthat in 1992/3 the NHS will cost more than £34 billion. Although whenthe NHS was introduced it was intended that treatment and medicineswould be provided without extra charge to patients, later some chargeswere introduced for medicines. The move was bitterly opposed by

76 MODERN BRITAIN

the left wing of the Labour Party, which felt that the basic concept ofthe NHS was being undermined. At present a charge is made formedicines and some forms of treatment—for example, dental care—butcertain categories of patient, such as pregnant women, are exempt fromcharges. In cases of hardship or prolonged illness, medicines are free.

The Poor Law was finally brought to an end legally in 1948, althoughin practice it had ceased to function during the 1930s when the numberof unemployed was so great that the guardians could not meet theirresponsibilities. The National Assistance Act of 1948 set up the NationalAssistance Board, which was designed to aid those in need. Basic ratesof assistance were laid down by the nation al government, thoughindividual offices were given d iscretionary powers.

The welfare state today

Between 1948 and 1979 the system of social security and health basedon the Beveridge proposals enjoyed broad support from governments ofall parties. However, the Conservative government elected in 1 979 let itbe known that it favoured a shift of emphasis, away from a welfare statethat provided a safety net for all, to a system where greater emphasiswas laid on market forces. Thus the number of people entitled to benefitwas reduced, benefits were frozen and encouragement was given tohospitals and doctors to set up trusts to administer their services.

The National Health Service

The Health Services Act 1980 introd uced some major changes into theadministration of the Health Service, phasing out Area HealthAuthorities and making the 188 District Health Authorities (DHAs) inEngland and Wales responsible for the operational management andplanning of health services within regional and strategic guidelines.Each DHA organises its services into units of management at the levelof hospitals and community services, and in theory at least decisions aretaken at the unit level whenever possible. There are also ninety-eightFamily Health Services Authorities (FHSAs) in England and Waleswhich administer family doctor services and which contribute to theplanning of health services. The fourteen Regional Health Authorities(RHAs) are the bodies in charge of planning at the regional level, andthey allocate money to the DHAs, FHSAs and General Practionerfundholders (see below). They also take responsibility for ensuring thatnational policy is implemented, acting as th e link between the district


bodies and the Department of Health. The Secretary of State for Healthhas overall responsibility for policy and for supervising the regional andarea authorities. In Scotland the responsible authority is the ScottishOffice Home and Health Department, with fifteen Health Boards at thelocal level.

The Family Health Services Authorities organise the family doctorservice an d also the dental, pharmaceutical and o phthalmic services fortheir areas. Some 28,000 doctors take part in the family doctor servicein England and Wales and some of them also take on private patients aswell. Family doctors are paid for Health Service work, receiving a basicpractice allowance plus capitation fee, and other specific payments.Under the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990practices with at least 7,000 patients can apply for ‘fund-holdingstatus’, which means that the practice is responsible for a specifiedrange of goods and services. The 16 ,000 dentists working in the NHSare also responsible to the FHSA for their area; patients pay three-quarters of the cost of NHS treatment, with certain exceptions.

While the Secretary of State has a duty to provide hospitals and otherservices under the NHS the means by which they are provided havebeen changing in recent years. Under the National Health andCommunity Care Act hospitals are entitled to opt out of health authoritycontrol and set up a self-governing trust run by a board of directors. It isenvisaged that these trusts will get their income from contracts toprovide health services to health authorities and fund-holding generalpractices. Similar schemes have been introduced for doctors. Measuressuch as these have caused considerable controversy among HealthService workers, including doctors and nurses, who fear that patientswill receive inferior treatment under the new scheme.

Social security

The range of benefits available to people living in Britain today fall intotwo main categories: contributory and non-contributory. Contributorybenefits depend on prior payments into the National Insurance schemeand include retirement, sickness and invalidity benefit, unemploymentbenefit and maternity allowance. Noncontributory benefits are financedby general tax revenue and cover supp lementary benefit, family incomesupplement and housing benefit.

Every working person over the minimum school-leaving age (16)must make a weekly National Insurance contribution. Contributions are

78 MODERN BRITAIN

also paid by employers and the government. The main benefits paidunder the National Insurance scheme are:

1 Retirement pensions— £56.10 per week (£89.80 for marriedcouples) in April 1993—paid to men at the age of 65 and women atthe age of 60 . It has been announced that the retirement age for menand women will be the same, i.e. 65, by the year 2010.

2 Maternity allowance— £42.25 per week for eighteen weeks.3 Child benefit: £ 9.65 for the first child up to the age of 16, and £7.80

for each subsequent child.4 Sickness benefit— £41.20 per week for up to twenty-eight weeks off

work.5 Disability benefit.6 Unemployment benefit— payable at a rate of £43.10 a week for up

to a year.

Income support is paid to those over the age of 18, with certainexceptions, who are unemployed or whose income is inadequate. InApril 1992 income support for single peo ple was £33.60 for single peopleaged between 18 and 25 and £42.45 for those over 25. For couples over18 the rate was £66.60 Additional payments were available for childrenaccording to age.

Although peop le with a low income have a legal right to benefit,large numbers do not claim it. Many people, particularly pensioners,regard the payments as charity, while o thers object to un dergoing ameans test (a device whereby the authorities investigate the income andsavings of applicants). Still others do not know how to claim or areworried by the bureaucracy involved. People in low-income jobsbringing up children are entitled to claim Family Credit until the child is16 (or 19 if still at school). To claim Family Credit one partner must beworking for at least sixteen hou rs per week. It is payable for twenty-sixweeks.

Housing

For the average Englishman (and his cousins elswhere in the BritishIsles) the only real home is a house. It is estimated that over 80 per centof the population of Britain live in houses or bungalows, the remainderin flats or maisonettes. A house can be detached, semi-detached, or in aterrace, but ideally should stand in its own garden and have both a frontand a back door. Although the bungalow has become increasingly


popular, the traditional house has two storeys, the ground-floor onecontaining the living rooms (or, in the language of estate agents the‘reception rooms’) and kitchen, and the upper floor the bedrooms andbathroom. The average house built in this century has two living roomsand two or three bedrooms, and there is often storage space in the formof a pantry (for food) or cupboards. The commonest building material isbrick, although many of the houses built in the last three decades useprefabricated techniques, employing concrete, plastics and other modernmaterials.

It is estimated that there are more than 20 million homes in theUnited Kin gdo m. Some 67 per cent are owner-occupied, a further20 per cent are rented from local authorities, while the rest are rentedfrom private landlords or housing associations. In 1980 the governmentintroduced a scheme under which tenants living in council houses couldbuy their homes, and it is estimated that by early 1991 1.5 families haddone so. (Some 200,000 families—that is, about 1 per cent of thepopulation—have two homes.) As few people have sufficient money topurchase a home outright, the usual procedure is to take out a loan in theform of a mortgage from a building society, bank or other financialinstitution, or the local authority. This long-term loan, which is usuallypaid back over a period of twenty or twenty-five years, is granted at acomparatively low rate of interest, although over the last twenty yearsinterest rates have risen considerably. In 1964 the standard rate was6 per cent, ten years later it had risen to 11 per cent, while in February1990 it reached a peak of 15.4 per cent. At the beginning of 1993 it wasabout 8 per cent. The bulk of mortgage finance is still provided by oneof the 350 or so building societies, but du ring the 1970s a number ofbanks also entered the mortgage market, probably owing to the fact thata spectacular rise in house prices at the beginning of the decade mademortgage funds scarce. It is estimated that in 1972–3 house prices wentup b y 50 per cent in a period of eighteen months in the London area.

This rise in prices continued, though at a more modest level,throughout the decad e, though by 1989 as the country entered a severerecession prices started to stagnate and at the beginning of the 1990shouses in some areas began to drop in value. This caused greatdifficulty for owners who had bought when prices were at their peak, asthey found that the mo rtgages they had taken out were greater than thevalue of their property. In spring 1993, however, there were the firstsigns that things were changing when a survey by a leading buildingsociety found that the value of the average British home had risen from£60,000 to £61,500 during March. It was estimated that the average

80 MODERN BRITAIN

price of a semidetached house (i.e. a house split into two living units)was £50,000 in Sheffield, in South Yorkshire, £55,000 in Birmingham,in the Midlands, and £126,000 in London. Owner-occupiers are en titledto tax relief on interest payments on the first £30,000 of their mortgage,although there have been suggestions from some quarters that thisconcession should be phased out.

About 40 per cent of Britain’s housin g stock has been built since theSecond World War, and until the late 1970s a significant proportion ofthe new housing stock was provided by local authorities. Since 1 979,however, the policy of the government has been to encourage privaterather than pu blic building of residential property.

Adequate housing has been a problem for many years, and is madeworse by the fact that many of the worst houses are priv ately owned bylandlords who have little incentive to provide improved conditions fortheir tenants. Until 1957 rents were controlled, but in that year a RentAct was passed which permitted rents to rise at the same rate as prices.The declared aim behind this Act was to make it financially attractivefor people to buy property for renting. It was hoped that more dwellingswould thus become available and the housing shortage would be eased.However, the Act introduced a numb er of new pro blems, one of whichwas that while ‘sitting tenants’ were permitted to retain their tenancieswithout an increase in rent, new tenants could be charged at a higherrate. This situation meant that people whose interest lay in makingmoney, rather than helping with the h ousing problem, could make alucrative business out of buying up large houses with several ‘sittingtenants’ cheaply, and then forcing the tenants out. The house, minustenants, could then be sold at a co nsiderable profit. In 1965 a furtherRent Act was introduced, restoring security of tenure for tenants andproviding strong penalties for harassment. The basis of the new Act wasa ‘regulated tenancy’, fixed at a ‘fair rent’ by a rent officer. Should thelandlord or tenant object to the rent officer’s decision, the case could goto the rent assessment committee for consideration. Once a rent hadbeen fix ed it would remain in force for three years. In 1974 theprovisions of the Rent Act were extended to include furnishedaccommodation. In 1980 the Housing Act, which gave council tenantsthe right to buy their home, also altered the prov isions of the Rent Actby introducing a system of ‘shorthold’ lettings, giving tenants security oftenure for an agreed p eriod but not for life. In 1988 another HousingAct introduced further deregulation.

Housing associations, which build dwellings for co-ownership or tolet, have become widespread following the establishment of the


Housing Corporation in 1964. It is estimated that the 2,800 or sohousing societies and associations own about 600,000 homes inEngland, Wales and Scotland. Housing societies are financed bybuilding societies and the Housing Corporation, each of which provides50 p er cent of the money needed for building .

In spite of the fact that the people of Britain are better housed todaythan at any other time in their history, the problem of housing is still amajor one. An estimated 37 per cent of the housing stock was builtbefore 1919. While much of this is in good condition, particularly incountry areas, where possession of an old (but modern ised) countrycottage is regarded as a status symbol, and in residential suburbs, thereare many urban areas where bad conditions still exist. There are also adepressingly large number of people who have no home of any kind,and who have to rely on hostels provided by local authorities, many ofwhich are reminiscent of the workhouses of the last century. One bodythat has been actively fighting poor housing conditions and theproblems of the homeless is Shelter, which has branches in many largetowns. However, with the recession adding to unemployment theproblem of homelessnes has, in recent years, become one of the greatestsocial problems in large cities.

Chapter 6Education

Schools

Historical development

The English education system has always tended to resemble a handicaprace. However, whereas in the usual form of handicap race the aim is togive all competitors an equal chance of winning by placing someimpediment on those who have an advantage, the aim of the Englishschool system seems to be to give those who have an advantage an evengreater one.

The first English schools were founded by the Church in the sixthcentury, to train boys for the priesthood, and the Church was to retain avirtual monopoly of education for centuries. During the Middle Agesmost of the schools that existed were attached to cathedrals, monasteriesor collegiate churches, although they were sometimes supplemented byestablishments founded and endowed by rich burgesses for theeducation of their so ns. The state played virtually no part in education.Although individual monarchs could follow the example of Alfred theGreat and establish particular institutions, as Henry VI did in the case ofEton, the state accepted no responsibility for either organising orfinancing any educational system. During Tudor times a number ofschools were established; Edward VI founded some dozen schools, stillknown as King Edward VI Grammar Schools, while a number of othersopened their doors in Elizabeth I’s reign.

Education was the prerogative of the rich. Although scholarshipsexisted for ‘poor and needy’ boys who showed an aptitude for learning,there were not nearly enough of them to provide places for all thosehaving this qualification. If a child did not attend school he or she might

84 MODERN BRITAIN

pick up the rudiments of reading and writing from a parent, relative orneighbour, but in many cases people were illiterate for life. A numberof the giants of the Industrial Revolution had received little or no formaleducation: James Brindley, the great canal engineer, taug ht himself towrite in order to be able to keep his notebooks up to date, while the elderStephenson, of ‘railway’ fame, was illiterate into manhood.

During the late eighteenth century a considerable number of‘industrial schools’ and ‘Sunday schools’ were established byindustrialists and philanthropists. These institutions were intended toprovide a basic education for the working class, or at least what theirfounders considered to be a basic education. The men who set up theseschools were not particularly concerned about training future Brindleysand Stephensons to read plans and technical works; they were moreanxious to ensure that their workers could read the Bible. Thus the mainemphasis was to provide a man or child with enough reading knowledgeto stumble through the scriptures, while arithmetic, writing an d otherpotentially dangerous subjects were practically ignored. One of thegreat problems of these early schools was a shortage of trained teachers,as the demand for education was so great that frequently parents as wellas children crowded into the classrooms.

At the beg inning of the nineteenth century such elementary schoolsas existed were financed either by private individuals or by theChurches. Local authorities were empowered to make grants towardseducation from the rates if they saw fit to do so, but by no means allof them did. The Church of England no longer had the monopoly ofeducation it had enjoyed in earlier times, and frequently found itself inconflict with Nonconformists over which Church should have the rightto provide education in a particular area. At times the issue became soheated, and the opponents so involved in questions of principle, that thechildren were completely forgotten and remained uneducated.

If the Churches wanted to fight over the right to educate the young,the state for its part seemed indifferent. This aloofness was to continueuntil 1833, when Parliament made a grant of £20,000 for the provisionof ‘school houses’. Although this grant could hardly be described asgenerous, it did mark the beginning of the state’s involvementin education, which was to increase throughout the century, culminatingin the Education Act of 1870. This Act, often known as the Forster Act,after the man who piloted it through Parliament, established some 300school boards throughout the coun try which were empowered toprovide schools for elementary education in their respective areas. Bythe end of the decade a national system of education had been

EDUCATION 85

established, p roviding free compulsory education for all childrenbetween the ages of 5 and 10 (14 by 1900).

Although elementary education for all had been achieved, secondaryeducation was still the privilege of those who were able to pay for it.The nineteenth century saw a revival of the ancient secondary schools,many of which received new endowments, enabling them to expand andenlarge their intake of pupils—fee-paying, of course. In addition to therevival of the old-established schools, many new ones were founded.Like their predecessors, they provided an exclusive education, based onthe classics, for members of the middle and upper classes. the Victorianpublic school—‘public’ then, as now, meant ‘private’—was, however,much more than mere bricks and mortar. It quickly became the trainingground for the men who were to rule Britain and the Empire. At thebeginning of the nineteenth century most of the public schools were in abad way. Neither the masters nor the pupils seemed to have muchinterest in education, while discipline was so bad that on one occasionthe military were called in to suppress a riot at one of the best-knownschools. Under the influence of su ch men as Samuel Butler and ThomasArnold, however, things began to ch ange. Butler revised the syllabusat his school, Shrewsbury, placing the emphasis on a liberal education;at Rugby, Arnold laid the foundations of the public schools’ role asinstitutions where boys were trained to be Christian gentlemen. A RoyalCommission appointed to report on sev en of the most prestigiousschools in 1864 found much to be commended in them, and as a resultthe position of the public schools was confirmed by the Public SchoolsAct of 1868.

It was not until the beginning of the twentieth century that anopportunity was provided for children whose parents could not affordexpensive school fees to benefit from secondary education. Under theterms of the 1902 Education Act, 25 per cent of the places in secondaryschools, excluding public schools, were reserved for scholarship pupils.In 1918 the Fisher Education Act increased the number of secondaryschools, but the demand for places still exceeded the supply, and theposition did not improve much before the 1940s. But a number ofreports had been commissioned between the two World Wars, and in1944 a new Education Act was passed, which reorganised secondaryeducation in England and Wales.

One of the reforms effected by the 1944 (Butler) Act was that thePresident of the Board of Education was replaced by a Minister ofEducation. This minister was expected to ‘promote the education of thepeople of England and Wales…and to secure the effective execution by

86 MODERN BRITAIN

local authorities…of the national policy for providing a varied andcomprehensive educational service in every area’. This effectivelymeant that guidelines were drawn up by the ministry, while the individualeducation authorities decided what form education would take in theirarea. The Act stipulated that education would be divided into threestages: primary, from 5 to 12; secondary, over 12 to under 19; andfurther—post-scho ol. The school-leaving age was fixed at 15, with theintention of raising it to 16 when facilities became available. Otherimportant clauses of the Act dealt with the welfare role of localauthorities in relation to education, a standardised scale of paymentfor all teachers employed by local authorities, and a system ofinspection for independent scho ols (those outside the state system).

The 1944 Act defined two kinds of state schools, county andvoluntary. The former were provided and maintained by the localauthority, while the latter were schools that had originally been foundedby the Churches. Voluntary schools, the vast majority of which areprimary scho ols, were divided in to three categories: ‘controlled’,‘aided’ and ‘special agreement’. The distinction between the differentcategories depended largely o n the amount of financial assistance givenby the local authority, and the powers the authority and the religiousbody had over the appointment of certain members of staff.

The Act paved the way for two kinds of secondary school, the grammarschool and secondary modern school. Some areas had a third type, thesecondary technical school, while in other areas the local educationauthority gained ministry approval for more individual schemes. InAnglesey, in North Wales, for example, a comprehensive system,in which all pupils of secondary school age went to the same kind ofschool, was instituted. For the majority of pupils, however, theexistence of two different kinds of school meant a choice, an d in mostcases the choice was made on the basis of examination results. Thedecisive examination, known as the 11+, was taken in the last year atthe primary school, and its intention was to distinguish betweenacademic and non-academic children. Those who did well inthe intelligence and other tests that made up the examination passed andwent to grammar schools, wh ile those who failed went to secondarymodern schools, where they received a less academic type of education.

It was the inten tion of those who had framed the 1944 Act that thereshould be ‘parity of esteem’ between the different kinds of secondaryschool, that is, the grammar schools should not be considered ‘better’ inany way than the other schools. However good the intentions of the menand women responsible for the Act, they seem to have failed to take into

EDUCATION 87

account the pressures of the post-war social system, and to have totallymiscalculated the reactions of parents, teachers and children. Thegrammar schools prepared children for the General Certificate ofEducation (GCE) examinations at Ordin ary and Advanced level, whichwere the qualifications for entry to higher education and theprofessions. In secondary modern scho ols, on the other hand,the emphasis was on practical education, leading to skilled or unskilledjobs. It is not surprising th erefore that the secondary modern pupil felthimself inferior to the child who went to the grammar school. Hequalified for his school by failing an examination, and then found thathe was unable to take the later examinations he would need to pass if hewanted to continue into higher education. Many took the Certificate ofSecondary Education (CSE), which was designed as a ‘lower level’GCE O level with less emphasis on academic achievement. Pressurefrom parents and teachers forced many secondary modern schoo ls tointroduce courses leading to GCE examinations, and before long thesecondary modern schools in many areas had become imitation grammarschools.

It was this state of affairs, together with growing scepticism about theability of the 11+ examination to predict the long-term intellectualability of the ch ild, that led many educationalists to press for theintroduction of comprehensive schools. These were to be non-selectiveand would provide courses for children of all levels of ability. In spiteof the fact that the Labour government of 1945–51 had acceptedthe 1944 Act, with its principle of selection, during the 1950s attitudeschanged, and when th e Labour Party returned to power in 196 4 itannounced that it would introduce a system of comprehensive schoolsthroughout the country.

In 1965 the Secretary of State sent out a circular (Circular 10/65)which invited all local authorities to submit plans for the introduction ofcomprehensive education. By the beginning of 1970 most of the 163local education authorities had done so, although some had refused,presumably for political reasons. In February 1970, therefore, theSecretary of State for Education intro duced a Bill ‘to impose on localauthorities a duty to plan for and to achieve a system of comprehensivesecondary education’. During the debate on the Bill the Conservativespokesman on education said that if it was passed the Conservativeswould repeal it when they returned to power. This, however, provedunnecessary, as the Bill did not go through before the 1970 generalelection. One of the first acts of the incoming Conservative Secretary ofState was to withdraw Circular 10/65 and replace it with Circular 10/70.

88 MODERN BRITAIN

The new circular stated that the government felt it was wrong to imposea uniform pattern of secondary education by legislation, and that localauthorities should be free to choose the kind of secondary educationthey considered was best suited to lo cal needs. In most cases theauthorities which had made considerable progress along the road tocomprehensive schools decided to continue with their policy. Otherswhich, for one reason or another, had been slower in getting startedannounced that they would retain selection.

In February 1974, however, a Labour government was once againreturned to power and the new Secretary of State for Educationannounced that it was Labour policy to introduce a fully comprehensivesystem in England and Wales, if necessary by legislation.Reorganisation continued during the 1970s and although theConservative Party opposed the measures at both the national andthe local level it failed to stop the changes in the school structure frombeing implemented. There were those who hoped that the election of theThatcher administration in 1979 would halt the process—Mrs Thatcheras Secretary of State for Education in the 1970–4 Heath government hadsupported the grammar/secondary modern school system—but it wasfelt that as the introduction of comprehensives had gone so far it shouldbe allowed to contin ue. In 1985, twenty years after the introduction ofCircular 10/65, it was estimated that so me 90 per cent of the schoolpopulation at the second ary stage attended comp rehensive schools.

However, if the Co nservative governments of the 1980s have notattempted to reintroduce the grammar schools, they have taken a greatdeal of interest in the organ isation and structure of schools. In 198 4 anEducation Act was passed which gave parents and local authoritiesequal representation on the governing bodies of schools, while theEducation Reform Act of 1988 gave control of budgets to secondaryschools and some primary schools. However, perhaps the mostimportant element is giving schools the right to ‘opt out’ of localauthority control. A school that chooses to ‘opt out’ is funded directlyby central government and responsibility for running the school is takenby the head teacher, working closely with the governors. A furtherEducation Act in 1992 created a Chief Inspector of Schools independentof the Department for Education who has the reponsibility of ensuringthat academic standards are maintained. The Chief Inspector and histeam of inspectors report to the Secretary of State for Education and arealso expected to send reports to parents.

Another important reform introduced in the 1980s was the NationalCurriculum, which establishes for the first time what subjects should be

EDUCATION 89

taught in schools. According to the National Curriculum a standardrange of subjects, including mathematics, English and certain sciencesubjects, must be taught up to General Certificate of SecondaryEducation (GCSE) level. There has been a great deal of discussion overthe amount of time that should be spent on the vario us subjects, withparents, teachers and politicians putting forward a wide range of views.Coupled with this discussion have been lengthy arguments between the‘traditionalists’ who favour a return to structured education withconventional examinations at regular intervals throughout a child’seducation, from the age of 7 to 16, when a child can leave school, andthose who consider that education should not be examination-basedand that a child should have the right to learn a wide variety of subjectsat its own pace. In early 1993 several of the largest teaching unions saidthat they were not prepared to administer the tests in their present form,claiming that they had been introduced too quickly and without enoughconsultation.

Those supporting a more liberal approach to education tend to prefercontinuous assessment rather than examinations. The GCSEexaminations which in 1988 replaced the GCE O level and CSEexaminations are a mixture of assessment and written examination, butthere is a strong body of opinion, including some government ministers,claiming that the assessment element should be reduced and replacedwith traditional examinations.

State schools

Although the comprehensive school is now the ‘standard’ secondaryschool in England and Wales, there are marked differences between theschools th at the various education authorities elected to set up. Circular10/65 listed the following types:

1 The ‘all-through school’ providing education from 11 to 18.2 The two-tier school where children transfer from the primary school

to a junior comprehensive or ‘middle’ school at the age of 11 andthen go on to a senior comprehensive at 13 or 14.

3 The parallel-tiered school where only some children choose or areselected for the upper tier.

4 The tiered school, where children go from primary school tocomprehensive at 11, and then at 13–14 have the option of goingto either a senior school taking them past th e school-leaving age, orone that provides education up to the official school-leaving age.

90 MODERN BRITAIN

5 Schools for ages 11–16, followed by sixth-form colleges.6 The three-tier system: primary school from 5 to 8–9;

comprehensive school from 8–9 to 12–13; comprehensive seniorschool from 1 2 to 13+.

The circular tended to favour the 11–18 schoo l, which most closelyresembled the age grouping of the grammar and secondary modernschools, but different education authorities have selected differentmodels, depending on how they and their advisers assessed the meritsof the various systems. One interesting development has been theestab lishment of sixth-form colleges in many areas, which take childrenat the post-GCSE stage. Students attending these colleges spend two orthree years preparing for Advanced level examinations which will givethem an opportunity to enter higher education. The establishment ofthese institutions has been welcomed by those studying at them, as thefact that they are physically separate from the youn ger children meansthat the rigorous school regulations governing dress and behaviour canbe relaxed and the students can study in an atmosphere that is closer tothat of a university than that of a school. In April 1993 sixth-formcolleges, together with other institutions of further education, were freedfrom local authority control, receiving their funding direct from theDepartment for Education.

Many teachers and educationalists who opposed the intro duction ofcomprehensive schools did so, not because they favoured an elite, butbecause they did not like the way comprehensive schools were beingestab lished. The popu lar view of a comprehensive school is a largepurpose-built campus providing a complete range of educationalfacilities, staffed with sufficient specialists to ensure that the childrenget the widest possible education, provided in small teaching groups. Itis unlikely that even the most impassioned supporter of comprehensiveschools could argue that this is always the reality. In many cases theschools, formed by the amalgamation of existing grammar andsecondary modern schools, have carried on in the old buildings. Many ofthese date from the beginning of the century, or even earlier, and oftenthe buildings are separated from each other by busy streets, while insome country areas they are even in different towns.

The restructuring of secondary edu cation in England and Walesinevitably had an effect on the organisation of schools at the presecondarystage. Under the system established by the 1944 Act pupils enteredprimary school at the age of 5 and then transferred to secondaryschool at 11. This system still prevails where the comprehensive school

EDUCATION 91

provides education over the age range of 11 to 18, but in other areaswhere middle schools have been established schoolchildren move on tocomprehensive schools at the age of 12, 13 or 14, according to thesystem that the local education authority has adopted.

It is estimated that in 1992 some 9 million children aged between 5and 16 attended Britain’s 34,800 schools. In England and Wales thereare some 20 ,000 primary schools, 1,333 middle schools and 3,300comprehensive schools. In Scotland virtually all the secondary schoolsare six-year comprehensives, although Northern Ireland retains aselective system.

The organisation of schools

One of the reasons for the complexity of the English education systemis that until recently the government was unwilling to intervene directlyin education at the local level. As we have seen, it was not until 1833that the government felt obliged to make any contribution to educationat all, and when, in 1870, elementary education was introduced theresponsibility for the provision of schools was given to decentralisedschool boards throughout the country. In 1944 the responsibility for theprovision of education was given to 163 local education authorities,while, as we have seen, the President of the Board of Education wasreplaced by a Minister of Education. Twenty years later the Ministry ofEducation was expanded to include the Ministry for Science, and also totake responsibility for the universities, becoming the Department ofEducation and Science (DES), headed by a Secretary of State. In April1992 responsib ility for science was transfered to the Office of Scienceand Technology and the DES became the Department for Education.Until the 1980s the Secretary of State was responsible for framing anddirecting policy, and for the general supervision of the local educationauthorities, although he or she did not intervene at the local level unlessit was felt that the authority was acting unreasonably.

However, following the election of a Conservative government in1979, successive Secretaries of State have become more involvedin deciding how schools are run, while the role of the local educationauthority has diminish ed. By the Education Act 1988 schools have beengiven the right to opt out of local education authority control followinga ballot of parents. If this happens the school becomes a ‘grant-maintained’ school, receiving finance directly from central government.Management of such schools is the responsibility of the head teacherworking in close co-operation with the governers, who include parents,

92 MODERN BRITAIN

teachers and representatives of local industry and the community. It isthe intention of the government to increase the number of grant-maintained schools at the expen se of local authority-maintainedschools. The claim is that ‘local management of schools’ (LMS) willincrease the power of parents and teachers, but as has been pointed outit also leads to an increase in the power of central government. Theintroduction of the National Curriculum and country-wide tests atvarious ages throughout the school career also means that theinvolvement of central government is greater than previously. Whilesome feel that such reforms are long overdue and will lead to higherstandards in the country as a whole, others protest that the NationalCurriculum and the tests that accompany it are unimaginative and havebeen introduced with very little input from the teaching profession.

Another recent feature of education at the secondary level is theproduction of comparative tables showing the latest public examinationresults on a school-by-school basis. The first lists were made availablein the autumn of 1992 and caused considerable controversy amongschools, educationalists and parents. The reason that the Department forEducation gave for the publication of such lists was that they providedparents with greater choice when it came to making decisions aboutwhere their children should be educated, but many have pointed out thatthe worth of a school cannot be decided solely on the basis ofexamination results. Parental choice is an issue that has attractedconsiderable attention in recent years, though in practice parental choiceis usually restricted by the availability of schools locally and the factthat only a few are lik ely to be accessible to the pupil.

Independent schools

To many people English education means the public schools, whichconjure up an image of boys in striped blazers and straw boaters playingexotic games, and being educated in buildings that are more reminiscentof medieval castles or Victorian railway stations than educationalestablishments. In fact, in terms of numbers, the public schoolscomprise a very small minority of the schools in England. Only 5 percent of the school population receive their education in suchinstitutions. In terms of influence and prestige, however, theirimportance is very great.

There is no exact d efinition of a public school, although one thing apublic school is notis public in the usual sense of the word. Originally‘public’ meant that a school was run by a g overning body ‘in the public

EDUCATION 93

interest’, as opposed to private scho ols that were run for the benefit oftheir proprietor. Today the public schools are usually held to be the 200or so schools whose headmasters belong to the Headmasters’Conference (the HMC), althou gh recently the heads of some state schoolshave been invited to join this body. Traditionally, a sch ool whoseheadmaster belongs to the HMC must have a certain degree ofindependence from the state, a sixth form above a certain size, and agood proportion of pupils entering universities each year.

Public schools draw their finances from fees—which can amount to£9,000–£10,000 a year for boarders and £6,000–£7,000 for day pupils—from trusts and endowments, and from land and property In recent yearsa useful source of extra money has been that provided by industry forthe building of science laboratories or teaching rooms. Public schoolsreceive no state support and hav e few scholarship places.

Some public schools are very ancient: Winchester was founded in1394 and Eton in 1400. But the majority of the schools were establishedduring the nineteenth century to provide seco ndary education formiddle-and upper-class boys, who would go on to the universities ofOxford or Cambridge and thence into the professions o r the Church(of England). Although the number of public schools is very small incomparison with other secondary schools, they have a great in fluenceon society as a whole. If one looks at the educational background ofpoliticians of all parties, of civil servants, High Court judges, leadingchurchmen, prominent industrialists and high-ranking officers in thearmed forces, one finds an overwhelming number of those (particularlymen) who have been educated at public schools. The power of the ‘oldschool tie’ can play a considerable part in getting a university place,particularly at Oxford and Cambridge, or a certain kind of job. This isnot to say that having been to public school guarantees a universityplace, or a good job, but it does tend to make things easier.

Many public schools are boarding schools and the majority aresingle-sex institutions, catering for boys. There are a number of public-school-type establishments for girls, most of them of recent foundation,and a few co-educational boarding schools, although usually these arerather far removed from the conventional public school idea. Parentswishing their child to enter a public school may h ave to put his or hername down for the school a number of years before he or she is oldenough to go there. Children destined for public schools frequentlyattend private preparatory (or prep) schools b etween the ages of 5 and13, after which they transfer to the public school. A child intending togo to a public school has to sit the ‘Common Entrance’ examination. If

94 MODERN BRITAIN

the child passes, he or she goes to the school which has been chosen. Inpractice few boy s or girls whose parents have the means to send them toa a public school fail to gain a place, although it may not always be atthe school of their first choice. Factors such as family connections withthe school also play a not unimportant part in selection. Not all thoseintending to go to a public school attend a prep school; some go throughthe state primary system and then on to a pu blic school, although thereare problems here, one being the difference in the age at which transferis effected.

It may seem strange that parents are prepared to pay large school feesevery year when it is possible to get free education at the state’sexpense. Some parents, however, consider that the advantages of theindependent schools are such that the money they pay in fees is aworthwhile investment. Not only do boys and girls from public schoolsenjoy a certain prestige later in life, but the public schools are often able,by offering status and fringe benefits, to attract higher-qualified staff sothat pupils receive more individual attention.

The exclusive nature of the public schools has received muchcriticism in recent years. A number of committees have been set up toconsider ways in which the independent schools could be incorporatedinto the state system but their recommendations have not been actedupon. In 1944 the Fleming Committee suggested that public schoolsshould offer at least 25 per cent of their places to pupils from stateprimary schools. The Newsom Committee, set up in 1965 by theLabour government to consider how the public schools could best beintegrated with the state system, recommended that up to 50 per cent ofthe places at boarding schools sh ould be made generally available. Afterthe defeat of Labour in 1970 the Newsom Committee was disbandedand its proposals were shelved.

The examination system

As we have seen there has been considerable controversy over thegovernment’s attempts to bring new examinations into the educationsystem at points th roughout a child’s school life. Similar controversy hassurrounded the introduction of new school-leaving examinations. Until1988 there were two examinations at the age of 16 in England andWales, the General Certificate of Education, Ordinary level, and theCertificate of Secondary Education. In 1986 courses for the new GeneralCertificate of Secondary Education were started and the firstexaminations took place in 1988. The introduction of the new

EDUCATION 95

qualification was the cause of considerable and heated discussion, asmany teachers and educationalists (not to mention parents) consideredthat the government had allocated insufficient funds to finance teachertraining and capital expenditure, while there was a large body of opinionthat believed the new system had been introduced too quickly. Thecontroversy has continued, with arguments over whether the newcertificate relies too much on assessment of course work at the expenseof written examinations of the traditional kind.

For the time being the Advanced level GCE examination will continueto serve as the school-leaving examination for those who continue infull-time education after the age of 16, but discussions are taking placeas to how the examination might be modified. Scotland has its ownexamination system, pupils take the Scottish Certificate of Education atthe Ordinary level at 16 and the ‘Higher’ at 18.

Higher education

Broadly speak ing, ‘higher education’ covers universities, and collegesand institutes of higher education. There are over eighty universityinstitutions in Britain, and more than 450 colleges offering highereducation qualifications, that is, degree courses or pro fessionalqualifications. During the academic year 1990–1 there were 353,000full-time students in universities.

Perhaps the most significant influence on the development of highereducation since the Second World War was the Robbins Committee,appointed in 1961 by the Macmillan government to report on highereducation needs. In its report, published in 1964, the committeerecommended a significant expansion of higher education, so that allthose seeking a place would be able to obtain one. The subsequentexpansion of higher education in the 1960s was dramatic—manyuniversities expanded their intake considerably, while a number of newinstitutions were established to complement those that already existed.Robbins had predicted that between the academic year 1962–3 and thatof 1967–8 there would be a 51 per cent expansion of numbers in highereducation; in fact the growth rate was 74 per cent. This expansioncontinued into the 1970s, but at a slower rate than the dramaticexpansion of the 1960s, so that in the last academic year of the decadethere were 265,000 UK students at universities and 202,000 attendingother institutions. In 1985 the government published a paper entitledThe Development of Higher Education into the 1990s, which although itdeclared supp ort for ‘the Robbins’ principle’ made it clear that the

96 MODERN BRITAIN

selection for higher education courses in the future would be made morerigorous.

Universities

At the beginning of the n ineteenth century there were seven universitiesin Britain, only two of which were in England. By the beginning of thetwentieth century a further five had been founded, while between 1900and the mid-1960s another thirty-four universities were granted charters.In 1992 polytechnics and some other institutions were given permissionto grant their o wn degrees and take university titles if they wished todo so.

The oldest universities in Britain are Oxford and Cambridge—oftenreferred to jointly as ‘Oxbridge’—founded at the end of the twelfthcentury. Until the reign of Henry II it had b een the custom for Englishscholars to study at universities on the Continent, particularly at theUniversity of Paris. Henry’s quarrel with his archbishop, Thomas aBecket, led to the expulsion of Englishmen study ing in France, and therefugees set up their own institution at Oxford. Later some members ofthe Oxford community moved to Cambridge. The first Oxford college,University College, was founded in about 1249; the first Cambridgeone, Peterhouse, in 1284. No further universities were establishedin England until the nineteenth cen tury, although four were founded inScotland between 1411 and 1582, while in 1591 Queen ElizabethI granted a charter to Trinity College, Dublin.

Both Oxford and Cambridge restricted their membership to membersof the Anglican Church until the nineteenth century, with the result thatat various times the Dissenters (Nonconformists) tried to set up their ownhigher education institutions. Although some of these had considerablesuccess in the short term, they were unable to establish themselves asuniversities. It was not until the 1830s when the universities of Durhamand London opened th eir doors that non-Anglicans were admitted tohigher education.

During the second half of the nineteenth century a number ofinstitutions of advanced education were set up, particularly in the northof England. Some of these, such as Owen’s College in Manchester andthe Yorkshire College at Leeds, were to develop into universities intheir own right at the turn of the century. These universities, whichinclude Manchester, Liverpool and Bristol, are often referred to as the‘civic universities’, although they are more popularly known as

EDUCATION 97

‘red-brick universities’, a name said to be derived from the colour of thebuilding material of the University of Birmin gham.

The second-generation civic universities include a number ofinstitutions that started life as university colleges, that is, university-level institutions which co uld not award their own degrees. Instead theyprepared students for the ‘external’ degrees of the University of London.These institutions acquired full university status just before, or shortlyafter, the Second World War. Universities of this kind includeLeicester, Hull and Nottingham.

In 1949 the University College of North Staffordshire (later theUniversity of Keele) was founded. Although a university college, thisinstitution awarded its own degrees from the start. The universities of the1960s fall into two categories: in the first place there were the ‘new’universities, completely new foundations, usually situated on theoutskirts of provincial towns like Brighton (the University of Sussex)and York. Secondly, there were the former colleges of advancedtechnology , which formed the basis of technological universities, forexample Loughborou gh, Bradford and Salford. Seven of the ‘new’universities were set up in England, one in Scotland, and one in Ulster.England also got seven technological universities, while two more wereestablished in Scotland.

In 1966 the Labour government announced that it intended to develophigher education outside the u niversity sector and designate a numberof polytechnics. These polytechnics came into being for the most partduring the late 1960s and early 1970s. In most cases polytechnics wereformed from institutions that already existed (for example, in somecities the college of technology, the college of commerce and thecollege of art were combined); in others an entirely new institution wasset up. Many colleges of education, designed for training teachers, wereincorporated into polytechnics as well. The amalgamations meant thatmany newly designated polytechnics found that they were expected tocontinue to operate in the buildings occupied by the constituent parts. Insome cases polytechnics did get new buildings, but it is significant thatthese were for the most part much less lavish than those occupied by thenew universities. Initially polytechnics were financed and controlled bylocal authorities and were unable to grant their own degrees. However,in the mid-1980s the Conservative government introduced thePolytechnics and Colleges Funding Council, which effectively endedlocal authority control. The polytechnics were also given permission togrant their own degrees and take univ ersity titles. Thus in the autumn of1992 thirty-one ‘new’ universities appeared. Some of these were in

98 MODERN BRITAIN

towns that had not previously had a university and thus took the nameof the town. e.g. the University of Bourne mouth or the University ofPlymouth, but others had to choose a title that clearly distinguished thenew institution from an earlier foundation. Thus Leeds Polytechnicbecame the Leeds Metropolitan University, while the former LeicesterPolytechnic became the De Montfort University after the thirteenth-century Earl of Leicester.

The last university that should be mentioned is the Open University(see p. 104), which accepted its first students in 1 970 .

British universities therefore have been founded at different times, inresponse to different needs. Thus there is little apparent similaritybetween the University of Oxford, founded in the thirteenth centurymainly for the training of priests, and the University of Loughborough,founded in the 19 60s, which is primarily concerned with producingtechnolo gists and eng ineers. Another reason for differences is thatuniversities have always been planned and set up at the local level, evenwhen the greater part of their funds has come from the state. Thus,even when a number of universities have been founded at the same time,their structures may differ considerably. For example, York, Kent,Sussex and East Anglia were all established during the 1960s. The firsttwo have a collegiate system, derived from the ancient universities; theother two have a structure that is more like that of the civic universities,although with many distinctive features. The type and content ofcourses may also differ a great deal from u niversity to university, asmay entrance requirements, staff-student ratios, teaching methods, andso on.

There are no state universities in Britain, even though the stateprovides the largest part of the universities’ income through the HigherEducation Funding Council. As with schools, the government has inrecent years begun to take a more intrusive role in deciding how themoney allocated to universities should be spent, and various exerciseshave been undertaken in an attemp t to judge whether institutions areproviding ‘value for money’. One of these was an assessment ofresearch work being carried out in all institutions which resulted in thepublication of a table giving each department in each university aranking number. As might be expected this produced a great deal ofdiscussion among university staff as to whether such an exercise wasvalid, but it is interesting to note that the institutions that achieved highrankings are not averse to mention them when advertising their coursesin the educational press.

EDUCATION 99

The standards for first degrees are intended to be the same at alluniversities, alth ough in practice one university may have greaterprestige than another. Recently there has been a great deal of discussionabout the relative standard of different universities, with the publicationof ‘league tables’ intended to show which institutions score best interms of academic research. Tables which will monitor teaching are alsodue to be published. Prior to designation as universities most of theformer poly technics granted CNAA (Council for Natio nal AcademicAwards) degrees, but they are now permitted to grant degress in theirown name. The CNAA has been wound up and a number of collegeswhich do not have degree-granting powers of their own offer degreesfrom neighbouring universities, which undertake to validate them. InEngland and Wales, studying for a first degree normally takes threeyears, except for subjects such as medicine and dentistry where coursesare invariably longer. At the end of a first degree course, the successfulstudent is awarded a Bachelor’s degree, usually a Bachelor of Arts (BA)or Bachelor of Science (BSc). In Scotland the first degree is a Master’sdegree which is awarded after four years of study. In English and Welshuniversities a Master’s degree is awarded after a further period of study,except at Oxford and Cambridge, where it is possible to purchase anMA twelve years after graduating as a BA. The names and standards ofhigher degrees vary between different universities.

As far as the administration of universities is concerned there isa basic similarity between the various institutions, although details maydiffer. In England and Wales the n ominal head of the university is theChancellor, who is u sually a distinguished public figure, often amember of the royal family or the aristocracy. The Chancellor appears atdegree-giving ceremonies and on other appropriate occasions, but his orher duties are almost completely ceremonial and he or she takes no partin the day-to-day running of the university. The professional head of theuniversity is the Vice-Chancellor, who in most cases is an academic ofprofessorial rank. At most universities the vice-chancellorship is apermanent position, but at Oxford the office is held by heads of collegesfor a period of three years.

The bodies and committees which run the administrative andacademic side of the university vary from institution to institution. Insome universities members of the academic staff and students have farmore say than in others, while o bviously the large collegiate Universityof London, with some thirty schools, requires a totally differentstructure from that of a small provincial institution such as Keele.

100 MODERN BRITAIN

Nevertheless, there are certain features that are common to mostuniversities and these are outlined below.

The University Court is usually a large body consisting of localdignitaries, such as Members of Parliament, local cou ncillors, Churchleaders and oth ers, together with members of the aca-demic staff.However, in most cases the powers of the Court are purely formal.Executive control of the university is vested in the Council, composed ofpersons nominated by the Court, local authorities and senior academics.The Council is concerned principally with finance and seeing that theuniversity is able to meet its responsibilities.

The Senate is the principal academic body of the university. It isresponsible for academic policy, teaching, examinations and discipline.The Senate is usually made up mainly of senior academics, althoughthere is a trend towards including more junior members of staff and, insome cases, students. Academic work is the responsibility of faculties,each of which is headed by a Dean. A faculty consists of a number ofdepartments, and the head of department, usually a professo r or seniormember of the teaching staff. Associate and Assistant Professors are notnormally found at the traditional British university: staff tend to beReaders—academics with strong research interests—Senior Lecturersor Lecturers. Usually staff teach on the academic courses provided bythe university and are also expected to participate in research. Theresearch base in many of the former polytechnics is less well establishedthan at the older universities, which has led to considerable discussionas to whether there is now a two-tier university system, with certain ofthe old established universities, led by Oxford and Cambridge andcertain of the large colleges of the University of London, such as theLSE, Imperial and Un iversity College, providing centres of excellencein research, while the ‘new universities’ devote their time toundergraduate teaching. While it is clear that many of the newuniversities are weak on research, it is also apparent that in a great manyareas their courses are very innovative and well taught, so there maywell be scope for fruitful exchanges between institutions in the future.

While most academic staff divide their time between teaching andresearch, in the case of senior staff, they may often find that they have aconsiderable administrative load as well. Most university teaching, atleast in the arts and social sciences, is done through lectures,supplemented by tutorials and seminars. The amount of individualattention given to students varies from one university to another. AtOxbridge great emphasis is put on the tutorial system, and studentsreceive a considerable amount of personal tuition . At many provin cial

EDUCATION 101

universities, however, the weekly tutorial, where students are taught insmall groups, is not possible. The univ ersities have, with somejustification, prided themselves on their favourable staff-student ratio. In1991 this was one staff member to every eleven students, though theratio tends to be better at the traditional universities and worse at theformer polytechnics.

The Open University

The Open University was granted its charter in 1969, and started to enrolits first students the following year. Originally the Open University wasconceived as ‘the university of the second chance’, designed to providedegree-level courses for those who for one reason or another had beenunable to take advantage of a conventional university education whenthey left school. There are no formal entry requirements and recentadvertisements for the university have emphasised that people from alloccupations are eligible to become students. In 1991 the university hadnearly 80 ,000 undergraduates and a further 7,500 postgraduates.

There are no conventional lectures or classes. Students study at homewith the aid of lectures broadcast on television and radio, supplementedby course material prepared by tutors. The Open University has thirteenregional directors, each responsible for providing support services forthe students in his or her area. The regional director maintains contactwith local organisations, such as libraries, and local educationauthorities, and with the headquarters of the Open University at MiltonKeynes. Her or she also runs local study centres and appoints localcounsellors and course tutors. Counsellors are expected to help studentswith any educational problems they may encounter, while tutors holdcourses for students in local study centres. Students are also expected toattend a summer school each year.

For the authorities one of the attractions of the Open University is thatit is relatively cheap. It is estimated that the average recurrent cost perstudent at the Open University is a quarter of that at a conventionaluniversity, and as more students are enrolled so costs per student fall.

Students

Students taking full-time first degree courses at universities and otherinstitutions of higher education have their fees paid and are entitled tostudy grants from local education authorities. Since 1990 studentsstudying outside London receive grants of £2,300 a year; grants in

102 MODERN BRITAIN

London are slightly higher. Ho wever, only about three students in tenget the full grant, as parents’ incomes are taken into account whengrants are allocated. Students can also get loans worth up to £830 a year,from the Student Loans Company.

Students at British universities tend to be younger than those at manysimilar institutions on the Continent. One reason for this is probably thefact that, because the majority of courses last for only three years, andthis is the period for which the grant is paid, students spend a relativelyshort time on their studies. The majority of British students go touniversity straight from school at the age of 18, which means th at theyhave completed th eir studies by the time they are 21 or 2 2. As there isno military service, boys as well as girls are able to continue theirstudies from sixth form to higher education without a break. Somecourses at the former polytechnics are ‘sandwich courses’, whereengineers or trainee managers will work for a qualification at the sametime as doing a job. A relatively small number of students are married.

Facilities for students vary greatly between universities. The standardof accommodation at some Oxbridge colleges is very high indeed;students have well appointed rooms and servants provided by thecollege. At the other end of the scale, students are expected to competefor flats and bed-sitters on th e open market. Most universities try toprovide student hostels or halls of residence, at least for first-yearstudents.

Students wishing to attend a higher education institution in GreatBritain must first apply to a central admissions body which thenforwards the application to the appropriate university or college. Until1993 there were two bodies, the Universities Central Council onAdmissions (UCCA), which acted on behalf of the universities, and thePolytechnics Central Admissions System (PCAS) which representedpolytechnics and colleges. Following the change in status of the polytechnics it was decided to amalgamate the two admission bodies into anew body known as the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service(UCAS). Students applying for a place on a higher education course areexpected to inform UCAS of their qualificatio ns, actual or anticipated,together with details of the course they wish to follow and a list ofinstitutions they would like to attend, in order of preference. Theapplication is forwarded to the respective institutions which makethe decision whether to accept or reject the candidate.

EDUCATION 103

Further education

Further education is provided by institutions of higher education,colleges of further education and technical colleges, which are financedand administered by local authorities. These colleges provide a widerange of technical and vocational training, to fulltime or part-timestudents. Many full-time students are studying for GCSE or A levelexaminations, perhaps with the intention of going on to take a degree-level qualification in due course. Others may be taking courses that willqualify them for a particular career, such as a qualification offered bythe Business and Technology Education Council (BTech). In manycolleges of technology and institutes of higher education degree co ursesvalidated by the local university are also provided. A large number ofthe students at technical colleges are taking day-release courses—inother words, they are working in a factory or workshop for four days aweek and attending the college on the other day—or block releasecourses, which means that they attend full-time for a period of twomonths or so.

There are a wide range of adult education and ‘extra-mural’ classesavailable throughout the country, run by extra-mural departments of theuniversities, the Workers’ Educatio nal Association an d local educationauthorities. Subjects covered included languages, local history,archaeology, painting, judo, cookery, pottery, photography and a host ofothers.

Chapter 7The industrial state

During the Middle Ages, Britain, like the rest of Europe, was a ruralcountry. Most of the population lived in villages or small countrysettlements and d epended on agriculture for the necessities of life. Thesixteenth and seventeenth centuries brought important developments inpolitical and economic life, but as technological advances did not keeppace with these the pattern of life did not change a great deal. It was notuntil the beginning of the eighteenth century that technologicaldevelopments began to catch up with changes in the political andeconomic system; once they did, however, the effect was dramatic.Inventions such as those by Newcomen, Watt, Darby and Kay were tochange Britain, in a relatively short period of time, from a rural nationdependent on agriculture to an urban one growing rich on the power ofthe machine.

Towards the end of the seventeenth century a number of financialinstitutions began to develop in England, the most important being theBank of England, founded in 1694. The existence of a comparativelysophisticated financial structure through which credit could be obtaineddid a great deal to encourage the development of trade and industryduring the next century. Other important factors included a plentifulsupply of raw materials, such as coal and iron ore, and Britain’s tradingposition astride the sea routes to the New World.

By the early years of the nineteenth century Britain had won acommanding lead over the rest of the world as far as industrialisationwas concerned and proceeded to exploit her position. Her dominance ofworld trade was to be of relatively short duration, and by the end of the1870s it was virtually over. Nevertheless, in spite of increasingcompetition Britain managed to retain her lead in a number of fields,while the City of London continued to be the centre of world trade wellinto the twentieth century.

106 MODERN BRITAIN

At th e end of the nineteenth century Britain’s main rivals in thestruggle for economic leadership were Germany, united underthe leadership of Bismarck after the Franco-Prussian War, and theUnited States, which was fast developing its industrial potential. Beforethe end of the century both these countries had overtaken the UnitedKingdom in the production of steel. By 1900 the United States wasmaking twice as much steel as the United Kingdom (United States 10.1million tons, Germany 6.2 million tons, United Kingdom 4.9 milliontons). The First World War and the economic difficulties of the inter-war years caused many pro blems for Britain, although in 1938 she stillaccounted for about 22 per cent of the world’s exports of manufacturedgoods. This figure has been declining since the Second World War asinternational competition has grown more intense, and by themid-1980s was no more than 5 per cent.

One of Britain’s major pro blems in the period since the SecondWorld War is that her balance of payments situation has been far fromsatisfactory. Since 1983 Britain has run a deficit on visible trade,reaching over £24,000 million in 1989. By 1991 this had improved to£10,290 million, but in 1992 it slipped back to £13,771 million.

In the post-war period successive governments have tried to come toterms with Britain’s economic difficulties through a variety of measures.(Labour governments have tended to fav ou r direct intervention ineconomic planning, nationalising key industries and laying down strictguidelines for the conduct of trade and commerce, while Conservativegovernments have tended to permit a greater degree of freedom.)However, Governments of both political persuasions have had troublemaintaining the value of the currency The Labour government devaluedin 1949 and again in 1967, while in June 1972 the Heath governmentallowed the pound to float. The Conservative government that tookoffice in May 1979 was faced with soaring inflation and unemploymentrunning at over a million. It believed that the key problem of theeconomy was inflation, and it hoped that by reducing this it wouldincrease Britain’s competiveness in world trade. To achieve this itadopted a policy of minimum intervention.

The results of Conservative policy during the 1980s havebeen mixed. In the early 1980s the determination of the government tocontrol the money supply through high interest rates led the country intoa depression which reduced investment in industry, caused a severereduction in the country’s manufacturing base and pushed upunemployment to over 3 million. In the mid-1980s confidence seemedto return, in some sectors at least, but the boom proved short-lived as

THE INDUSTRIAL STATE 107

spending on imported goods increased, thereby worsening the balance oftrade, while inflation, a key target of the Tory government, rose from3 per cent in 1987 to 11 per cent in 1990. The government raised interestrates to slow down inflation, but by late 1990 it was clear that theeconomic situation was deteriorating, with the country heading for adeep recession, which was to grow worse in 1991 and 1992. Thegovernment had joined the Ex change Rate Mechanism (ERM) in theautumn of 1989, which meant that the pound was linked to keyEuropean exchange rates, notably the German mark. In September 1992the pound came under great pressure and the government spent over£7 billion to defend its position. However, the defence provedunsuccessful and on 16 September the pound left the ERM. Interestrates moved from 12 per cent to 15 per cen t and back to 10 per centover twenty hours, while the value of the pound against the Germanmark fell sharply

The government came under considerable criticism, as it had claimedthat membership of the ERM was a key factor in its economic policyThe period coincided with a series of heated exchanges between thegovernment and its critics within and from outside the party onratification of the Maastricht Treaty on European Union, whichculminated in a debate in the House of Commons that resulted in avictory for the government by three votes—against its usual majority oftwenty-one. At the end of 1992 there was little evidence that therecession was at an end and during the first quarter of 1993unemployment rose ab ove 3 million. Manufacturing output waslittle higher than when the Conservatives came to power in 1979 andthe indications were that growth for 1993 wo uld be only 1 per cent. Thesingle bright spot seemed to be that inflation was down to 3 per cent.Interest rates were also the lowest for fifteen years at 7 per cent.

The European Community has been expanding steadily asBritain’s largest export market. In 1979 it accounted for 36 per cent ofBritain’s exports; in 1987 this proportion had risen to 43 per cent and atthe end of 1991 to 57 per cent. Other important markets are NorthAmerica, which takes 12 per cent of exports, Europe outside theCommunity, 9 per cent, and the oil states, which take 5 per cent.

The British economy today

During the nineteenth century the policy of both Liberal andConservative governments was to interfere as little as po ssible in thecommercial life of the country. The general belief was that trade was

108 MODERN BRITAIN

best left in the hands of businessmen. This laissez faireattitude mayhave been acceptable when Britain dominated world trade, butincreasing competition in international markets, to say nothing of thecomplexity of managing the domestic eco nomy, has meant thattwentieth-century governments have had to take a much greater part ineconomic planning.

Government participation in economic decision-making has increasedto such an extent over the years that in the 1950s a Conservativeminister was moved to say, ‘We are all planners now.’ His comment atthe time was apt, for even though the Conservatives held the view thatthe economy should operate with the minimum of governmentintervention, until the 1970s the Conservatives were actively involved indetailed planning which, although insp ired by different political motivesthan those of the Labour Party, sought to control economic conditions.Broadly speaking, the Conservative Party believes in the ‘profit motive’and the enhancement of the individual’s position through his or her ownendeavours, while the Labour Party believes that the economy sho uld bemanaged for the benefit of society as a whole. When the Conservativesreturned to power in 1979 they announced that they were intending toloosen the constraints that had been imposed by previous Conservativeand Labour administrations and permit greater competitiveness. Byallowing ‘market forces’ to be the ultimate controller of the survival ordemise of industry th ey claimed that the British economy would expandmore quickly and on a firmer base than had been possible in the past.As we have seen, the key planks in the Conservative programme wereto reduce inflation, increase competitiveness, an d enco urage theexpansion of industry through encouraging investment an d removingrestrictions on entrepreneurs.

Control of industry

State Ownership

Up to 1945 nationalisation had been on a relatively small scale, but theLabour government that came to power in that year was committed toa comprehensive nationalisation programme. In 1946 the Bank ofEngland was taken over by the state, to be followed in the same year bythe coal mines and civil aviation. The Transport Act of 1947nationalised the railways, canals and some road transport, while in 1948and 1949 gas and iron and steel were added to the list (electricity had


been nationalised in 1926). The Conservatives denationalised iron andsteel in 1953, but the industry was taken ov er again by the Labourgovernment in 1967. The Labour Party does not have a monopoly ofnationalisation, however, for in 1954 the Conservatives set up theUnited Kingdom Atomic Energy Autho rity to develop nuclear powerfor peaceful purposes. In 1971 another Conservative governmentnationalised Rolls-Royce when financial difficulties drove the companyinto liquidation.

It can scarcely be said that the nationalised industries have had aneasy history. The establishment of the public sector and its role hasproduced a great deal of discussion in Parliament, in board roomsthroughout the country and in a large number of other places. One of theissues that has caused most argument is how the public industriesshould be run. The fundamental question here is whether they should beexpected to make a profit or whether they should be operated primarilyas a public service, being subsidised when necessary by thegovernment. This problem is well illustrated by the railways.

When the railways were nationalised by the Transport Act of 1947they had been making a loss for a number of years. Public ownershipdid not change the situation, and the question of profit versus publicservice was soon being hotly debated. The Act nationalising therailways had said that they should pay their way but a large labour force(648,740 workers in 1948), outdated equipmen t and a large number ofuneconomic branch lines made this difficult to achieve. In 1 963,however, the new chairman of British Railways, Dr Richard Beeching,published his rationalisation plan, which recommended that trackmileage should be cut from 17,000 to 8,000 and that 70,000 jobs shouldbe phased out. The report produced an imediate outcry from the public,who stood to lose their rail services, and from the railway unions, whosemembers were threatened with redundancy. A long and bitter discussionensued as to whether Beeching’s proposals should be implemented.

On commercial gro unds his findings made a great deal of sense. Therailways had been planned for the needs of the nineteenth century,before road transport had developed on any scale. Fierce competitionbetween rival companies meant that in some cases main lines duplicatedeach other, while country lines had lost much of their traffic to otherforms of transport, particularly the family car. Nevertheless, there werelarge numbers of people who did not have cars and for whom thewithdrawal of serv ices would cau se hardship, and it was for this reasonthat Beeching’s critics argued that social costs should also be taken intoconsideration when planning future rail services, as the railways were

110 MODERN BRITAIN

owned by the state. Taking social costs into account would, of course,mean that financial subsidies would have to be provided. In the event,many of Beechings’s proposals were adopted; but British Rail continuedto lose money.

The Conservative government elected in 1979 announced that itintended to privatise many of the nationalised industries and since thatdate it has sold a number of companies, including British Aerospace,Cable & Wireless, the National Freight Consortium, Britoil, BritishTelecom, British Gas and other power companies. Following theelection of 1992 it announced that British Rail and British Coal wouldalso be sold off. The sale of all these organisations has caused a greatdeal of political debate in the country; critics of the policy have claimedthat shares were sold too cheaply, while the Labour Party warned thatonce it returned to power it would reintroduce nationalisation in keyareas, though it has since modified such plans considerably.

Private enterprise

While control of the industries in the public sector is ultimately in thehands of Parliament, in the private sector, control is vested in those whohave a financial interest in a particular company . In most privatecompanies ownership is concentrated in a few hands, and in practicethe directors of a large number of small businesses are members of thesame family. Expansion inevitably requires capital and, in the firstinstance, this often means a loan from a bank or similar institution.Really large-scale developments, ho wever, are frequently financed by‘going public’, which means that members of the public are give achance to invest money in the company and thus participate in itsfortunes. Money is invested by buying stocks or shares on the StockExchange. Stocks are loans, either to the government (gilt-edged) or tocompanies, which earn a fixed-interest return. Shares, however, meanthat the purchaser actually becomes an owner of the company in whichhe or she is investing money, although this ownership may well beshared with several thousand other people. The shareholders as ownersof the company are responsible for appointing the board of directors,who run the company on their behalf. In practice the majority ofshareholders are more interested in receiving their dividends than ininterfering with how the company is run, and so most boards ofdirectors tend to be self-perpetuating.

During the 1960s and 1970s there was a trend towardsamalgamations between companies. Part of this has been due to large


companies buying up their smaller competitors, while there have alsomergers between groups of comparable size. Such mergers could beseen in all sections of industry: electronics, communications, motorvehicles and the food and service industries. Towards the end o f thedecade, however, although mergers, both nation ally and internation ally,were continuing to be a feature of the commercial scene, there was alsoevidence that certain companies felt that there were advantages inbreaking up large corporations. It is significan t how many of the largestUK companies are in the food and service industries, and it is trueto say that these are the sectors that have seen the most significantexpansion of their market share in recent years—at the expense ofmanufacturing industries. The largest manufacturing companies in theUnited Kingdom in 1993 were: Royal Dutch/Shell—oil, BP—oil;Unilever—food-related industries; BAT—tobacco, food, etc; BritishTelecom—communications; ICI—chemicals; British Aerospace;British Gas.

The concentration of economic power in fewer hands, brought aboutby the mergers of the 1960s, concerned the government of the day andin 1965 the powers of the then Board of Trade (now part of an enlargedDepartment of Trade and Industry) to investigate mergers wereincreased. In 1965 the Monopolies and Mergers Act strengthened theMonopolies Commission that had been established in 1948, andgovernment powers in this area were further strengthened in 1973 bythe Fair Trading Act, which is administered by the Director of FairTrading. In 1976 the Restrictive Trade Practices Act and the ResalePrices Act were passed to control activities which were felt to beagainst the public interest. The Director General of Fair Trading canalso investigate business practices that restrict competition under theterms of the Competition Act of 1980.

The City

The City is ro ughly a square mile of banking houses, insurance firmsand stockbrokers’ offices, rubbing shoulders with such famousbuildings as St Paul’s Cathedral and the Tower of London. Although nolonger the axis around which world trade revolves, London is still afinancial centre of considerable importance. It is the largestinternational insurance market in the world, and has important marketsfor the supply of goods and services, such as the Baltic Exchange andthe London Metal Exchange.

112 MODERN BRITAIN

The financial power of the City originated centuries ago. During theMiddle Ages merchants from London pioneered the wool trade withthe Contin ent. In Tudor times the City invested in the voyages ofexplorers and privateers such as Sir Francis Drake, while the support ofthe City for the parliamentary cause was one of the reasons for thedefeat of Charles I in the Civil War. Many of the great institutions ofthe City were established during the seventeenth century. In the 1680sEdward Lloy d’s coffee house, from which grew the great insurancemarket of Lloyd’s, began its operations, while in the last decade of thecentury the Bank of England was founded.

The Bank of England

The Bank of England was founded in 16 94. It is interesting to note that,although it b ecame banker to the government and the leading bank ofissue, it was not until 1946 that the Bank was nationalised. It is nodoubt due to this long period of independence that the Bank stilloperates with a certain amount of autonomy. Indeed, at times someMPs, particularly Labour MPs, have complained that the Bank has toomuch freedom of action and should be controlled more closely.

The Bank of England plays a very important role in the commerciallife of the United Kingdom. In addition to acting as banker to thegovernment, it is also banker for overseas central banks and commercialbanks in Britain. In England and Wales all banknotes are issu ed by theBank of England, although in Scotland and North ern Ireland a numberof banks have this right.

In addition to the responsibilities outlined above, the Bank also actsas a middleman between the commercial institutions of the City and thegovernment. It advises the government on monetary matters, and is alsoexpected to ensure that the measures adopted by the government are putinto effect. Metho ds employed by the Bank for implementinggovernment policy include the regulation of interest rates and thebuying and selling of Treasury bills. The head of th e Bank isthe Governor, a gov ernment appointee, and he presides over a boardof directors, also chosen by the government. Privatisation of the Bankof England is currently under discussion.

Other banks

The most important clearing banks are the Abbey National (previously abuilding society), the Midland, Barclays, the National Westminster and


Lloyds—branches or associates of which can be found in virtually everyHigh Street in Britain. The clearing banks between them provide thebulk of the banking services required b y the British people: current anddeposit accounts, short-term loans and advice on financial matters. Thebanks are closely involved in many aspects of national and internationalfinance, and some of the banking groups also have extensive overseasinterests.

Other financial institutions

The merchant banks play an important role in London’s activities as acommercial centre. Although there are some sixty concerns which couldbe described as merchant banks, the most exclusive are the seventeenwhich belong to the Accepting Houses Committee. The merchan t banksare involved in a wide range of activities. Some specialise, while othersare active in a number of different fields. Broadly speaking, their sphereof operations lies in one or more of the following areas: they managefunds for individuals and trusts; they finance foreign trade; they adviseindustrial companies (there are few major take-overs that get very farbefore both sides call in a merchant bank); and they are involved in theforeign security b usiness, providing an important link between Londonand overseas banking centres. In the 1980s a number of foreign banks,particularly banks based in the United States and Japan, bought sharesin London merchant banks. It seems likely that foreign investment inbanking will con tinue with the advent of the European single market,while liberalisation of the insurance market and investment serv ices isdue by the middle of the 1990s.

The Stock Exchange was formally established in London in 1802.During the nineteenth cen tury other stock markets were developed inprovincial centres, but at the end o f the century they were tendin g toamalgamate. The London Stock Exchange, which is one of the largestsuch institutions in the world, is based in London, with provin cialcentres in Belfast, Birmingham, Glasgow, Leeds and Manchester.

On 1 March 1986 new legislation gov erning membership of the StockExchange came into force. Under the new regulations membership ofthe exchange was made available to corporate firms or individualmembers. There are strict rules governing the admission of membersinto the Stock Exchange and the conduct of business once they havebeen admitted. Memb ers of the Stock Exchange buy and sell securities(i.e. stocks, shares, etc.) in both the international and the domesticmarket, deal in ‘g ilts’, bonds, options and financial futures. In 1980 the

114 MODERN BRITAIN

Unlisted Securities Market (USM) was established to deal inthe securities of small companies, that did not wish to obtain a StockExchange listing.

Lloyd’s is probably best known for its world-wide involvement inmaritime insurance. Although this still produces a large amount ofrevenue, Lloyd’s also has interests in many other fields. It is said th at itis possible to insu re against anything provided the price is right, andLloyd’s goes a long way towards proving this by providing insurance forstatesmen against assassination or serious injury, for farmers againsthurricanes and for shipping and air firms against the loss of their shipsor aircraft, or injury to their passengers. Lloyd’s is no t a company, buta market for insurance, where individual underwriters transactbusiness.To become an underwriting member of Lloyd’s rigorousfinancial requirements have to be satisfied, design ed to ensure completebusiness integrity In recent years Lloyd’s members have experiencedconsiderable losses owing to a series of disasters, includingearthquakes, oil-rig fires and shipping calamities; it is estimated thatlosses for the years from 1988 to 1991 amounted to some £6 billion.While Lloyd’s is the best-known insurance institution there are nearly850 insurance companies in the United Kingdom handling bothinternational and national business. British companies handle about 20per cent of general insurance placed on the international market, whileLondon is the world centre for reinsurance.

In recent years there have been a number of scandals in the City thathave caused anxiety among many peo ple and, as a result, a number ofsteps have been taken to introduce new measures of regulation. Oneof the most significant of these is the setting up of a Securities andInvestment Board, which among other things will have the powerto require self-regulating organisations—such as the Stock Exchange—to amend their rules if it is thought that they do not offer sufficientprotection for investors. The full powers of the Securities andInvestment Board are laid down by the Financial Services Billintroduced in 1986.

Industrial relations

Trade unions

Although the origins of the trade union movement are often traced backto the craft guilds of the Middle Ages, the modern trade union is


essentially a product of the Industrial Revolution. During the lateeighteenth century there were a number of attempts by workers toimprove their conditions, and these were usu ally resisted by theauthorities. In 1799 and 1800 Parliament, fearful that the events of theFrench Revolution might be repeated in Britain, passed the CombinationLaws. These laws, by forbidding working men the right to combine tonegotiate for better wages and conditions, effectively checked thegrowth of unions until 1824, when they were repealed. In 1825, however,a new Act was passed, which once again restricted the right of men totake effective industrial action. During the late 1820s and early 1830s anumber of unions were formed, but they were subject to continualharassment.

By the 1840s a numb er of unions were in existence, usually drawingtheir membership from those who practised a particular craft. Inaddition to bargainin g with employers these unions were particularlyconcerned with providing sickness grants and similar benefits for theirmembers. They were still restricted by anti-union legislation, but thefirst Trades Union Congress, which met in 1868, could claim torepresent about 118,000 workers. During the next few decades theposition of the trad e unionist improved, although there were still manybattles to be won. In 1900 there were rather more than 2 millionworkers who were members of 1,323 trade unions. Seventy years laterthe number of unionists had grown to about 11 million, although as aresult of amalgamatio ns the number of unions had fallen to about 480.In 1991 the figures had fallen to just under 10 million and 309respectively. According to an ILO report trade union membershipdeclined from 55 per cent of the labour force in 1980 to 39 per cent in1992, the greatest decline in any country apart from Sweden. In spite ofthe tendency towards larger unions, a large number of British unions arestill basically ‘craft unions’, that is, members belong to a union becausethey have a particular skill, rather than because they b elong to aparticular industry. This tend s to keep the number of unions relativelylarge, and can also cause demarcation, or ‘who does what’, disputes.

The central body of the British trade union movement is the TradesUnion Congress (TUC). The Co ngress itself meets only once a year,when delegates from the member unions meet to discuss matters ofconcern to the movement. Each year this annual conference elects aGeneral Council, consisting of thirty-four general secretaries of tradeunions, and the council acts as the voice of the TUC for the rest of theyear. The only full-time member of the General Council is the GeneralSecretary, who is also the chief officer of the TUC.

116 MODERN BRITAIN

There are seventy-three trade unions affiliated to the TUC—fewerthan a decade ago, largely owing to the amalgamations that have takenplace in recent years—representing about 7.7 million unionists. It isestimated that almost 80 per cent of trade unionists belong to the twenty-five largest unions. The biggest unions are UNISON, comprising thevarious public service sectors previously represented by separate unions,with 1.4 million members, and the Transport and General Workers’Union, with over 1.2 million members. The Amalgamated Union ofEngineering Workers, and the former General, Municipal,Boilermakers’ and Allied Trades’ Union (now known as the GMB),each of which had about 1 million members in the mid-1980s, hadshrunk to 702,2 28 and 860,000 respectively by 1991.

Since the Second World War British industry has acquireda reputation for being strike-prone, although in fact the figure for dayslost during the 1960s through industrial action—5.4 million—comparesfavourably with other industrialised coun tries. In the 1970s the figurerose significantly, but even so the figure of 13 million days lost between1971 and 1980 gave Britain a better record than Canada, Italy or theUnited States. During the 1980s the number has declined again,standing at 3.8 million days lost through strikes in 1983, and fell to761,000 in 1991, the lowest for 100 years.

In 1965 the Labour government appointed a Royal Commission tostudy the trade union movement and this body reported in 1968. One ofthe key recommendations of the Royal Commission was thata commission on Industrial Relations should be set up. Thisrecommendation was put into effect, but as the Commission’s role wasto bring unions and employers together on a voluntary basis its powerswere somewhat limited. Meanwhile the Labour government wasworking on a far more controversial measure, details of which werecontained in a policy document entitled In Place of Strife, publishedearly in 1969. The proposals guaranteed the rights of unionists, but alsocontained measures that the trade unions regarded as totallyunacceptable. After a long and bitter struggle within the Labourmovement, the TUC announced that it was prepared to give a ‘solemnand binding undertaking’ to intervene in strikes where unionists were atfault. Although this voluntary declaration fell far short of what thegovernment was aiming at, the hostility of the unions forced it to backdown, and shelve plans for legislation.

The Conservative Party, which returned to power in 1970, had nosuch inhibitions. Sho rtly after the election the outlin e of an IndustrialRelations Bill was drawn up, and this became law in August 1971.


Under the Act, un ions were required to register with the Registrar ofTrade Unions and Employers’ Associations. The Act also put theCommission on Industrial Relations on a statutory basis, set upthe National Ind ustrial Relations Court, and forbade ‘un fair industrialpractices’ by employers and employees. The TUC felt that the Actrestricted its rights and instructed member unions not to register. If aunion did not register it would not, of course, be reco gnised as official,but the TUC obviously hoped that by adopting a policy of non-cooperation it could render the Act unworkable.

The Act came into effect at the beginning of 1972 and from then untilits repeal by a Labour government in mid-1974 it was a thorn in theflesh of labour relations in Britain. During 1974 the Labour governmentannounced that it and the unions had agreed that the future of labourrelations in Britain would be decided within the terms of a ‘socialcontract’ (see p. 136). However, this well-meaning but extremely vaguedeclaration of principle had little effect in a time of unprecedentedinflation and economic despondency. In mid-1975 the governmentannounced that no pay increases were to exceed £6 a week. InSeptember that year, at the TUC’s annual conference, the trade unionsagreed to support the government’s plan by a two to one majority.

The Employment Protection Act of 1975, and the Trade Unions andLabour Relations (Amendment) Act of the following y ear gave workersgreater protection against dismissal and the right to higher redundancypayments an d provided legal immunities for the unions. Unions werealso given access to comp any information which was relevant to wagenegotiations.

When the Conservatives returned to power in 1979 they introducedthe Employment Acts of 1980 and 1982 and the Trade Union Act of1984, which restricted the po wers of trade union officials by introducingsecret ballots on issues such as official strikes, the election of certainofficials and the payment of levies to political parties. The Acts alsointroduced chan ges in the legal standing of trade unions, allowing themto be sued in the civil courts in certain circumstances, and establishednew regulations for picketing. Although the government claimed thatthe Acts were designed to increase democracy in the trade unionmovement they were widely seen as an attack on the unity of the tradeunion movement. It is interesting to note that the req uirement that unionshad to hold a secret ballot on the issue of a political levy backfired onthe Conservatives, as the overwhelming majority of unions have votedin favour of a levy being paid to the Labour Party.

118 MODERN BRITAIN

It is clear that the antagonism between the Conserv ative governmentsand the TUC has increased since the 197 9 election. This is partly due tothe legislation outlined above; partly to the fact that the Government hasrarely consulted the trade union movement on policy—as comparedwith the Labour government which regularly sought the opinion ofleading unionists—and partly to the anti-union stance adopted byConservative ministers to trade unionists in the civil service and thepublic sector. In August 1993 a new Act, the Trade Union Reformand Employment Rights Act, came into force. This abolished WageCouncils—set up in 1909 to set minimum wages in occupations such ashairdressing, catering and shops—thereby making the UK the onlycountry in the European Community without a minimum wage system.Critics of the measure pointed out that women and ethnic minoritieswould be particularly badly affected by th e Act. In addition to theabolition of Wage Councils, a new system of collecting union leviesfrom workers was established.

The Confederation of British Industry

The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) represents some 300,000companies and acts as a mouthpiece for business. Matters of policy aredecided by the 400-member council and there is also a permanent staffheaded by a director-general. It provides advisory services to itsmembers and represents the employers in any meetings between thetrade unions, management and the government. In addition it maintainslinks with similar bodies in other countries.

The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service

The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) wasestab lished in 1974. It is an independent body, although it is government-financed, and is designed to intervene in labour disputes at th e requestof the parties concerned. The board of ACAS consists of a chairman andnine other members and has the power to nominate an arbitrator(frequently a leading academic with industrial relations experience) if itfeels that such a course is appropriate.

Chapter 8Life in Britain today

Population

At the beginning o f the nineteenth century most of the inhabitants of theUnited Kingd om lived in the country. According to the first officialcensus in 1801, the population of England and Wales was 8.8 million,7.3 million of whom lived in the countryside. In 1831 agriculture stillaccounted for the largest sector of the country’s labour force, givingwork to 28 per cent of all families. By 1851 the population had risen tonearly 18 million, half of them living in urban areas. London, which hadgrown in size from just over 1 million in 1801 to 2.6 million in 1851,was by far the largest city, but industrial centres such as Liverpool,Manchester and Birmingham had also expanded at an unprecedentedrate. In 1801 Birmingham had 71,000 inhabitants; fifty years later therewere 233,000 people living in the city, while Manchester had grownfrom 75,000 to 303,000 and Liverpool from 82,000 to 376,000. By themiddle of the twentieth century London’s population was 8.3 millionand Birmingham’s 1.1 million, while Manchester and Liverpool had703,000 and 789,000 inhabitants respectively. It seems that 1951represented the peak population in the large cities, fo r at the time of the1961 census London had 8.1 million inhabitants, while other large citiesshowed similar small, but none the less significant, falls in population.

At the beginning of the 1990s the pop ulation of the United Kingdomwas estimated to be 57.4 million , living at a density of 237 per squarekilometre. In common with other industralised countries, Britain hasexperienced a fall in both birth and death rates during the twentiethcentury. This has meant that, although fewer people have been born,they are surviving longer. In 1870 the birth rate was 35.5 per 1,000 andthe death rate 22.9 per 1,000; in 1991 the figures for England and Waleswere 13.8 per 1,000 and 11.7 p er 1,000 respectively. At the beginning

120 LIFE IN BRITAIN TODAY

of the 1870s the average expectation of life was 41 years for men and45 y ears for women; in 1991 it was 73 for men and 78 for women. Lackof effective methods of birth control, among other factors, meant thatthe average nineteenth-century family consisted of between five and sixchildren. Many children, however, did not reach maturity, succumbingto diseases that have virtually disappeared in the twentieth century. In1870 the infant mortality rate in the United Kingdom was 150 per1,00 0; at the beginning of the 1990s it was 7.4 per 1,000.

Marriage and family life

Although marriage remains a popular institution in Britain—58 per centof the population over 16 are married—there have been considerablechanges in the pattern of relationships in recent years. In 1972 therewere nearly half a million marriages in the United Kingdom; by 1981 thenumber had declin ed to under 400,000 and by 1990 it was down to 375,400. The number of marriages ending in divorce has increased from 2 inevery 1,000 married couples in 1961 to 13 in every 1,000 in 1991.(These figures are for England and Wales—rates for Scotland andNorthern Ireland are lo wer, reflecting the different religious and culturalstructure of those parts of the United Kingdom.) The rise in the divorcerate in recent years has been seen by some as evidence of decliningmoral standards, but it is probably more realistic to account for it bychanges in the law and social attitudes. In 1969 the Divorce Reform Actwas passed, which states that the only ground for divorce is that themarriage has ‘irretrievably broken down’. This means that whileadultery, cruelty and desertion, previously regarded as grounds fordivorce, could be (and still are) used as evidence that a marriage hadbroken down , the committing of such acts is no longer the only cause ofdivorce. An important new provision in the Act was that a divorce canbe granted, after two years’ separation, if a couple agree that they wanttheir marriage terminated. It is also possible for a marriage to bebrought to an end on the p etition of one spo use after a period of fiveyears’ separation. In 1984 a new Act was passed which put a limit onthe length of time that a divorced spouse could receive maintenance.This Act was criticised by many women’s organisations, which felt thatit discriminated against wo men, as they usually suffered mostfinancially when a marriage broke up.

With increasing urbanisation, old family patterns have broken down.When people lived in one community for most of their lives they tendedto remain in close contact with members of the family. Many farms, for

MODERN BRITAIN 121

example, were worked on a family basis, which meant that a man wouldmeet his parents, brothers and sisters virtually every day. Otherbusinesses, notably small shops and service trades, were also often runby families, and even today one still comes across evidence of this inthe names of firms; for example W.H.Grant & SonsLtd, Williams Bros(Brothers). Today, however, many families have their membersscattered throughout the country, and meetings are irregular, usuallytaking place on special occasions such as weddings or funerals.Nevertheless, a large number of families still maintain regular contact,which is easier today than it used to be as a result of improvedcommunications. Many parents keep in touch with their married orunmarried children by telephone, while widespread car ownership meansthat relatives can be visited at weekends and during holidays. Althoughmost young couples would undoubtedly like to set up their own home,it is often financially impossible, so many spend the first year or so oftheir married life living with one or other set of parents. The problemof old people is also one that is often solved within the family context. Afeature of the 1980s was that the population remained relatively stablethroughout the decade, while live births actually rose from 694,000 in1983 to 792,000 in 1991 (figures are for England, Scotland and Wales).Some 18 per cent of the population were over retirement age in 1991(60 for women, 65 for men), compared with 15 per cent in 1961.

The position of women

Changes in family life are linked with ch anges in the position and role ofwomen in society. It is sometimes suggested that the position of womenin nineteenth-century society can be summed up by the clothes theywere expected to wear. The wide hooped crinoline was no doubtextremely effective in concealing what was referred to in the phrase ofthe time as an ‘interesting condition’, but it had few other practicalbenefits. As far as upper and middle-class women were concerned, theiraim in life was to look after a man’s home and to bring up his family.Legally a wife’s position was inferior to that of her husband , an d mostwomen were prepared to accept this status. It is ironical that althoughduring the greater part of the nineteenth century there was a woman onthe throne of Britain, members of her sex were not permitted to vote,take degrees at the ancient universities or, if married, own property intheir own right. According to the law which prevailed during much ofthe nineteenth century, a woman’s property passed to her husband onmarriage, while any property she subsequently acquired also became


his. Between 1870 and 1893 a number of Acts were passed to alter thissituation and to establish the right of a married woman to retain herproperty.

It is interesting to note that even among the wealthy classes of societythe education of girls was generally thought to be unnecessary As far asmost parents were concerned, girls were expected to be able to play amusical instrument, sew and engage in genteel conversation. Among thelower classes, education was likewise considered unnecessary, as mostgirls would find work as domestic servants, or in mills and factories.However, attitudes gradually changed as the century progressed anda number of schools for girls were foun ded. Bedford College, later to bea women’s college of the University of London, was established in1849, and Girton College, Cambridge, in 1869 (although women werenot granted Cambridge degrees until 1920). The Education Act 1870provided elementary education for g irls as well as boys.

Increasing educational opportunities produced a desire for equalcareer opportunities and the right to vote. The first women’s suffrageorganisation was formed in the 1860s, although perhaps the best knownwas the Women’s Social and Political Union, founded by thePankhursts in 1903. During the period leading up to the First WorldWar the ‘suffragettes’ conducted a sustained campaign to win the votefor women. In 1918 they won their battle, although it is generallythought that the involvement o f women in war work of variouskinds did more for their cause than the demonstrations against thegovernment. It is perhaps characteristic of the male politicians of 1918that they could not resist adding a fin al insult to the women whowere being enfranchised for the first time. Men had always been grantedthe vote at the age of 21; the 1918 Act gave the vote to women aged 30and over, and it was not until th e 1920s that they were given the vote onequal terms with men. In recent years women have been campaigningfor greater equality in job opportunities and rates of pay (see also p. 134).The Sex Discrimination Act and the Equal Pay Act came into force inDecember 1975. The former made it unlawful for employers todiscriminate between men and women when filling jobs (with a fewexceptions), while the latter laid down that men and women doingthe same job were entitled to similar rates of pay. A further SexDiscrimination Act was passed in 1986.

The Equal Opportu nities Commission was set up in 1975 to enforcethe Sex Discrimination and Equal Pay Acts. However, there are stillquite considerable discrepancies between the payment received by menand women, partly because women tend to work part-time or in jobs

MODERN BRITAIN 123

that only attract low wages. It is also clear that it is difficult for womento obtain p romotion in both the public and the private sectors and thereare still relatively few women in top jobs in the civil service, industry oreducation. In spite of the fact that Britain has had a female monarch,Queen Elizabeth II, since 1952, and had a woman Prime Ministerbetween 1979 and 1990, the 42 per cen t of women in the work forcestill have a long battle ahead to achieve equality.

Commonwealth immigration

Another group who feel they have suffered considerably fromdiscrimination in recent years are the Commonwealth immigrants. Afterthe Second World War large numbers of people from theCommonwealth moved to Britain in ord er to find work and improvedliving conditions. Many of the newcomers came from ‘new’Commonwealth countries, such as India, Pakistan and the West Indianislands. In 1962 the Conservative government introduced theCommonwealth Immigration Act, which limited the number of peoplewho were admitted to Britain each year. As the majority of immigrantswere from the ‘new’ Commonwealth and Pakistan the cry immediatelywent up that the Act was racist in concept. These criticisms wereredoubled when in 1968 an d 1971 further Acts were passed which madeentry even more difficult, especially for those with no ancestral ties withBritain.

It is estimated that the ethnic minority population of Great Britain atthe beginning of the 1990s numbered some 2.7 million , or about 4.9 percent of the total population. Many of the newcomers have tended tosettle in towns in the Midlands and the north of Eng land, while Londonalso has a sizeable ethnic minority. In some areas there has been frictionbetween the ethnic minorities and their white neighbours, and thesituation has not been helped by the fact that a number of right-wingpoliticians have made speeches suggesting that repatriation schemesshould be introduced. The Race Relations Act of 1976 makesdiscrimination on grounds of colour, race or ethnic or national originunlawful. It also established the Commission for Racial Equality, whichreplaced the Community Relations Commission that had been set up bythe Race Relations Act 1968.


Sport and entertainment

As we have seen, industrialisation and urbanisation had farreachingeffects on many aspects of life. Of particular importance is the effect ofhow people work, how they meet the challenge of new methods and newmachines, and how they adapt to new pressures on their way of life. Butthey do not spend all their time working. They also take part in a varietyof leisure-time activities, and in this area, as in others, there have beenimportant changes in the last 150 years. When life was centred on thesmall rural community, amusements were for the most part provided bythe villagers themselves. The most popular ways of relaxing seem tohave been dancing and music-making, while a large number o f games,legal or illegal, were also played. On occasion these homemadeamusements might be supplemented by travelling actors or musicians, orsometimes the country people might travel to a nearby town to see aboxing match, theatrical produ ction, or similar entertainment. With thecoming of the railways cheap travel became a reality; Thomas Cook’sday outing between Loughborough and Leicester in 1841 was theforerunner of the charter trips and package holidays of today

One of the important effects of industrialisation as far as leisureactivities are concerned is that there has been a change fromparticipating to observing. Instead of taking part in sport or culturalactivities people tend to watch others, often paid professionals. This isparticularly true in the case of one of Britain’s most po pularentertainments, Association Football or ‘soccer’.

In its original form football was (and indeed, still is) widely playedby amateur teams throughout the country. In 1888 the Football Leaguewas founded in England and it is from this that the multi-million-poundgame of today has grown. At the present time the Football Leagueconsists of ninety-two teams, graded into four divisions. While eachteam will have its devoted supporters who turn out to see their team inaction each Saturday afternoon, the clubs that attract most attentionare those in the Premier Division. Many Premier Division footballersare household names, sometimes enjoying the same kind of fame as filmstars and pop singers. It is estimated that attendance at football matchesis around the 19 million mark each season, while there are also largenumbers o f people who prefer to follo w th e sport on telev ision. Theclimax of the year for players and spectators alike is the Cup Final,played at the Wembley Stadium in London in early May. In addition toplaying in league matches teams play other matches at home and abroad,while England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland all have national

MODERN BRITAIN 125

teams that participate in international matches. In recent yearsattendance at matches has been fallin g off (perhaps owing in part to thehooliganism that prevails at some games), b ut it is still true to say thatfootball is the dominant Saturday afternoon entertainment betweenAugust and May, particularly in the north of England. Some, of course,prefer to play rather than watch, and there are something like a millionamateur players in the country. The controlling body of AssociationFootball in England is the Football Association, which was founded in1863.

Rugby football is a game which seems to appeal mainly to English-speaking countries, although it is also played in France, Argentina andelsewhere. Rugby Union is confined to amateur clubs (there are about1,60 0 in England), while Rugby League is played by professionalsbelonging to clubs concentrated in the north of England. Rugby Unionis popular at many boys’ scho ols (particularly public schools) and alsoat universities. International Rugby Union fixtures are often arranged,and there are county champ ionships and other tournaments.

Like rugby football, cricket is largely confined to English-speakingcountries (possibly, a cynic might say, because it is impossible totranslate the rules). It is widely played in towns and villages throughoutthe country, while most scho ols, universities and many other institutionsalso have teams. There are eighteen ‘first-class’ county teams who playfor the County Championship. Each summer a ‘Test’ series is playedbetween an England team and a touring side from overseas, whileduring the winter an England team usually tours abroad. The governingbody of cricket in Britain is the Cricket Council, made up of a number ofbodies representing the various groups interested in the game. In spiteof its leisurely pace (a first-class county match can take four days and aTest match, five) the game has many devoted followers, both spectatorsand participants.

If crick et is England’s national game, Scotland can lay claim to golf.Since the late nineteenth century, however, the ‘Royal and AncientGame’ has spread so uth of the border and is now played in all parts ofthe United Kingdom. Some golf courses are owned by local authorities,but a large number are in the hands of private clubs, many of whichcharge high membership fees. Tennis courts are also owned by bothmunicipalities and private clubs, the most famous of the latter being theAll England Croquet and Lawn Tennis Club at Wimbledon. It is atWimbledon that the open championships are played each year, andthese usually attract leading players from all over the world.


Other sports that are popular in the United Kingdom includeathletics, hockey, bowls an d various kinds of water sport. Sailing hasrecently become very popular, both at coastal resorts and at inlandcentres, while rowing is practised on many rivers and inland lakes.Mountaineering and v arious types of hill-walking are also popular,particularly in Wales, the north of England and Scotland.

Hunting in Britain refers to the pursuit of wild animals by a pack ofdogs and people either mounted or on foot, the best-known branch ofthe sport being fox hunting. In the West of England stag hunting is stillpractised, while hares are often used as quarry in other parts of thecountry. In recent years, hunting, along with other blood sports, hascome in for considerable criticism from those who feel that pursuinganimals to their death is cruel and also from those who believe thatmany of the species hunted are in danger of extinction. Shooting—ofgame birds—is indulged in by landowners and others who can affordthe high fees demanded by those who own shooting rights in variousparts of the country. There is a certain amount of rough shooting insome areas, while wildfowling is popular in coastal districts, particularin East Anglia. There is also some deer-stalk ing in the Highlands ofScotland. The other popular ‘field’ sport is fishing and, as with shooting,most of the best areas are available only to those who purchase alicence. Licences for ‘coarse’ fishing are inexpensive, and manystretches of river and canal bank are lined with rows of patient anglersduring summer weekends and evenings.

Horse racing is a sport with a large following. Basically there are twokinds of horse racing in Britain: flat racing, from March to No vember,and steeplechasing, from August to June. Wh ile horse racing attractslarge crowds—the most fashionable meeting being that held at Ascotduring June, ‘Royal Ascot’—there is probably even more interest offthe course in the ‘betting shops’ that can be found in every town inBritain. The betting shops exist to provide the punter with off-coursegambling facilities, and they are licensed by the local authority. Manyhunts hold point-to-point races to supplement their funds. Greyhoundracing also has a larg e number o f supporters, mainly in the big cities.

Every year a number of motor-car and motor-cycle meetings are heldthroughout the country. Perhaps the most important event for cars is theBritish Grand Prix, while each year the Tourist Trophy for motorcyclists is held in the Isle of Man. Rally driving has also attractedconsiderable interest in recent years, and the Royal Automobile Clubarranges a nation-wide rally every year.

MODERN BRITAIN 127

The co-ordination of government policy towards sport is one of theresponsibilities of the Secretary of State for National Heritage, inEngland, and of the national Secretaries of State in the other countriesof the United Kingdom. The national Sports Council (and equivalentbodies in Wales, Scotland and Ireland) advises the government onmatters relating to amateur sport, while regional sports councils lookafter the interests of their areas. All schools are expected to providefacilities for phy sical recreation, and a large selection of sports arecatered for. Most boys’ schools play either soccer or rugby footballduring the winter months and cricket during the summer, while somewill also provide alternatives such as hockey. Girls usually play hockeyor netball during the winter and tennis or rounders in summer, althoughlacrosse is also found in some schools. At one time tennis seemed to bemore popular at girls’ schools than at boys’, but today most secondaryschools provide some form of tennis facilities. Other sports found inschools include badminton, swimming—an increasing number ofschools are acquiring their own swimming pools, often with theassistance of the parents who are members of Parent-TeacherAssociations—fencing and, of course, athletics.

The Theatre

There are some 300 professional theatres in the United Kingdom, nearlya third of which are to be found in London and its suburbs. In the WestEnd (stretching roughly from Piccadilly to the Aldwych) some thirtytheatres provide a wide range of plays, musicals and revues. Themajority of London’s theatres are owned and run as business concerns,but the Royal National Theatre and the Royal Shakespeare Company bothreceive sizeable subsidies. The National Theatre Company, foundedafter years of procrastination in 1963, now has a purpose-built theatreon the banks of the Thames. The Royal Shakespeare Company presentsplays by Shakespeare at the Royal Shakespeare Theatre in Stratford-upon-Avon, the poet’s birthplace, and a mixture of old and modernplays at the Barbican in the capital. Both the National Theatre and theRSC tour in Britain and ov erseas.

Theatre in the provinces is currently suffering from rising costs andshrinking audiences, a situation made worse by reductions in grantsfrom central bodies such as the Arts Council and local authorities.However, many survive, providing a mixture of plays from the classicalrepertoire, modern pieces and ‘who-dunnits’ on a regular basis.Selecting a balanced programme presents a challenge, and on occasion


there have been clashes between directors who are considered ‘tooadvanced’ and conservative theatre boards. Most of the civic theatresare repertory theatres, that is, they rely on putting on a number of playsin a season, all with relatively short runs. There are also commercialtheatres, some of which present plays prior to a London performance,and a few touring companies.

The Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, provides a home for theRoyal Opera and Royal Ballet. In addition to giving London seasons,both companies tour at home and abroad, although in practice thelimited number of provincial theatres that can provide facilities for amajor operatic production means that tours are often restricted in scope.The English National Opera Company also has its headquarters inLondon, and presents a season of opera each year during the winter.Other opera companies include the English Opera Group, the WelshNational Opera and the Scottish Opera. While the Royal Ballet isprobably the best-known British ballet company, the Ballet Rambert isthe oldest. Other ballet companies include London’s Festival Ballet andthe Scottish Theatre Ballet.

The United Kingdom has a number of well known orchestras.London alone has five that enjoy considerable international standing:the London Philharmonic, the London Symphony, the RoyalPhilharmonic, the New Philharmonia and the BBC Symphony. Outsidethe capital, the best-known orchestra is probably the Hallé, whoseheadquarters are in Manchester. In ad dition to the symphony orchestrasthere are a number of chamber orchestras, such as the English ChamberOrchestra and the London Mozart Players. As in the case of the theatre,patronage of operas, ballet and concerts is confined to a small minorityof the population, with the result that most companies and orchestrashave to be supported by subsidies from the state and local authorities inorder to survive. Pop and rock concerts are usually run on a commercialbasis and there are frequent concerts throughout the coun try, inclu ding anumber of open-air spectaculars during the summer months.

Museums and art galleries are usually run by local authoritiesalthough national museums, such as the British Museum, the ScienceMuseum and the National Gallery, are the responsibility of theDepartment for National Heritage, which was set up in 1993. In practicegovernment funds are channelled through the Arts Council an d its tenregional arts boards. Members of the Arts Council of Great Britain areappointed by the Secretary of State for National Heritage and each yearthey are responsible for allocating funds to theatres, orchestras, operaand ballet companies and a variety of other cultural enterprises. Local

MODERN BRITAIN 129

authorities also contribute towards the arts, although many are critcisedfor not spending as much as they are entitled to. Money from privatesources and from industrial concerns also plays an important part insupporting artistic ventures, including festivals that take place all overthe country. The most famous festival in the United Kingdom isprobably the Edinburgh Festival, which is held in the late summer. Otherpopular festivals include the City of Lon don Festival, the Bath Festivaland the Aldeburgh Festival.

In 1960 there were 3,034 cinemas in Great Britain; ten years laterthere were 1,529. In 1983 there were 1,500 screens in 803 cinemas, andadmissions had dropped to 60 million. However, by 1991 admissionshad risen to 100 million, while in the same year sixteen new multiplexcinemas opened, bringing the number of screens to 1,642. At the sametime, the custom of watching films at home has become widely adoptedin the last few years and it is estimated that 68 per cent of homes hadhome video-recorders in 1991, compared with 35 per cent in 1983.

Other leisure activities

In addition to the sporting and cultural activities outlined above, theBritish people engage in a wide range of other leisure-time activities.Traditionally the public house has been regarded as one of the maincentres of British life outside working hours, and although a large numberof pubs have suffered from attempts to give them a modern image,others strive to retain the atmosphere that made the pub an institution.Many pubs are ‘tied houses’, that is, they are owned by breweries, andin some cases the owners have tried to establish a corporate image.Other innovations include juke boxes, fruit machines and ‘canned’music, often introduced at the expense of dartboards and other familiarfeatures of the pub scene. Recently there have been some indicationsthat the new image does not find universal acceptance and this hasresulted in some modernisation programmes bein g modified.

Foreigners—and many British residents—have often criticised thelicensing laws that govern pub opening hours and the sale of alcoholicdrinks in the United Kingdom and after much discussion licensing lawshave been relaxed to allow pubs to be open ‘all day’ during the week,which in practice means between 11.00 a.m. to 11.00 p.m. Sundayhours are shorter.

In the past the pub often fulfilled the fu nction of an informal club,and to a certain extent this remains true, particularly in rural areas. Thepub was regarded as a male preserve, and women were tolerated only if


they kept to the lounge or saloon bar. While many pubs concentrate onproviding alcoholic beverages, others also provid e food at the bar, orhave restaurants attached.

Most workers in Britain are entitled to four week s’ annual holidaywith pay in addition to public holidays. While many people take theirholidays in Britain, the coasts, particularly those in the south and west,being very popular, some 21 million holidays were taken abroad in1991, with Spain, France and the United States being the most populardestinations. Charter flights and ‘package tours’ are usually wellpatronised, in spite of hair-raising stories about half-finished hotels andinadequate food. Other prefer to travel independently, using one of themany fast sea or air routes that link Britain with Europe.

In the past the British holiday was often spent at a guest house orsmall hotel at a seaside resort, or at that peculiarly British institution,the holiday camp. However, the increasing cost of accommodation andthe lack of value for money in many places have driven more and morepeople to make their own arrangements, with the result that thecaravaning or camping holiday has b ecome extremely popular.

There is little doubt that the factor that has had most effect on thechanging pattern of the British holiday is the increase in car ownership.Sixty-seven per cent of households have the use of a car, while 23 percent have two or more. The growth of car ownership, of course, has hada far-reaching effect on aspects of life other than holidays, for it haschanged patterns of transport and involved the building of new roadsand motorways.

Incomes

When the First World War broke out skilled male workers were earningan average wage of just under £100 a year. By 1924 average wages hadrisen to £ 180, but the economic difficulties of the late 1920s and early1930s meant that skilled workers’ average earnings rose only £15between 192 4 and 1935. After the Second World War earnings roserapidly. The average for a skilled worker was £796 in 1960 and around£2,000 in 1974. Ten years later it was about £8,000.

Women have always tended to be paid less than men. In 1914 theskilled woman worker was paid an average of £44 a year and her sisterin the professions an average of £89. Of course, at that time the numberof professional women was very small. Most were either teachers(average income for qualified women, £104 per year) or nurses (averageincome, £55 per year). By 1971 wo men manual workers were earning

MODERN BRITAIN 131

£820 per year, about half the amount that men were earning at that time.In spite of legislation to ensure similar pay for similar jobs women’s paystill lags behind that of men—in mid-1991 average gross weeklyearnings for men were £319, or just ov er £16,500 a year, while theweekly figure for women was £222, or £11,544 a year.

The basic working week in the United Kingdom is between thirty-five and forty hours, with non-manual workers tending to work shorterhours than manual workers. Office hours are usually from 9.00 a.m. to5.00 p.m. or 5.30 p.m. with a lunch hour between 1.00 and 2.00 p.m.However, hours of work, length of holidays and rules about overtimediffer from occupation to occupation and are the result of collectivebargaining between employers and trade unions acting on behalf ofemployees, or individual negotiation.

In addition to the basic salary paid in monetary terms, some jobscarry extra benefits. These may be in the form of private pensionschemes, sick pay arrangements, or participation in profit-sharing orbonus schemes. Many managers also receive benefits of other kinds,such as the provision of a company car, assistance with children’seducation, or loans made available at low rates of interest. In April 1993the British Institute of Management published a survey which foundthat the average manager earned £29,838 a year, while the averagesalary of directors was £68,722. The survey found that 40 per cent ofmanagers received more than £30,000 a year, while almost 70 per centof directors were paid over £50,000.

Naturally, basic earnings and any ‘perks’ are both subject to taxation,which is applied at a rate of 20 per cent on the first £2,000 of taxableincome. There is a rate of 25 per cent on the next £2 1,700, while above£23,700 the rate is 40 per cent. Tax relief is allowed for v ariouspurposes, the most important being mortgage interest payments on loansfor house purchase.

The rapid increase in incomes since the Second World War hascaused serious disquiet in government circles, for it has been felt thathigh wage costs coupled with poor productivity have had a detrimentaleffect on Britain’s industrial performance. The Labour administrationthat was in power between 1945 and 1951 attempted to keep wages incheck, but the policy became less and less effective followingdevaluation in 1949. During the 1950s a policy of persuasion wasfollowed by the Conservatives, with varying success, while in 1962 payincreases were limited to a guideline of 2.5 per cent. In 1963 theNational Incomes Committee (NIC) was established, although it failedto receive co-operation from the trade unions. The Labour government


elected in 1964 replaced the NIC by the National Board for Prices andIncomes, and this body and accompanying legislation tended to slowwage increases down, but the trend for the decade was upwards.Restrictions on wage increases were removed by the incoming Heathgovernment in 1970, with the result that prices and wages rocketed—asituation that was aggravated by the enormous increase in world oilprices that came into effect in 1973. When the Heath government wasdefeated over the miners’ strike in 1974 the new Labour administrationdevised the ‘social contract’—a somewhat vague expression of intentthat won the verbal support of the TUC and Labour politicians, butwhich had little real effect on salary increases. The Conservativegovernment which came to power in 1979 announced that wages andsalaries should, like other p arts of the economy, be governed by marketforces. Thus governmen t policy between 1979 and the present time hasbeen to interfere only marginally in the process of establishing wagerates, apart from stating that they sh ould not be higher than the rate ofinflation. However, in certain cases—for example, the police, the armedforces, the judiciary and the civil service—large pay increases havebeen granted on the basis of either the inability of such groups to strike,or the national need. Other groups, notably the teachers, the railwaymen,miners and local government employees, have been resisted.

Chapter 9The mass media

Newspapers

England’s first daily paper, the Courant, was published in 1702. Duringthe course of the eighteenth century many more newspapers werefounded, including the Morning Post in 1772 and The Times in 1785.However, it was not until the last decade of the nineteenth century thatthe mass circulation daily paper made its appearance.

In 1896 Alfred Harmsworth (later Lord Northcliffe) founded theDaily Mail, and by the beginning of the new century it was sellingnearly a million copies a day. The Mailwas to be the basis of a greatnewspaper empire that, at its height, included The Times, The Observer,the Daily Mail, the Evening News, the Daily Mirror (which wasfounded in 1903, in 1911 became the first daily paper to top the millionmark in circulation) and a number of other weekly and provincialpapers and periodicals. In 1900 Arthur Pearson started the MorningHerald(later renamed the Daily Express ), which used techniques similarto those of the Mailwith equal success.

The rise of the popular press at the end of the nineteenth andbeginning of the twentieth centuries was the result of a number offactors. Whereas the newspapers o f the mid-nineteenth century weredirected primarily at the middle and upper classes, the Daily Mail, DailyExpress and Daily Mirror were aimed, both in price and in content, atthe lower middle and working classes. Using the most up-to-dateprinting methods, and obtaining a large revenue from adv ertising,Harmsworth was able to produce the Daily Mail more cheaply than itscompetitors. His distribution arrangements (from 1900 the paper wasprinted simultaneously in London and Manchester) ensured that hewould get nation -wide coverage. Anoth er factor that should be takeninto account is that the introduction of compulsory education in 1870

134 MODERN BRITAIN

laid the foundations of universal literacy, which undoubtedlycontributed to the success of the new papers. The growing politicalawareness of the working classes and their desire to find out ‘what wasgoing on’ shou ld also be mentioned, although it was not until 1911 thatthe first socialist paper, the Daily Herald, appeared.

In 1921 there were twelve national morning papers, twenty-onenational Sunday papers and 130 provincial papers (morning andevening). Seventy years later there were twelve national mornin g papers(though not all were the same as the twelve in 1921), nine nationalSunday papers and some 100 provincial dailies or Sun days. In 1921there were about 1,480 weekly papers; by the mid-1980s thefigure was about 1,000. It is estimated that in 1920 just under5.5 million newspapers were sold each day, compared with some13 million national newspaper sales in early 1992.

Britain is a relatively small country with good internalcommunications and it is largely due to this that a national press hasdeveloped. It is possible to buy a copy of one of the national papersvirtually anywhere in the United Kingdom o n the day it is published.National press in practice means London press, because although anumber of national papers are printed in Manchester as well as London,all the national papers except one have their headquarters in the capital.The exception is The Guardian, fou nded as the Manchester Guardian in1821, but even this pap er now has editorial offices in London. Dailypapers outside London are usually pub lished as ‘evening’ papers andcontain a mixture of national and local news. There are, however, anumber of regional morning papers, such as the Yorkshire Post, theWestern Morning Newsand the Northern Echo. Scotland has a numberof newspapers in addition to those which come from England, the twoleading ones being The Scotsman, published in Edinburgh, and TheHerald(Glasgow). For many years the name Fleet Street was virtuallysynonymous with the national newspaper industry, but during the 1980smost of the national newspapers which h ad their headquarters theremoved out, several of them to the newly developing area of Docklands.

One of the interesting characteristics of the industry is that, at any onetime, over half the national newspapers seem in imminent danger ofclosure, and indeed, some have collapsed, the most recent casualtybeing the Sunday Correspondent. Virtually every newspaper mustsupplement the income it receives from sales with revenue from othersources, and the most important of these is advertising. Advertising,however, cannot be entirely divorced from sales figures, as advertiserswill only wish to buy space in papers that reach a large number of

THE MASS MEDIA 135

people. Thus a vicious circle sets in: newspapers with a low circulationtry to attract advertising to assist their finances and so develop means toimprove their sales, but the advertisers are reluctant to use these papers.As circulation declines, so advertisers tend to fall away, which meansthat revenue continues to decrease. Unless another source of money isfound, such as subsidy, the proprietors will be forced to close down,merge with another paper—which usually amounts to the same thing—or sell to someone who is willing to invest money in a rescue operation.The financial structure of the newspaper industry in Britain is far fromsimple. In some cases a company will own a broad range of papers andmagazines, using the dull but solvent titles to support prestigious, butfrequently impecunious, big names, usually dailies or Sundays. It isby no means uncommon to find that many newspapers are controlled bylarge commercial groups with diversified interests, and once again theprofitable sectors will help to carry the newspapers along. Theinvolvement of large business enterprises in the production ofnewspapers and the concentration of ownership into a few hands hascaused considerable concern in recent years.

There have been no fewer than three Royal Commissions on thePress since the end of the Second World War—in 1949 , 1962 and 1974—looking into issu es such as the concentration of ownership of thenational press into the hands of large corporations and similar problems.None of the findings of the Royal Commissions has had mu ch effect onthe structure of the newspaper industry, however, and the buying andselling of newspaper ownership has continued unabated, particularly inthe 1980s. Following a lengthy stoppage, due to an industrial dispute overmanning, the Thomson Group, owners of Times Newspapers, sold TheTimes and the Sunday Times to News International, which alreadyowned a national daily— The Sun— and a Sunday— The News of theWorld. This group also owns Today. The Mirror Group—the DailyMirror, the Sunday Mirror and the Su nday People— was bo ugh t byRobert Maxwell in 1984, but following the death of the proprietor inNovember 1991 the papers were put up for sale. In 1985 control of theSunday Telegraph and the Daily Telegraph passed into the hands of aCanadian financier, Co nrad Black, while in the same year ExpressNewspapers, publishers of two dailies—the Daily Express and the DailyStar—and a Sunday—the Sunday Express— came un der the own ershipof United Newspapers. New ownership has, in certain cases, seen theintroduction of new methods of production and a subsequentconfrontation between management and print unions.

136 MODERN BRITAIN

The British national press can be divided roughly into two sections,the ‘qualities’ or ‘heavies’, and the ‘populars’, although such a divisionis far from absolute. Among the dailies, The Times, the Daily Telegraph,The Guardian and The Independent, founded in 1986 (plus thespecialised Financial Times, which concentrates on ‘City’ news), areconsidered to be ‘qualities’. The Daily Mirror, the Daily Express,the Daily Mail, Today, and The Sun can be classified as ‘popular’papers. The division is based primarily on how each paper treats thenews. The ‘qualities’ usually have in-depth news items, backed upby articles written by staff writers or outsiders interpreting the news.The ‘populars’ give space to relatively few news stories, and those thatthey do cover are often treated superficially. The popular papers alsotend to have more photographs than the qualities, and in many casesthese are included for their decorative value, rather than their relevanceto the news.

When one looks at the circulation figures (see Table 9.1 ) itis immediately apparent that the sales performance of the populars isdecidedly better than that of the qualities. However, the qualities notonly cost more, they also carry far more of the revenue-earningclassified advertising. Over 30 per cent of the Daily Telegraph, forexample, is made up of pages carrying ‘classifieds’ (small advertisementsclosely set in columns under classifications such as ‘For Sale’,‘Wanted’, and so on), compared with about 4 per cent for the DailyExpress and less that 1 per cent for the Daily Mirror. A comparablesituation exists with the Sundays. The qualities—the Sunday Times, TheObserver, the Sunday Telegraph and the Independent on Sunday —allcarry more advertising than editorial matter, a great deal of it in the formof classified advertisements. As in the quality dailies, the emphasis is ongiving th e background to the news, and all four papers contain articles ofconsiderable length, analysing different aspects of home or foreignevents. The popular Sundays— The News of the World, the SundayPeople,the S und ay Mirror, the Mail on Sunday, and the SundayExpress—are more concerned with ‘human interest’ stories andphotographs. Like the qualities they carry advertising, but the emphasisis on display advertisements rather than classifieds.

In addition to carrying news and advertisements, the newspapers alsohave feature articles, reviews, sports pages and financial and businesssections, although the proportions devoted to each of these variesconsiderably from one paper to another. Although some of the Sundayshave names resemb ling those of daily papers, and are indeed, owned bythe same group, the papers for the most part retain their own identities.

THE MASS MEDIA 137

T le 9.1 Ci c la i a i al w a

Source:ABC

Thus the Sunday Express and the Daily Express are both owned byUnited Newspapers, but each has its own editor and staff. The same istrue of The Times and th e Sund ay Times, both part of the NewsInternational Group, and the Daily Mirror and the Sunday Mirror,published by the Mirror Group. However, The Independentand Today arepublished seven days a week. Apart from the Morning Star, which usedto be owned by the Communist Party and is currently controlled by theMorning Star Cooperative Society (it has a circulation of some 7,000),none of the national papers is owned by a political party, although thisdoes not mean, of course, that they do not have political opinions.Politically sp eaking, the majority of the British press is inclined to beright of centre. The leftwing Daily Herald mentioned earlier changed itsname, ownership and outlook during the 1960s, rising again as The Sun.

Periodicals

Something like 4,200 periodicals are published in the United Kingdom,covering a very wide range of topics. The leading nonspecialist serious

138 MODERN BRITAIN

weeklies are the New Statesman and Society, The Economistand theSpectator, which provide coverage of national and international affairsfrom different points of the political spectrum. They also have sectionsdealing with the arts. The humorous magazin e Punchceased publicationin 1991, but the irreverent Private Eye, founded durin g the 1960s,continues to maintain a precarious existence sniping at the morepompous features of British life. Women’s periodicals, such as Womanand Woman’s Own, enjoy a wide circulation, as do many of themagazines catering for leisure activities. Although there are a largenumber of well illustrated magazines dealing with subjects as varied asgardening, railways, cooking, architecture and various aspects oflifestyle, Britain has no illustrated news magazines of the Paris-Matchor Sterntype. Picture Post, which enjoyed great popularity during the1940s, was unable to survive the competition of television, whileattempts to launch new magazines of this kind have provedunsuccessful.

Radio and television

The first commercial broadcasting to be carried out in Britain was whenthe Marconi Company was given permission to transmit for one hour aday from radio station 2LO. In December 1922 Mr John Reith (laterLord Reith) was appointed General Manager of the British BroadcastingCompany, and in 1927 he became Director General of the new BritishBroadcasting Corporation. Reith was to have a great effect on how theBBC carried out its duties. In his opinion it was the BBC’sresponsibility to give the p ublic, not what they wanted, but what ‘theyought to want’. As the BBC was in a monopoly position this in practicemeant that the public had to accept what the corporation and its director-general thought was good for them. Reith was also very concerned thatthe BBC should retain its independence of the government andcommercial interests. Before long the BBC had built up a considerablereputation for impartiality in its news reports, and this was enhancedduring the Second World War by the radio reports beamed to occupiedEurope.

Until the 1950s the BBC had a monopoly of broadcasting in Britain,but with the advent o f television there was considerable pressure fromcommercial interests to establish other firms with permits to broadcast.Largely owing to the tactics of a small but extremely well organisedpressure group, the commercial lobby won the day, and in March 1954the Bill to establish an ‘independent’ television authority was passed.

THE MASS MEDIA 139

Fourteen months later the first programmes containing advertising spotswere broadcast.

At the present time the BBC controls two national television services,four national radio services and a number of local radio stations.The Indepen dent Broadcasting Commission, which replaced theIndependent Television Authority in 1 991, controls the activities ofthe commercial television companies and radio companies. The BBChas a board of governors who, under their chairman, are responsible forsupervising the programmes that are transmitted. These governors areappointed by the Crown, on the advice of the government. The day-to-day running of the BBC is in the hands of the director-general, who ischosen by the board of governors. The BBC is financed by a grant fromParliament, which is derived from the revenue received from the sale oftelevision licences. The BBC also earns revenue from sellingprogrammes to overseas television companies, and from the sale ofbooks, magazines and other publications, including the Radio Times.The BBC’s external services also receive government support. TheBBC’s charter is up for renewal in 1996, and there is considerablediscussion as to how the terms of the charter might be modified byParliament.

The Independent Television Commission does not produceprogrammes itself, but issue licences to, and supervises, theindependent television transmitting companies, those broadcasting onChannel 3. There are sixteen programme companies making upIndependent Television (ITV), for example Carlton, which too k over theLondon franchise from Thames in January 1993, Granada (the north-west) and Anglia (East Anglia). The ITC is financed by rental receivedfrom programme companies for the use of transmitting facilities.Licences are awarded for a ten-year period by competitive tender, whichis based partly on the price offered for the contract and partly on qualityconsiderations. The programme companies receive nothing from licencefees, and are entirely dependent on the money they get from the sale ofadvertising.

In 1972 the Sound Bro adcasting Act was passed, ending the BBC’smonopoly of radio broadcasting. The BBC has five national radioprogrammes, four national regional programmes and thirty-nine localradio stations. In addition there is the BBC World Service, whichbroadcasts 82 0 hours of programmes a week in thirty-eight languages.There are also some 115 local radio stations and two nationalcommercial stations: Classic FM, which began broadcasting inSeptember 1992, and Independent Music Rad io, which started

140 MODERN BRITAIN

operations in early 1993. Non-BBC radio broadcasting is theresponsibility of the Radio Authority.

Television viewing is the most popular leisure activity in Britain.Virtually all households have a television set, while 35 per cent havetwo or more receivers. A large proportion of the programmes shown areproduced in Britain, although there are a number of American series onboth BBC and ITV. A few programmes come from other countries,notably ‘soaps’ from Australia, but very few foreig n-languageproductions reach the screen, as the British seem to object to subtitles.

The range of programmes shown varies considerably in quality.There are a number of current affairs, education al, sport and culturalprogrammes and a wide selection of plays, series, films and varietyshows. Owing to the competition that exists between the BBC and ITVthere is often a tendency for similar programmes to be broadcast at thesame time—for example, one channel may be producing a varietyshow, which leads to the other channel having a variety show at the sametime, with what it considers to be bigger and better stars.

In 1964 the BBC was granted a secon d television chan nel, BBC 2,giving it what ITV regarded as an unfair advantage. It was the intentionof the BBC that programmes on BBC 2 would include a high proportionof minority interest programmes, and although this happens in somecases (for example, the Open University programmes are transmitted onBBC 2) there is evidence that at peak viewing times the battle of theratings once again becomes of key importance (the ratings show howmany people watch each programme).

Channel 4—the second ITV channel—commenced transmission inNovember 1982. It provides a television service throughout the country(with the exception of Wales, where the service is in the hands of Sianel4 Cymru, which ensures that a high proportion of the output of theservice is in Welsh). Channel 4 was originally a subsidiary of the IBAand was financed by subscriptions from the independent televisioncompanies in return for advertising time. However, from January 1993it has become an independent company selling its own advertisin g timeand retaining the proceeds. Like BBC 2, Channel 4 provides aconsiderable number of documentary and educational programmesand has also b een responsible for the production of some striking filmsand plays. In February 1983, TV-AM—broadcasting throughout thecountry for three hours at breakfast time—after a somewhat shaky startestablished itself as a strong competitor to the BBC 1 breakfast timeprogramme which had started a month earlier. In 1993, however,

THE MASS MEDIA 141

Goodmorning Television took over the early morning commercialfranchise.

It was estimated that at the end of 1992 15 per cent of British homescould receive television from satellite stations. The largest Britishsatellite station was British Sky Broadcasting (BSkyB), which is ownedby Rupert Murdoch, who also controls News International, publisher ofa number of newspapers, including The Times and the Sunday Times.

Opinions about th e standard of programmes shown on Britishtelevision differ widely It is probably true to say that some of the newsand current affairs reporting is of a very high standard, while there arealso excellent drama productions which enable many people to seeplays they would not be able to see in the theatre. On a number ofoccasions there have been attempts by self-appointed protectorsof public morals to influence the kind of programmes broadcast ontelevision, but there seems little evidence that the British public isexposing itself to great moral danger by sitting in front of the televisionscreen for some twenty-four hours a week (the average viewing timeper head of population).

Chapter 10Religious life

Christianity came to Britain in Roman times, although its influencedeclined after the withdrawal of the legions early in the fifth century. In596 Pope Gregory sent a party of monks led by Augustine to convert theEnglish and it was these men and their successors who establishedthe Roman Catho lic Church in this country Throughout the MiddleAges, the English kings acknowledged at least nominal allegiance toRome, but by the sixteenth century it was clear that relations werebecoming somewhat strained. In 1534 Henry VIII broke with Rome, theimmediate cause of the breach being the Pope’s refusal to recognise hisdivorce from Catherine of Aragon. Although his eldest daughter, MaryTudor, tried to re-establish the Roman Catholic Church in Englandduring her reign (1553–8), she was unsuccessful. Her sister Elizabethhad been brought up a Protestant, and the Settlement made soon aftershe came to the throne confirmed the position of the Protestant Churchof England. The Elizabethan Church Settlement, however, did not endreligious controversy in Britain, as even the most cursory glance at thehistory books will show. Matters of faith were rarely far from the mindsof those involved in the conflicts of the seventeenth century, althoughonce again the Church of England triumphed when the ProtestantWilliam III replaced the Catholic James II on the throne in 1688.Throughout the eighteenth century Noncomformists and RomanCatholics were barred from holding public office, but the 1828 Test Actand the 1829 Catholic Emancipation Act lifted many of the restrictionslaid upon those who were not members of the An glican Church.

The Church of England

The Church of England is still the established Church in England. (InWales the Church of England was disestablished in 1920, largelybecause the Welsh have a strong Nonconformist tradition.) The head of

144 RELIGIOUS LIFE

the Church of England is the monarch, and part of the coronationceremony includes an oath in which the monarch promises to protect theposition of the Anglican Church. Archbishops, bishops and deans areappointed by the Crown, although in fact the advice of the PrimeMinister is the decisive factor. The involvement of the Prime Minister isinteresting because, although the monarch must be a member of theChurch of England by law, the Prime Minister need not be a member ofthe Anglican or indeed of any other Church. Although changes havebeen suggested to this method of appointing senior members of theChurch , no thing has been done.

The links between Church and state can also be seen in the fact thatarchbishops and twenty-four other bishops sit in the House of Lords andparticipate in debates on equal terms with members of the peerage.Unlike other members of the upper House, however, they do not sit forlife, giving up their seats when they retire from their sees.The Church of England must obtain parliamentary approval if it wishesto change its form of worship, and this approval is by no means alwaysforthcoming. In 1929 the Church Assembly produced a revised prayerbook, which was accepted by the House of Lords, but rejected by theCommons. Since the Church as a whole was in favour of the new prayerbook, the action of the Commons raised the whole question of theposition of the state Church, and there were those who suggested thatdisestablishment was the answer. The question of disestablishment hasalso come up more recently. In 1970 a commission set up to considerthe relationship between Church and state recommended that the statusof the Church of England should be maintained, but that a number ofchanges should be introduced to give the Church more autonomy. Themost important of these proposals were that the Church should havefinal authority over its forms of doctrine and worship, so avoiding arepetition of the 1929 situation; that the method of selecting bishopsshould be revised; that all ministers of religion should be able to standfor Parliament; and that leading members of other Churches shou ld beinvited to sit in the House of Lords, alongside the senior bishops of theChurch of England. Some people felt that the commission did not go farenough, and should have recommended a complete break betweenChurch and state, while others felt that the changes proposed were tooradical to be acceptable.

England is divided into two provinces, Canterbury and York, andforty-three dioceses, twenty-nine of which are in the Province ofCanterbury, while the remain ing fourteen come under the authorityof the Archbishop of York. Although the Archbishop of Canterbury and

MODERN BRITAIN 145

the Archbishop of York are nominally of equal status, in practicethe former, who is styled ‘Primate of All England’, is the senior, and isin fact the professional head of the Anglican Church. Many of thebishoprics are of considerable antiquity; Canterbury was established atthe end of the sixth century by St Augustine, while others, such asLeicester and Guildford, set up in 1926 and 1927 respectively, werefounded to meet the needs of present-day centres of populatio n. In theolder dioceses the bishop has his seat in an ancient cathedral. Most ofthese cathedrals were b uilt during the Middle Ages and they embod y afascinating variety of styles, sometimes providing an outline of severalcenturies of English architecture in one building. The majority ofthe medieval cathedrals are extremely impressive buildings, even moreso when one takes into account the relatively primitive technology ofthose responsible for designing and erecting them. In the case ofdioceses of more recent foundation the cathedral is usually a largeparish church adapted to suit the responsibilities of its new status,examples being Leicester, Manchester and Derby In some dioceses,however, notably Truro, Liverpo ol, Guildford and Coventry, newcathedrals have been built in the last hundred years or so.

There are about 13,000 ecclesiastical parishes in England, eachcentred on a parish church. While many parishes have a resident parishpriest, a large town p arish will probably also have one or more assistantpriests or curates; conversely in country areas some parishes have beencombined with a single priest taking responsibility for a number ofchurches. In early Christian times the founder of a parish had theprivilege of appointing the parish priest, this right of patronage beingknown as the advowson. During the Middle Ages many advowsonswere in the possession of monasteries, and when these were dissolvedby Henry VIII the advowsons passed into the hands of the Crown, or oflay landowners who had bought monastic land. Today patronageis exercised by bishops and archbish ops, cathedral chapters, the Crown,lay landowners—including some large companies—the universities,particularly Oxford and Cambridge colleges, and trusts. In February1975 the General Synod of the Chu rch voted to end the old system ofpatronage and to give the Church more control. Most livings aresupported by endowments and sometimes by land known as a glebe.Other so urces of income are fees for services, such as marriages andfunerals, while the parish priest is also entitled to the proceeds of theEaster collection. Incumbents of livings where the endowment isinsufficient may receive assistance from central funds of the Church ora stewardship scheme arranged by parishioners.

146 RELIGIOUS LIFE

The Church of England does not have a formal register of members.One becomes a member of the Church on baptism, and this membershipis often re-endorsed at confirmation, usually at the age of 14 or so. Anelectoral roll, consisting of parishioners over the age of 16, is compiledevery year, usually at the Easter communion. However, having one’sname on the electoral roll is not necessarily proof of active Churchmembership, nor does it impose any compulsory duties, such aspayment of a Church tax. In these circumstances it is not surprising thatany accurate measurement of the Church of England is virtuallyimpossible. It has been estimated that over 27 million of the populationof England have been baptised into the Church, almost 10 million havebeen confirmed, while 2.5 million appear on the electoral rolls. Theappearance of a name on the roll does not necessarily mean thatthe elector plays an active part in parish activities b y taking advantage ofthe right to vote for parish officials, or standing for election. Churchattendance is also difficult to estimate, although few would dispute thatChurch of England congregations, like those of the other Churches,have declined during the present century. Some 1.2 million peopleattended Christmas and Easter communion services in 1989.

Although the Church of England is the state Church it receives nofinancial assistance from the government, apart from salaries paid tochaplains in the armed forces and money provided for Church schools.The main financial support for the Church comes from the free-willofferings of Church members and from its own land and capital.Although the amount of land held by the Church has shrunk from itsheyday just before the Reformation, the Church of England is still thethird largest landowner in the country, after the Forestry Commissionand the Crown. The assets of the Church are administered by theChurch Commissioners. There are many demands on the resources ofthe Church, including salaries, the upkeep of ancient churches andcathedrals and the finan cing of various services provided by the Churchat home and overseas.

Between 1919 and 1970 the governing body of the Church ofEngland was the Church Assembly, but in September 1970 elections wereheld for the new General Synod of the Church. The General Synod,which is composed of the bishops and representatives of the clergy andlaity, deals with matters such as education, missions, social questions,training for the ministry, interchurch relations and the care of churchbuildings.

The clergy of the Church of England are all male, but in November1992 the General Synod voted in favour of women being ordained as

MODERN BRITAIN 147

priests, in spite of considerable opposition among both lay and ordainedmembers of the Church. Following acceptance by the Synod, the mattermust be put to Parliament for ratification.

In additio n to the Church of England in England, the Anglicancommunion extends to other parts of the British Isles and throughoutthe world. The (unestablished) Church of Wales is headed by theArchbishop of Wales, and there are also the Episcopal Church inScotland and the rather misleadingly named Church of Ireland, whichcovers both Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. Every tenth yearthe Lambeth Conference (Lambeth Palace is the London residence ofthe Archbishop of Canterbury) meets, and is attended by Anglicanbishops from all over the world. The conference has no executiveauthority, but provides a useful forum fo r the exchange of ideas.

The Church of Scotland

The Church of Scotlan d took its Presbyterian form after theReformation, and maintained its oppostion to episcopacy (rule bybishops) throughout the seventeenth century, in spite of Charles I’sattempts to remodel it on the lines of the Church of England. The statusof the Church of Scotland was confirmed by the Treaty of Unionbetween England and Scotland in 1707. The Church of Scotland, whichhas the sovereign in her capacity as Queen of Scotland as its head, iscompletely free from parliamentary control. All ministers of the Churchare of equal status and can be of either sex, although each year aModerator is elected to preside over the meeting of the General Kirk.Each of the 1,500 or so churches is under the local control of the KirkSession (the ministers and elders of the Church), while above this arethe Court of the Presbytery, the Court of Synod and th e GeneralAssembly. Adult membership of the Church of Scotland is about790,000 .

The Roman Catholic Church

After the Reformation the Roman Catholic Church in England sufferedconsiderable hardships. By the nineteenth century, however, attitudeshad mellowed somewhat and the hierarchy was reintroduced to Englandin 1850 and to Scotland in 1878. At the present time there are sevenRoman Catholic provinces, twenty-nine episcopal dioceses and some2,800 parishes. The head of the Roman Catholic Church in England isthe Archbishop of West-minster. It is estimated that the Roman Catholic

148 RELIGIOUS LIFE

Church has nearly 6 million members in Britain, the majority of whomlive in large towns.

Recently there have been many discussions between the RomanCatholic Church and members of other Churches in Britain, aselsewhere in the world, on the subject of co-operation, and a number ofinterdenominational services have been held. The age-old distrustbetween Protestants and Catholics seems to have died down in mostparts of Britain, although the past, or a highly coloured version of thepast, is still remembered in Scotland, while the tragedy of NorthernIreland shows that for some the past and present are inextricably linked.

The Free Churches

The Methodist Church, which today has some 430,000 members, wasfounded by a Church of England clergy man called John Wesley. At firstWesley tried to maintain his link s with the Anglican Church, but theopposition of the hierarchy of that institution to his methods and hisdoctrine forced him to break away in 1784 and ordain his own clergy Anumber of divisions occurred within the Methodist Church during thenineteenth century, but most of the schisms were healed in 1932. In the1960s and again in 1972 an attempt was made to bring the Methodistand Anglican Churches together. Although the proposal was acceptedby the Methodists, it failed to get the necessary majority from theAnglicans, and so the idea came to nothing. Individual Method istchurches have a considerable degree of self-government, and each yeara conference, which is chaired by an elected president, is held to discussmatters of concern to the Church.

In 1972 the oldest community of Dissenters in Britain, theCongregationalists, united with the English Presbyterian Church to formthe United Reformed Church. Other Christian groups represented inBritain include the Baptists, wh o have about 2,000 churches, the Societyof Friends (Quakers), first active in the mid-seventeenth century, theSalvation Army, founded by William Booth in 1865, and the UnitarianChurch.

Other faiths

The Jewish community in Britain is divided into two groups, theOrthodox, consisting of about 80 per cent of practising Jews, andthe Reform, which originated during the last century The leadingmember of the Jewish community is the Chief Rabbi, who belongs to

MODERN BRITAIN 149

the Orthodox g roup. The Jewish community numbers about 410,000,and it has 240 synagogues, mainly in urban areas.

Since the Second World War large-scale immigration into the UnitedKingdom has meant that there is a substantial Muslim community(estimated to be 1.2 million) with some 600 mosques. Hindu and Sikhcommunities throughout the country each number about 300,000.

Chapter 11England and Ireland

The national flag of Britain consists of the three flags associated withthe saints of England, Scotland and Ireland superimposed upon eachother to form the Union Flag (sometimes incorrectly termed the UnionJack), thus symbolising the unity of the three countries. However, as isoften the case with symbolism, this flag raises as many questions as itanswers—in particular, why should Ireland, an independent countrysince 1922, still form an essential part of it? Clearly, it is not possible inthis book to look at the whole history of the relationship between theIrish and the other nationalities inhabiting the British Isles, but it isprobably appropriate to look at some of the main features of Anglo-Irishhistory in order to focus on the troubles that have been a feature of lifein Northern Ireland since 1969.

The first large-scale invasion of Ireland by the English took place in1166 when a force of Norman knights under the leadership ofStrongbow, the Earl of Pembroke, went to the aid of DermotMacMurrough, King of Leinster. The invasion was backed by KingHenry II, who took the title Lord of Ireland—a role that he and hissuccessors honoured more in the breach than in the observance.Throughout the Middle Ages the affairs of Ireland were of relativelylittle importance to their nominal En glish rulers and the Irish developedtheir own customs and culture. Thus, at the time of the Reformation,when the Protestant religion was adopted in England, Wales andScotland, the Irish insisted on remaining Catholic, and during theseventeenth century this tenacious hold of the Irish on to their faith ledto armed clashes with their En glish overlords. After the Civil War inEngland, the Lord Protector, Oliver Cromwell, led a force to crush theremaining supporters of Charles I and during the ensuing campaignhe massacred the inhab itan ts of the towns of Wexford and Drogheda.Cromwell was, of course, a staunch Protestant and his victims wereCatholics. In 1690 William of Orange, invited to become the Protestant

152 MODERN BRITAIN

King of England in place of the deposed Catholic monarch, James II,defeated James’s Franco-Irish army at the Battle of the Boyne, thussecuring the Protestant Succession and a heroic place in the history ofProtestant Ireland. Whereas the vast majority of the Irish populationwere Catholics, there were a number of Protestants who wereconcentrated almost exclusively in an area roughly co-terminal with theancient king dom of Ulster. Most of these Protestants had beenencouraged to move from England and the lo wlands of Scotland byElizabeth I and Cromwell, through grants of land and favoured treatmentover the native Irish.

Once the Protestant Succession had been secured, measures weretaken throughout the British Isles to ensure that Catholics were excludedfrom positions of power and authority. The impact on Ireland wasparticularly marked: Catholics were forbidden to hold official positions,were not allowed to serve in the armed forces, and had restrictionsplaced upon them as far as land purchase and tenure were concerned.This meant that Irish land was owned mainly by Englishmen or Scots,who were either Protestan ts from Ulster or, more often than not,absentee landlords. Although Ireland retained her Parliament, Catholicswere not allowed to sit in it and the English Parliament had a right ofveto over all measures passed b y the Irish one. The English Parliamentalso imposed restrictive trading laws on the Irish which meant that theIrish economy was unable to develop. These conditions prevailedthroughout most of the eighteenth century, althoug h certain restrictionswere lifted in the last two decades. It was not until 1829, however, thatthe Catholic Emancipation Act—giving Catho lics the right to holdpublic office—was passed, and then only after bitter oppostion fromsectors of the English Parliament.

If the struggle for Catholic emancipation dominated the politics of thefirst three decades of the nineteenth century, the Home Rule questiondominated the final two. Although the passing o f the CatholicEmancipation Act allowed Irish Catholics to become involv ed in thegovernment o f their country by sending MPs to Westminster (the separateIrish Parliament had been abolished in 1801) conditions had notimproved. During the 1840s the Irish potato famine had a catastrophiceffect on the population of the country, reducing it, through acombination of death by starvation and emigration, from 8 million in1841 to 6 million at the end of the decade. The continuing discontentin Ireland manifested itself in rebellions, bombings—both in Ireland andon the mainland—and through parliamentary agitation by theNationalist MPs sitting in Westmin ster. By and large, English

ENGLAND AND IRELAND 153

government ministers and the bulk of the English people tended toregard the Irish with a mixture of scorn and exasperation, and any actiontaken to deal with the Irish problem tended to be too little or too late, orboth.

However, by the 1880s it had become clear that some action wouldhave to be taken and in 1866 the Liberal Prime Minister,W. E.Gladston e, introduced a Home Rule Bill, which, if passed, wouldhave restored a measure of self-government to Ireland. The Bill,however, was bitterly opposed by the Tory Party—who declaredthemselves to be ‘Unionists’—and the Bill was defeated, to the chagrinof the Irish Nationalists and to the delight of the Conservatives andProtestants of Ulster, who saw in Irish Home Rule a threat to theireconomic and political power. A second Home Rule Bill, introduced in1893, suffered the same fate as its predecessor at the hands of theConservative-dominated House of Lords, as did the third Bill, whichwas introduced in 1912. However, by that date the rules of the game hadbeen altered through the Parliament Act of 1911 under whichthe Lords no longer had the power to defeat Bills already passed by theCommons. The Irish Nationalists therefore looked forward to thepassing of the Home Rule Bill in 1914, while the Ulstermen inthe North began to arm themselves to resist what they considered to bean imminent invasion from the South. Groups of nationalists, who overthe years had shown that they were no strangers to the politics of armedstruggle, formed their own armed units and by the beginning of 1914 itlooked as if the Irish were on the brink of civil war. However, thedanger of such a conflict was averted by the outbreak of a greater one—the First World War. The Irish Nationalists sitting at Westminster—presumably thinking, like other groups, that the war would be of shortduration—agreed that the Home Rule Bill should be held in abeyanceuntil the war was over. Other groups within Ireland, however, were lessinclined to be patient and in Easter 1916 the Easter Rising broke ou t inDublin. By all accounts, the rebellion lacked popular support, but theEnglish autho rities, concerned about the effect which such an eventmight have in the middle of war, overreacted and the leaders of therebellion were brought to trial and executed. There was an immediateoutcry and the cause of Irish independence gained momentum.

Attempts to reach a compromise agreement failed and guerillawarfare broke out between the forces of the nationalists and the RoyalIrish Constabulary. In the 1918 general election the Home Rulers werevirtually ousted by Sinn Féin (Ourselves Alone), who won seventy-three of the 105 seats in Ireland. The newly elected Sinn Féin members

154 MODERN BRITAIN

refused to take their seats at Westminster and set up their ownparliament—the Dáil Éireann—in Dublin, while the fighting betweenthe nationalists and the British forces intensified. By now the police hadbeen reinforced by Auxiliaries and the ‘Black and Tans’ (recruited fromthe British armed forces). They and the nationalist forces (known as theIrish Republican Army the IRA) waged a bitter struggle of terror andcounter-terror.

In 1920 in an attempt to end the fighting Westminster passed theGovernment of Ireland Act, which made provision for two parliamentsin Ireland, one in the North, the other in the South, with a Council ofIreland to encourage co-operation, consultation and eventually unionbetween them. However, at elections held in May 1921 Sinn Féin againwon virtually all the seats in the South and assembled once again inDublin. In July 1921 a truce to the fighting was agreed and thefollowing October a conference was convened in London. Two monthslater it was announced that the Irish Free State was to be established,with the status of a dominion within the British Empire. NorthernIreland was given a month to decide whether it wanted to join the FreeState or remain part of the United Kingdom. The treaty was accepted bythe Dáil in January 1922 but many of the nationalists rejected the ideaof dominion status and refused to accept it. Civil war broke out betweenthe ‘treaty forces’ and the ‘irregulars’, Southern Irish against SouthernIrish with the British and the Northern Irish standing on the sidelines.After a brief but bitter struggle the rebels were defeated and the IrishFree State came into existence, with the six counties of Ulster choosingto remain part of the United Kingdom.

Between 1922 and 1938 the remaining ties between Britain andSouthern Ireland were loosened. The Free State remained neutral in theSecond World War, and in 1949 the Republic formally left theCommonwealth. During the 1950s and 1960s relations between Britainand the Republic gradually improved and in 1965 the Irish PrimeMinister, Sean Lemass, paid an official visit to Ulster—a visit that wasreturned shortly afterwards by Teren ce O’Neill, the Prime Minister ofNorthern Ireland. However, the majority of the population of the North,some 67 per cent of whom were Pro testant, remained implacablyopposed to clo ser ties with the Repu blic. Moreover, many Catholics inUlster felt that they were discriminated against in the fields of housingand job opportunities and during the late 1960s the Civ il Rightsmovement grew increasingly strident in its demands for more equitabletreatment. Inevitably there were clashes between the activists and thepolice, who were seen, with some justification, as the personification of


Protestant power. There was particular antipathy between thedemonstrators and the police reservists, known as the B Specials, and,as violence grew, pressure was put on the Westminster government tointervene. In August 1969 the British army was ordered into Ulsterto take over the security role from the Ulster Constab ulary. For a briefperiod the army was welcomed by the Catholic population, but the‘honeymoon’ was very brief and, rather than improving, the situationswiftly deteriorated.

During the Irish civil war of the early 1920s the opposition to thosewho had signed the treaty with Britain was led, as we have seen, by agroup calling itself the Irish Republican Army. Although defeated bythe Irish government, the IRA had never completely disappeared andindeed, during the 1940s and 1950s had b een involved in terroristactivities in both mainland Britain and the Irish Free State. Now thetroubles in Ulster gave the IRA a chance to strike at its old enemy onceagain. However, the older generation of IRA men were disinclinedto undertake active operations against the British army and have, on thewhole, remained aloof from the fighting that has taken place o ver thelast fifteen years. Most of the responsibility for attacks on the securityforces and other targets has fallen to the ‘Provisional IRA’—as opposedto the older-established ‘official’ IRA, and a variety of other nationalistgroups.

Terence O’Neill, who had been Prime Minister of Ulster throughoutthe 1960s, resigned in 1969 and was replaced by James Chichester-Clark. Both of these men, as well as the overwhelming majority of MPsin the Ulster Parliament at Stormont (as well as the Ulsterrepresentatives at Westminster), represented the Unionist cause—basedfirmly on the concept of Protestant supremacy. Opposition to theUnionists was in the hands of the Social Democratic and Labour Party(SDLP) and the Alliance Party, which was formed in 1971 in an attemptto form a bridge between Catholics and Protestants. (It should be notedthat, in spite of having similar names to parties on the mainland, theNorthern Ireland parties had no formal link with either the SocialDemocratic Party or the Alliance coalition at Westminster.)

In 1971 Chichester-Clark resigned and was succeeded by BrianFaulkner, who was destined to be the last Prime Minister of the UlsterParliamen t. During the second half of 19 71 and early 1972 the scale ofviolence grew, and in one incident twelve demonstrators were killed byBritish soldiers firing into a crowd from which they claimed shots hadcome. ‘Bloody Sunday’, as this incident was named, exacerbated analready deteriorating situation. In March 1972 the Ulster Parliament was

156 MODERN BRITAIN

suspended and the Stormon t government resigned. Edward Heath, whowas then the British Prime Minister, appointed a British CabinetMinister, William Whitelaw, as the first Secretary of State for NorthernIreland with direct responsibility for Ulster. Durin g 1973 attempts weremade to bring the opposing factio ns in Ulster together to work out abasis for the future government and org anisation of Northern Ireland.Politicians from the variou s Unionist groups, the SDLP and the AllianceParty were all invited to talks, but little progress was made.

The basic problem at the heart of the Ulster situation is that theProtestant majority are completely opposed to any solution that willbring them under the rule of Dublin. They also refuse to take part in anynegotiations that will bring them into contact with any of the nationalistorganisations pledged to a united Ireland. The Unionists, as their nameimplies, see their security resting on the maintenance of the link withmainland Britain, although some Protestants have gone on record assaying that they would prefer independence and a complete break withthe United Kingdom to being incorporated into the Irish Rep ublic. Fortheir part, British governments, of both right and left, have said that theywill not agree to any settlement that will bring about a united Irelandagainst the wishes of the majority of the population in Ulster. Againstsuch a background it is not surprising that a decade of discussion andattempts at new initiatives have led nowhere.

In 1974 a power-sharing executive, headed by the former PrimeMinister of Northern Ireland, Brian Faulkner, was established but it wasbrought down by the Ulster (Protestant) Workers’ strike in May anddirect rule was resumed. The following year elections were held for aseventy-eight-seat convention, but this initiative also failed anddiscussions were wound up in March 1976.

The fo llowing month the 1,500th death since violence broke out in1969 was recorded. There were signs during 1977 and 1978 that thesituation was improving slightly—a strike called by the Ulster UnionAction Council in May 1977 failed to obtain the support that the 1974strike had achieved—but the hostility between the two sections of thecommunity remained strong. In 1979 the Shadow Secretary of State forNorthern Ireland, Airey Neave, was assassinated while, later in the sameyear, Earl Mountbatten, uncle of the Queen, was murdered while on afishing trip off the coast of Ireland.

The policy of the Conservative government elected in 1979 was thatthe future of Ulster was the responsibility of the inhabitants as a whole.However, it is clear that, as in the past, the sympathy of much of theConservative Party—particularly among back-bench MPs—lies with


the Unionists. In 1981 a Northern Ireland Council, whose functionwould have been to advise the Secretary of State, was proposed butfailed to gain th e support of the political parties in Northern Ireland. Thenext year elections took place for a new Assembly consisting of seventy-eight seats, but, following the election, a number of members refusedto take their seats, while others withdrew. Not surprisingly,the contribution of the Assembly, which has a consultative role, wassomewhat muted. In June 1986, th e Assembly was dissolved by theBritish government, despite the protests of Unionist members.Developments in Northern Ireland are, of course, closely watched inDublin and in 1983 the Irish government called a New Ireland Forumin the Republic to which the leading Northern Ireland political parties(with the exception of Sinn Féin, which supports the Prov isional IRA)were invited. However, the politicians of the North almost unanimouslyrefused to participate in the Forum—the leaders of the Unionist partiessaying that they would do everything in their power to frustrate itsactivities—while the British government refused to endorse the Irishinitiative. However, intergovernmental discussions were being held andin November 1985 the Hillsborough Agreement was signed betweenBritain and the Irish Republic.

This treaty for the first time gave Dublin an opportunity tobe consulted on matters concerning Northern Ireland. Under the termsof the agreement an international conference was established, with anIrish minister sitting with the British Secretary of State. The agreementalso provided for the setting up of a secretariat in Belfast staffed jointlyby civil servants from Northern and Southern Ireland. AlthoughMrs Thatcher reiterated the pledge of successive British governmentsthat there wou ld be no change in the constitutional position of NorthernIreland, the Unionists promptly condemmed the agreement. All theUnionist MPs sitting at Westminster resigned their seats and announcedthat they would stand for re-election on the issue of opposition to theagreement. At the subsequent by-elections held in January 1986,fourteen of the fifteen MPs who had resigned were re-elected but thefact that one of their number was defeated by a member of the SDLPtended to take the edge off their gesture. It was also rather galling forthe Unionists that in most of the electoral contests the oppostion partiesdeclined to put up candidates, which meant that re-election was virtuallycertain. The Unionist MPs, however, claimed the result as a victory forthe status quo and announced that they would continue to campaignattempts of the British and Irish governments to establish a dialogue.The Provisional IRA also let it be known that it, too, rejected the

158 MODERN BRITAIN

Hillsborough Agreement and that it would continue to campaign for aunited Ireland.

During 1991 and 1992 the British government took part indiscussions with what are referred to as the constitutional parties, i.e.the Ulster Unionists, the Democratic Unionists, the Alliance Party andthe Social Democratic and Labour Party, but excluding Sein Féin.However, in spite of optimistic communiques it became apparent thatthe talks were bogged down in procedural wrangling and in November1992 they broke down without any significant progress having beenmade. In April 1993 attempts were made to restart the talks, but withoutsuccess. Meanwhile the violence continued in both Northern Ireland andon the mainland—in March 1993 a huge bomb exploded in the centre ofthe City of London. By mid-1993 the death toll sin ce ‘the troubles’began in 1979 was over 3,000.

In December 1993 the British and Irish governments published ajoint declaration, which sought to establish a basis for talks with allconcerned with the future of Northern Ireland, including Sinn Féin. Atthe time of writing the reaction to this declaration was unclear.

Glossary

The purpose of this glossary is to give the meaning of certain expressionsand terms in the context in which they are used in the text. The meaninggiven here is not necessarily the only one.

Abdication Renunciation of right to throne by sovereign. The most recentabdication was that of Edward VIII (the late Duke of Windsor) in 1936.ActStatute passed by both Houses of Parliament and given the royalassent.

Adjournment Postponement of proceedings (for example, in Parliament)until another occasion.

Adoption meeting Meeting at which a parliamentary candidate is chosen.AnglicanOf the Church of England.Appeal(legal) To take a case to a higher court.Audience (of royalty) Interview with or presentation to the sovereign.

Back-bencher Member of Parliament who is not a member of thegovernment (that is, not of ministerial rank) or the Shadow Cabinet.

Back-to-back houses Houses with a common rear wall and no rear access(usually built in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century).

Bail(legal) Temporary release from custody on a security to appear fortrial; also the security itself.

BallotSecret vote (introduced in British elections in 1872). BallotpaperPaper on which the vote is recorded.

Ballot box Box in which the paper is inserted after the vote has beenrecorded.

Bank holiday Public holiday in England and Wales, for example BoxingDay (the day after Christmas), the Spring Bank Holiday.

Bar(legal) Barristers collectively, or profession of barrister (barristersare ‘called to the Bar’ when they qualify).

BenchCollective term for magistrates or judges when presiding in court.Bill(political) Draft of an Act of Parliament submitted to Parliament for

debate.Black Rod Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod (so-called because he

carries a black rod or stick), usher of the Lord Chamberlain’sdepartment of the royal household, also usher of the House ofLords.

160 GLOSSARY

Building society Financial institution to which members lend money ata certain rate of interest and which in turn lends money for the purchaseof property—usually houses.

By-election Election in a single constituency during the life of Parliamentfollowing death or retirement of an MP.

CanvassTo try to obtain support for a candidate at an electio n byinterviewing individual voters.

CensusOfficial counting of the population; in Great Britain a census hasbeen taken every ten years since 1801.

Chief constable Chief officer in police force outside London (in theMetropolitan Police District—roughly Greater London—and the Cityof London the chief officers are Commissioners of Police).

CircuitDistrict through which a judge travels when attending courts.City (The) City of London, particularly when referring to financial

institutions such as Stock Exchange, banks, insurance companies, etc.Civil List Sum voted by Parliament for household and personal expenses

of sovereign.Civil servant Salaried government official.Civil War War (1642–6) between Parliament and King Charles I. The

king was defeated and was executed in 1649.Classifieds Small advertisements appearing in columns of newspapers

or journals classified under headings such as ‘For Sale’, ‘SituationsVacant’ (jobs), etc.

Coalition Combination of two or more political parties to form agovernment (or opposition).

Constituency Body of voters—in parliamentary terms, area for which anMP is elected and which he represents in Parliament.

Council house House built and maintained by a local authority (that is,a council) and rented to tenants.

‘Daily’ (paper) Newspaper that appears six days a week (cf. ‘Sunday’).DioceseArea under the authority of a bishop.Disestablish (ecclesiastical) To withdraw state support and patronage

from Church.Display advertisement Advertisement that is spread over a portion of a

page of a newspaper or journal (cf. ‘Classifieds’).Dissolution (of Parliament) Bringing a session of Parliament to an end.Division Separation of Parliament into two for the purpose of counting

votes.

Ecclesiastical Relating to the Church o r to clergymen.Electorate (parliamentary) People over 18 years of age who are entitled

to vote in a parliamentary election.

GLOSSARY 161

Equity(legal) System of law existing alongside statute law and commonlaw which overrides them when they conflict.

FilibusterTo prolong debate on a Bill so that its passage throughParliament cannot be completed in the time available. (An Americanterm.)

Flat racing (the flat) Horses racing over level ground without hedges orditches.

Fleet Street Street in London where there were a large number of national(and provincial) newspaper offices.

Friendly Society Association whose members pay contributions to ensurefinancial h elp in sickness or old age.

Front-bencher Member of the government or senior member ofopposition (usually in Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet).

GraduatePerson who holds a university degree.

HonourTitle or award granted by the sovereign (almost always onministerial advice). Honours are traditionally awarded twice a year, atNew Year and on the sovereign’s official birthday. They can be givenon other occasions, for example, on the Dissolution of Parliament (seeabove).

ImmigrantUsually in context ‘Commonwealth immigrant’ referring toperson originally coming from ‘new’ Commonwealth: West Indies,Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, etc.

Incumbent (ecclesiastical) Clergyman holding a living (as priest).Independent (political) Politician who belongs to no political party or

group.

Jacobite Supporter of the Stuart line and of the descendan ts of James II,who abdicated in 1688.

Junior(legal) Barrister who assists senior counsel (barrister) inpresentation of a case in court.

KirkThe Church of Scotland as distinct from the Church of England(kirk: Scottish form of ‘church’).

Living (ecclesiastical) Benefice, that is, in Church of England,incomeproducing property supporting a priest.

Lobby(political) In sense of division lobbies, two chambers into whichMPs go when they vote, one for Ayes’ and one for ‘Noes’. Also placewhere MPs meet constituents, journalists, etc. (hence ‘lobbycorrespondents’, journalists particularly concerned with politics).

162 GLOSSARY

Lord chamberlain A prominent official of the royal household.Lord Protector Title held by Oliver Cromwell as head of state 1653–8,

and briefly by his son Richard.

MaisonetteSmall house, or completely self-contained part of large houseused as dwelling.

Marginal seat (political) Constituency where the majority of the sittingmember is low, which means the seat might be won by a rival party atan election (cf. ‘Safe seat’).

Middle Ages Historical period from (roughly) AD 1,000 to c. 1450.Minister (political) Person controlling or administerin g department

of state. The most powerful minister is the Prime Minister, also knownas the First Lord of the Treasury. Other key ministers are theChancellor of the Exchequer (finance minister), Home Secretary(Secretary of State for Home Affairs), Foreign Secretary and LordChancellor. Large ‘departments’ are headed by Secretaries of State,e.g. Secretary of State for Defence, Secretary of State for Health andSocial Security. In the departments there may be junior ministers, e.g.Minister for Transport Industries within the Department of theEnvironment, and ministers of state. Junior ministers are known eitheras parliamentary secretaries or parliamentary under-secretaries ofstate, depending on the status of the minister in charge of thedepartment.

Ministry (political) A government department, for example, Departmentof the Environment, Ministry of Defence. Administered by a politician(see ‘Minister’) and staffed by civil servants.

MortgageMoney loan advanced by building society, council, etc, forpurchase of dwelling or other property, with the house, etc, being usedas security.

Nationalisation Taking over of business concerns by the state.Nonconformist Person who does not accept the doctrines of an

established Ch urch, especially the Church of England, usuallyexcluding Roman Catholics.

Open University Institution (first students accepted 1971) which providesuniversity-level courses in students’ homes by means of television andradio lectures and correspondence courses.

Oxbridge Oxford and Cambridge Universities, that is, the ancientuniversities.

Point-to-point Cross-country race for horses.Postgraduate Student studying for a higher degree (for example, MA,

Master of Arts, PhD, Doctor of Philosophy) or diploma.

GLOSSARY 163

Precedent (legal) Previous decision or action which provides anauthoritative rule for similar cases.

Presbyterian Church Church governed by a council or assembly of‘elders’ or officials, especially the Church of Scotland.

Provinces England outside London (hence ‘provincial’).Puisne judge (legal) Judge in a superior court of rank lower than chief

justice.

Question Time Period during parliamentary day set aside for MPs toquestion ministers.

Referendum Direct vote by citizens on a political issue.Returning officer Official responsible for arranging and conducting an

election.

Safe seat (political) Constituency where the sitting member has alarge majority and there is little or no danger of any rival political partywinning the seat at an election (cf ‘Marginal seat’).

Sandwich course Course where students spend alternate periods of timeat work and studying at the institution.

Semi-detached house House that has one common wall with anotherhouse.

Session (political) Period for which Parliament sits.Shadow Cabinet Group composed of the leader of the opposition and his

or her senior colleagues in Parliament.Sheriff Official representing the Crown in counties with various

ceremonial, judicial and electoral functions.‘Stand for Parliamen t’ Attempt to get elected to Parliament by being

nominated at an election (the American expression is ‘run for office’).Steeplechasing Horse racing over hedges and ditches.Suffrage (political) The right to vote.‘Sunday’Newspaper published on Sundays.SynodAssembly of clergy (and lay representatives) for discussing and

deciding ecclesiastical affairs.

The Tower (of London) Fortress and royal palace traditionally used asplace of imprisonment and execution for offenders against the state—now a museum, though still garrisoned.

Tudor period The Tudors came to power in 1485 when Henry Tudor(later Henry VII) defeated Richard III. The fifth and last Tudormonarch, Elizabeth 1, died in 1603.

Undergraduate Student studying for first degree.Underwriter Person who carries on an insurance business.

164 GLOSSARY

Verdict (legal) Decision of jury as to whether the accused in a trial isguilty or not guilty.

Westminster Parliament.Whitehall Area of London where the most important ministries are found,

for example, the Treasury, Home Office, Foreign Office.Whip(political) (a) Party official responsible for maintaining party

discipline (b) Letter setting out instructions for attendance at deb atessent to MPs by the whips’ office.

Workhouse Institution, especially in nineteenth-century Britain, wherethose unable to support themselves were given food, shelter and work,all of a low standard (see novels of Dickens and Hardy, for example).

Writ Written command from sovereign, court, etc, requiring somespecific action, for example, writ for an election.

Select bibliography

General

Central Office of information, Britain: an Official Handbook (HMSO, annual).

Central Statistical Office, Annual Abstract of Statistics (HMSO, annual).

Central Statistical Office, Social Trends (HMSO, annual).

Jowell, R., et al., British Social Attitudes 1992 (Dartmouth, 1992).

Jowell, R., et al., International Social Attitudes the 10th BSA Report

(Dartmouth, 1993).

Sampson, A., The Essential Anatomy of Britain: Democracy in Crisis 2nd edn

(Coronet, 1993).

Whitaker’s Almanac (J.Whitaker & Sons, annual).

Historical and geographical background

Champion, A.G., and Townsend, A.R., Contemporary Britain–A Geographical

Perspective (Edward Arnold,1990).

Childs, D., Britain Since 1945: A Political History, 3rd edn (Routledge 1993).

Hoskins, W.G., The Making of the English Landscape, 3rd edn (Hodder, 1977).

Johnston, R.J. and Gardiner, V., (ed) The Changing Geography of the United

Kingdom, 2nd edn (Routledge 1991).

Marwick, A., British Society since 1945 (Penguin 1990).

Riddell, P., The Thatcher Era and its Legacy (Blackwell 1991).

Sked, A., and Cook, C., Post-War Britain: A Political History, 3rd edn (P enguin

1993).

Taylor, A.J.P., England 1914–1945 (Oxford University Press, 1965 and 1975;

paperback, Penguin, 1970).

Government and politics

Blake, R., The Conservative Party from Peel to Thatcher (Fontana, 1985).

Butler, D., and Kavanagh, D., The British General Election of 1992

(Macmillan, 1992).

Dunleavy, P., et al., Developments in British Politics 4 (Macmillan, 1993).

Hanson, A.H., and Walles, M., Governing Britian, 5th edn (Fontana, 1990).

Hennessy, P., Cabinet (Blackwell, 1986)

166 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Jeffreys, K., The Labour Party Since 1945 (Macmillan, 1993).

McKenzie, R.T., British Political Parties (Heinemann, 1964)

Punnett, R.M., British Government and Politics, 6th edn (Dartmouth, 1994).

Richards, P.G., Mackintosh’s The Government and Politics of Britain, 7th edn

(Hutchinson, 1988).

Local government

Stoker, G., The Politics of Local Government, 2nd edn (Macmillan, 1991).

The legal system

Berlins, M., and Dyer, C, The Law Machine (Penguin, 1989).

Howarth, D.D., The English Legal System (Blackstone, 1992).

Pannick, D., Judges (Oxford University Press, 1987).

Pannick, D., Advocates (Oxford University Press, 1992).

Waldron, J., The Law (Routledge, 1990).

The welfare state

Hill, M., The Welfare State in Britain: A Political History since 1945 (Edward

Elgar, 1993).

Harrison, S., et al, The Dynamics of British Health Policy (Routledge, 1990).

Education

Ball, S.J., Politics and Policy Making in Education (Routledge, 1990).

Brooks, R., Contemporary Debates in Education: An Historical Perspective

(Longman, 1991).

Tomlinson, J., The Control of Education (Cassell, 1993).

Industry and commerce

Allen, S., and Truman, C., Women in Business (Routledge, 1993).

Barberis, P., and May, T., Government, Industry and Political Economy (Open

University Press, 1993).

Clarke, W.M., How the C ity of London Works, 3rd edn. (Waterlow, 1991).

Coggan, P., The Money Machine: How the City Works, 2nd edn (Penguin,

1989).

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY 167

Cowe, R., The Guardian Guide to the UK’s Top Companies (Fourth Estate,

1993).

Durham, K., The New City (Macmillan, 1992).

Grant, W., Business and Politics in Britain, 2nd edn (Macmillan, 1993).

Green, G.D., Industrial Relations, 3rd edn (Pitman, 1991).

Harbury, C., and Lipsey, R.G., An Introduction to the UK Economy, 3rd edn

(Pitman, 1989).

Howells, P.G.A., and Bain, K., Financial Markets and Institutions (Longman,

1988).

Johnson, C., The Economy under Mrs Thatcher (Penguin, 1991).

McRae, H., and Cairncross, F., Capital City: London as a Financial Centre

(Methuen 1991).

Marsh, D., The New Politics of British Trade Unionism (M acmillan, 1992).

Millward, N., et al., Workplace Industrial Relations in Transition (Dartmouth,

1992).

Life in Britain

Annan, N., Our Age: The Generation that Made Post-War Britain (Fontana,

1991).

Cannadine, D., The Decline and Fall of the British Aristocracy (Pan Picador,

1992).

Hennessy, P., Never Again: Britain 1945–51 (Jonathan Cape, 1992).

Hoggart, R., The Uses of Literacy (Chatto & Windus, 1957; paperback Penguin,

1969).

McLoughlin, J., The Demographic Revolution (Faber & Faber, 1991).

Paxman, J., Friends in High Places: Who Runs Britain (Penguin, 1990).

Thompson, E.P., The Making of the English Working Class (Penguin, 1963).

Whitelegg, E., et al., The Changing Experience of Women (Blackwell, 1982)

Press and broadcasting

Briggs, A., The History of Broadcasting in the United Kingdom: Vol. I The

Birth of Broadcasting, 1961; Vol. II The Golden Age of Wireless, 1965;

Vol. III The War of Words, 1970; all published by Oxford University

Press.

Curran, J., and Seaton, J., Power without Responsibility: The Press and

Broadcasting in Britain, 4th edn, (Routledge, 1991).

Index

administrative tribunals 64 colleges of further education 102

alliance 21 Common Market (see EEC)

art galleries 52, 128 Commonwealth immigrants 122–7

Arts Council 128 Community Charge (‘Poll tax’) 19,

assizes 58–1 53

comprehensive schools 85, 86–87,

89–3Bank of England 103, 108, 111–15Conciliation and Arbitration Serviceba nks 110, 112–16

118barristers 33, 64–7, 67Confederation of British IndustryBeveridge Report 73

(CBI) 118bill (parliamentary) 15, 35–42, 158Conservative Party 3, 4, 9, 10–11,birth rate 118–3

16f., 27–32, 45, 48, 51, 52, 53–7,bishops 45, 143–875, 87, 91, 97, 105f., 116–20, 122,Boundary Commission 25132, 152, 156British Broadcasting Corporation

coroners’ courts 64(BBC) 137–5council houses 52, 80, 159British Rail 108–12council tax 54building societies 78–2, 159councillors 52

counties 50–5cabinet 19, 31, 32–4, 35county courts 62cabinet ministers 31, 32–4, 48Courts Act (1971) 55Certificate of Secondary Educationcriminal courts 55–62(CSE) 86, 88crown 5–14, 19, 31–3, 35, 39, 40,Channel Islands 2, 14

143, 144, 146Chief Whip 37crown courts 58–1Church of England 26, 45, 83, 93, 96,crown estates 12, 146143–50

Church of Scotland 146–1, 161, 162death rate 119cinemas 128Director of Public Prosecutions 60City (of London) 105, 111–17, 159district councils 51–5civil courts 62–5, 68divorce 119–4Civil List 12–13, 159

169

170 INDEX

doctors 76–77 House of Lords 5, 8, 13, 14–16, 36,

40, 44–48, 59, 61, 63, 68, 143

housing 52, 78–4Education Act (1870) 83, 121,

(1902) 84,

(1918) 84, incomes 130–6

(1944) 85–9, Independent Broadcasting

(1984) 88, Commission 138

(1988) 88 independent schools 92–7

elections 4, 15, 16f., 24–31 industrial relations 114–21

eleven-plus examination 85–9 Inns of Court 65

England 2, 4, 50, 53, 70, 81, 90, 92, insurance 113

123, 124–9, 144 IRA 153f.

entertainment 123–33 Ireland 2–3, 149–60

Equal Pay Act (1970) 122 Isle of Man 2, 14

European Economic Community

(EEC) 3–4, 19, 22, 47, 106–10, Jewish community 148118 judges 66–9

Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) jury 67–68106

Labour Party 3, 4, 9, 17f., 27–32, 45,family allowances 73–7 51, 53, 73, 86–87, 97, 105, 108,family life 119–4 109, 116–20, 131first reading (of Bill) 35 Law Society 64Fleet Street 133, 161 Liberal Democratic Party 11, 17, 21–Friendly Societies 71 3, 26, 29–1

Liberal Party 9, 11, 17–21, 27–29, 72,

General Certificate of Education 107

(GCE) 86, 88, 94 life peers 49f.

General Certificate of Secondary Lloyd’s 113–17

Education (GCSE) 88–2, 94 Local Education Authorities (LEAs)

General Synod (of Church of 87–5

England) 145, 146 Lord Chancellor 24, 32, 45–8, 48,

grammar schools 81, 85f . 62–5

grants (for students) 101 Lord Chief Justice 62

Great Britian (definition) 2

magistrates 57–58, 61, 62

Hansard 43 marriage 119–4

health authorities 76–77 Members of Parliament (MPs) 15–16,

High Court 62–5 24–31, 33–38, 40–5

holidays 129–4 merchant banks 112–16

hospitals 74–77 Methodist Church 147–2

House of Commons 5, 8, 9, 14–16, metropolitan counties 51

24–31, 36, 46, 47–1 ministries 48–2

mortgages 78–2, 162

INDEX 171

museums 52, 128 theatre 127–2

third reading (of Bill) 40

trade unions 19, 114–21National Curriculum 88Trades Union Congress (TUC) 4,National Health Act (1946) 74

115–20National Health Ser vice (NHS) 75–77

National Insurance 73, 77

National Insurance Act Ulster Unionists 4, 17, 22–4, 155, 157

(1911) 72, 74, United Kingdom (definition) 2

(1946) 74–8 United Reformed Church 148

nationalisation 108–12 Universities 95–102

newspapers 132–42 University and Colleges Admissions

non-conformists 83, 96, 147–2, 162 Service (UCAS) 102

Northern Ireland 2, 17, 22–4, 25, 52,

90, 149–60 Wales 2–3, 16, 23, 25, 52, 53, 55, 59,

80, 85, 98, 143, 146

parish 50, 144–9 women 66–9, 121–6

parliament 5–11, 14–48, 50, 66, 108, Workers’ Educational Association

121, 146, 163 (WEA) 102

Parliament Act (1911) 46, 152

Peerage Act (1963) 48

pensions 72, 74, 77–1

periodicals 137

Plaid Cymru (Welsh Nationalist

Party) 17, 23

police 68–2

Poor Law (Elizabethan) 70, 75

Poor Law Amendment Act (1834) 71

population 118–3

primary schools 84–8, 90

Prime Minister 4, 8f., 18–19, 23, 24,

29, 31–4, 39, 43, 45, 47, 47, 48,

143, 162

private bills 41

Private Members’ Bills 41–4, 46

Privy Council 11, 14, 32, 36

proportional representation 29–1

sport 123–30

Stock Exchange 110, 113

strikes 116

students 99–6

technical colleges 102

television 42, 137–5

Modern Britain-John Irwin

Documents

Transcript of Modern Britain-John Irwin