Compare the achievements of Attlee’s government after WW2 with Lloyd George’s government after WW1

Both Attlee and George were charged with overseeing Britain through difficult times. Both world wars had significant effects on Britain’s economic and social life. The general public were anxious for social change following the wars in which they fought with the vision of a brighter future and it was up to the politicians to deliver. Both post war leaders had successes and failures but their overall achievements had significant effects on Britain.

In 1918 Lloyd George led a coalition government which over saw post war reconstruction. One aspect of reconstruction was the demobilisation of a million soldiers and their return to civilian life. Lloyd George was intent in delivering “a land fit for heroes” and his intention was to raise living standards. Thus under George’s government Health Minister Christopher Addison was made responsible for introducing the 1919 Housing and Town Planning act. The aim of the measure was to encourage local councils to clear slums and construct low rent homes, specifically for the working classes. Historian Michael Lynch argues that this was a major success of the George government as by 1922 200,000 such houses had been built. However other historians such as Derrick Murphy have argued that this was an insufficient number of homes built and didn’t meet the needs of the population as there was a shortage of 800,000 homes. This criticism makes it questionable as to how far the Housing and Planning act was a major achievement. However Michael Lynch further argues that it was an achievement in principle; the act had laid down that housing was now a necessary public service which local authorities were responsible for providing.

Another achievement credited to the George government was the extension of national insurance. By 1921 the George government succeeded in extending, between 1920-1 provisions to 8 million more workers, totalling in 12 million workers being covered. The aim was to protect workers against short term unemployment. Michael Lynch argues that this was significant achievement because at a time of high demand for labour, it seemed the only cover likely to be necessary.

Another major achievement of the Lloyd George government was the signing of the Anglo-Irish treaty. Lloyd George was successful in persuading the Nationalists to accept his proposals or else face other proposals even less in their favour. The significance of his persuasion was that he managed to get the nationalists to drop the demand that Ulster be part of an independent Ireland. Historian Andrew Marr argues this was significant because it was the closest anyone came to solving the Irish question. He argues that far from being the perfect solution, it was a major achievement considering the scale of the problem. However Mike Byrne argues it could be seen as a political failure, as the Unionists felt betrayed by George and Nationalists would not forget treatment from the Black and Tans. Neither side the treaty other than a concession. This significantly led to distrust between both sides of Georges government.

In 1945 Labour surprisingly took office and Attlee succeeded Churchill. Similar to George, he was charged with overseeing Britain through a tough economic period, reconstruction and similarly there was a public mood for change.

One of the main achievements of the Attlee government was the implementation of large scale nationalisation programme. Chief industries were nationalised under labour, including Britain’s most vital industry coal, the bank of England, electricity, gas, iron and steel as well as other institutions. Michael Lynch argues the nationalisation of coal, as a vital industry was significant. The industry had been subject to decades of disruption and underproduction. Nationalisation would mean greater safety, productivity and would have the wider impact as other industries would benefit from this. However Labour’s nationalisation program has been criticised. Historian Stuart Ball is critical of Labour’s nationalisation of the steel and iron industry. He argued the industry was not a public utility, was profit making and had good employer-employee relations. Ball argues there were thus no grounds for nationalisation and undermined growth in those industries. However other historians have argued that Labour did not go far enough in their nationalisation program and failed to deliver the social democracy they had promised.

Another key achievement of the Attlee government was the creation of the Welfare state. Labour followed the principle of collectivism laid down in the Beveridge report. The four main features of the welfare state were the national insurance act, the industrial injuries act, the National Health Service act and the national assistance act. Significantly Historian Andrew Marr argues that Labour had not introduced anything new, they collectivised and built on existing welfare schemes and services into the welfare state. Similarly Labour built on foundations George’s government had laid down after the first world war, for example Labours National insurance act further extended George’s own extension of national insurance.

Another key achievement of Attlee’s government was a major housing programme. George’s government had also implemented a housing problem, however because of mismanagement and lack of investment there was an 800,000 housing shortage. Significantly Labour’s housing program led to one million homes being built. Andrew Marr argues this was significant in social well being of the country as slums were cleared and there was major low rent council homes built serving the working class of Britain.

Another major achievement of the Attlee government was convincing the USA of the need of the Marshall program. Following the war the worlds trading nations suffered from balance of payments difficulties. Foreign secretary Ernest Bevin played an instrumental role in obtaining the aid. Historian AJP Taylor argues the Marshall aid was the most significant achievement of the Labour government, as without it he argues the international economy would be under threat of losing strength and further fall under the influence of the Soviet Union.

In conclusion, both the George and Attlee governments were able to obtain significant achievements during their time on office, similarly in social policies. Both governments were faced with struggling economies and were in societies in the mood for rapid social change. It’s argued that many of Labour’s reforms were not new, but were a continuation of Liberal reforms and principles, for example Labour continued the principle that housing was a government responsibility, a principle laid down by the Liberals. Both governments have faced heavy criticism, particularly under the theme of missed opportunity. Right wing historians such as Colerri Barret rue the missed opportunity of concentrating on industrial recovery rather than welfare, while left wing historians rue the missed opportunity to nationalise more central aspects of the economy and carry through a socialist agenda. However Andrew Marr argues the similar achievements of both governments was keeping the country united while other countries suffered greater.

 

Compare and Contrast the effect of war on the characters’ from Journeys End by R.C. Sherriff and Birdsong by Sebastian Faulks

R.C Sherriff his play and Sebastian Faulks wrote his novel in different time periods. R.C Sherriff published his play in 1929 and the play was his experience as a soldier in the war, whereas Sebastian Faulks, who was born many years after the Great War wrote his novel based on research and the stories from his grandfather, who served in the war. Nevertheless both writers have successfully captured the effect that the war has on soldiers.

Most obviously, the effect of the war on Stanhope is that he is now become a heavy drinker. This is first discussed through hardy and Osborne when hardy brings up “how is the dear young boy? Drinking like a fish, as usual?” Stanhope also admits without alcohol and drinking he would crumble about going up to the line. He says to Osborne“. Without being doped with whisky – id go mad with fright”. He also says “I knew I’d go mad if I didn’t break the strain. I couldn’t bear being fully conscious all the time” he also seems to be making himself ill by drinking. Trotter exclaims “my goodness, uncle, doesn’t he look ill!” Trotter also says “there was Stanhope sitting on that bed drinking a whisky. He looked as white as a sheet!” Stanhope has clearly turned to alcohol to help with as an effect the war has had on him.
Correspondingly in Birdsong, Weir is also described to have turned to alcohol to help him deal with the effects of war. In our first encounter with him, he is described in this way; “But his eyes looked wild and red with whisky. The brownish stubble on his cheeks and chin was surely the result of more than one mornings missed shave.”

Stanhope is also paranoid as a result of the effect of war. He is obsessed that Raleigh is going to write home and tell his sister about how Stanhope is now. Stanhope is pathological about censoring Raleigh’s letter. When talking to Osborne about Raleigh he says “he’ll write home and tell her I reek of whisky all day” and he follows by saying Raleigh “wants to write home and tell Madge all about me. Well, he won’t, d’you see uncle? He won’t write. Censorship! I censor his letters – cross out all he says about me.”

There is a difference in the amount of sympathy the main protagonists have in both novels. In Birdsong, Stephen Wraysford is conveyed as a sympathetic man, as jack Firebrace says “They understood the difficulties of a man who had been stretched too far.” Contrastingly in Journeys end Stanhope has little sympathy for other soldiers. For example when Hibbert is complaining about his neuralgia Stanhope minimally says “get tight” which either means deal with it or get drunk. The effect of war on Stanhope has lessened his sympathy yet the effect of war on Stephen has increased his sympathy for the other soldiers.

The effect of the war physically on the characters in both novels has been conveyed excellently by both writers. When we are first introduced to Stanhope he is described to be “He is good looking, rather from attractive features than the healthy good looks of Raleigh. Although tanned by months in open air, there is a pallor under his skin and dark shadows under his eyes” Clearly the effects of war have caused some of these physical descriptions. We find that Stanhope has had trouble with sleeping. For example when Osborne pleads with Stanhope to have a sleep Stanhope replies “sleep – I can’t sleep”. An additional example is that when Osborne mentions sleep again Stanhope exclaims “Sleep! Catch me wasting my time with sleep”. Due to the fact that Stanhope doesn’t sleep much this must be why there are “dark shadows under his eyes”.
Likewise Stephen Wraysford has also been affected by the war in a physical way. When we are first introduced to Stephen in part 2 he was described by jack Firebrace; “Jack saw a man with dark hair that was going grey at the sides, he had a thick moustache that obscured his upper lip and big brown eyes that stared thoughtfully at him. He might have been from any age from twenty five to forty.” The war has evidently caused these physical appearances, as we see earlier in the novel, which is set some years before the war that Stephen is described to have “black hair” and “Stephen lifted searching eyes.” We also find that Stephen is only twenty years old. The evidence supports that Stephen’s physical appearance has been affected by the war.

The effect on war on trotter is that he experiencing a slow passing of time. He says “I’ve got an idea! I am going to draw a hundred and forty four little circles on a bit o’ paper, and every hour I’m going to black one in, that’ll make time go alright”. Trotter also doesn’t like the quiet as an effect the war has had on him. He says “too damn quiet. You bet your boots the boche is up to something. The big attack soon, I reckon. I don’t like it, uncle.” We would find this strange because we wouldn’t think the soldiers would like peace and quiet rather than the sound of shells in the trenches.

A further effect is the soldier’s acceptance of death, and their realisation that death is round every corner. For example in Journeys end the effect of war on Osborne is that he has accepted the possibility of death. When Stanhope and Osborne are talking about their plan for the big attack Stanhope says “yes. It’ll come while were here. And we shall be in the front row of the stalls” which confirms they will be heavily involved in the big attack Osborne replies “oh, well” and there is a silence, and the effect of that silence is that it shows Osborne thinks he is going to die. Stanhope has also accepted it is likely he will die as a result from the effect of war. Stanhope says to Osborne “it may not be much longer now. I’ve had my share of luck” consequently he doesn’t expect to be around much longer as he will probably die.
Equally in Birdsong there is a widespread acceptance of death, and that death can happen at any time and no one is immune to it. Jack Firebrace “thought of the stench of his clothes, the lice along the seams, the men he was frightened to be friend in case their bodies came apart the next day in front of his eyes.”

In conclusion the effect the war has had on the characters’ is very immense. R.C. Sherriff and Sebastian Faulks excellently illustrate how the war was a serious thing and not fun and games. The effects on their characters’ are practically screaming out at us, how people change because of their experiences.