BRITAIN THEMATIC ESSAYS
Table of Contents
CONSERVATIVE DOMINATION 1951-64 [20]...................................................................................2
‘Weaknesses of the Labour Party were the most important reason why the Conservatives were able to
stay in power between 1951 & 1964.’ How far do you agree with this statement?...................................2
LABOUR 1964-79 [20]....................................................................................................................4
The record of the Labour governments between 1964-79 was one of continuous failure. Asses [20].......4
1
, BRITAIN THEMATIC ESSAYS
CONSERVATIVE DOMINATION 1951-64 [20]
Question
‘Weaknesses of the Labour Party were the most important reason why the
Conservatives were able to stay in power between 1951 & 1964.’ How far
do you agree with this statement?
01.03.2022
Answer
Between 1951 & 1964 there were three elections in Britain: October 1951, May 1955, & October 1959.
The Conservatives won all three, allowing them to dominate the period. There were many reasons for this,
including the weaknesses of the Labour Party, the electoral popularity of the Conservatives’ leaders, & the
improvement in standards of living. Whilst Labour’s weaknesses were significant, they can’t fully account
for why the Conservatives stayed in power. Rather, the improvement in living standards is the main reason
as it informed the electorates’ decisions the most.
The Labour Party’s weaknesses played a significant role in allowing the Conservatives to stay in power
in the 1951-64 period because the weaknesses lowered trust in the party’s competency. For example,
there were extensive internal divisions, especially over how far they should push socialist policies, & over
the issue of unilateralism. This resulted in uncertainty among the public about what they would potentially
be voting for if they supported Labour. Furthermore, Labour had been against Britain joining the European
Economic Community (EEC) during the 1960s, which went against the views of many British citizens. In
addition to this, Labour was largely associated with rationing, austerity, & high taxes due to the policies
they had put out between 1945 & 1951. This meant voters had a negative perception of the party’s ability
to govern the country, & so were less likely to vote for Labour. However, this also showed how important
good living standards, which the Conservatives managed to provide, were to the voting population.
Moreover, Gaitskell, who was a well-established orator & leader, succeeded Attlee in 1957 and managed to
resolve some of the issues & weaknesses in the party. Despite this, Labour still lost the 1959 election,
losing a total of 19 seats. This would suggest that the Party’s weaknesses weren’t the sole reason for the
Conservative domination, & that factors such as the importance of standard of living also had a major
impact.
A stronger alternative reason for the Conservative domination was the increase in standards of living.
Between 1951 & 1964, wages had rose from £8.30 per week to £18.35. In combination with the availability
of credit & tactical lowering of taxes before elections, this meant people’s purchasing power increased
considerably. This was further enhanced by the availability of white goods, which allowed women more
time to work. As a result, many people’s living standards increased, and people began to gain badges of
middle-class respectability. For example, car ownership increased by 500% and TV ownership grew to 91%.
The Conservative party took the credit for this – Macmillan’s in a speech in 1957 said that the people had
“never had it so good”. Therefore, voters associated the Conservatives with economic prosperity, & so
were less willing to vote for another party because it could jeopardise their better standards of lives.
Admittedly, the increased standards of living were largely based on short- termism and stop-go policies
that led to stagflation. Moreover, Labour’s weaknesses, mainly that they were seen to be linked to
austerity, provided contrast that highlighted the association between the Conservatives and economic
prosperity. However, most of the voting public weren’t acutely aware of the dangers of the economic
policies underlying their increased living standards. The increased prosperity was much clearer as it
directly impacted their daily lives. Therefore, the increased standards of living informed the peoples’
choices to vote for the Conservatives much more than Labour’s weaknesses, making this a more important
reason.
Another major reason for the Conservative Party dominating the electoral popularity of the
Conservatives’ leaders. Many of the party leaders (& Prime Ministers) from 1951 to 1964 were seen as
charismatic & popular among the public. For example, Churchill (PM from 1951-55) was seen as the great
war hero, whilst Macmillan (PM from 1957-63) was seen as an unflappable and relatable gentleman.
Macmillan’s reputation was also boosted by his rallying speech in response to the Suez crisis that made
reference to Dunkirk. As the leaders were often the figureheads of the party, this helped to increase the
popularity of the Conservative party. By contrast, Attlee (leader of Labour from 1933-55) was seen as past
his prime & Gaitskell’s rejection of British entry into the EEC made him & Labour unpopular with many pro-
Europeans. This meant that people were more likely to vote for the Conservatives. However, this was far
from the only reason for Conservative domination. This is because the 1945 elections had shown that
Churchill, despite his popularity, wasn’t seen as a suitable peacetime leader. Eden (PM from 1955-57) had
also tarnished his reputation during the October-November 1956 Suez Crisis. Yet the Conservatives still
stayed in power till 1964. This may be because who the leaders of each Party were didn’t directly influence
the lives of the voters very much, & so had a minimal impact on their choice of vote. By contrast, the
improved standards of living had a very imminent effect on their lives. This shows that the electoral
popularity of the Conservatives likely had less influence than the weaknesses of Labour, such as their
2
Table of Contents
CONSERVATIVE DOMINATION 1951-64 [20]...................................................................................2
‘Weaknesses of the Labour Party were the most important reason why the Conservatives were able to
stay in power between 1951 & 1964.’ How far do you agree with this statement?...................................2
LABOUR 1964-79 [20]....................................................................................................................4
The record of the Labour governments between 1964-79 was one of continuous failure. Asses [20].......4
1
, BRITAIN THEMATIC ESSAYS
CONSERVATIVE DOMINATION 1951-64 [20]
Question
‘Weaknesses of the Labour Party were the most important reason why the
Conservatives were able to stay in power between 1951 & 1964.’ How far
do you agree with this statement?
01.03.2022
Answer
Between 1951 & 1964 there were three elections in Britain: October 1951, May 1955, & October 1959.
The Conservatives won all three, allowing them to dominate the period. There were many reasons for this,
including the weaknesses of the Labour Party, the electoral popularity of the Conservatives’ leaders, & the
improvement in standards of living. Whilst Labour’s weaknesses were significant, they can’t fully account
for why the Conservatives stayed in power. Rather, the improvement in living standards is the main reason
as it informed the electorates’ decisions the most.
The Labour Party’s weaknesses played a significant role in allowing the Conservatives to stay in power
in the 1951-64 period because the weaknesses lowered trust in the party’s competency. For example,
there were extensive internal divisions, especially over how far they should push socialist policies, & over
the issue of unilateralism. This resulted in uncertainty among the public about what they would potentially
be voting for if they supported Labour. Furthermore, Labour had been against Britain joining the European
Economic Community (EEC) during the 1960s, which went against the views of many British citizens. In
addition to this, Labour was largely associated with rationing, austerity, & high taxes due to the policies
they had put out between 1945 & 1951. This meant voters had a negative perception of the party’s ability
to govern the country, & so were less likely to vote for Labour. However, this also showed how important
good living standards, which the Conservatives managed to provide, were to the voting population.
Moreover, Gaitskell, who was a well-established orator & leader, succeeded Attlee in 1957 and managed to
resolve some of the issues & weaknesses in the party. Despite this, Labour still lost the 1959 election,
losing a total of 19 seats. This would suggest that the Party’s weaknesses weren’t the sole reason for the
Conservative domination, & that factors such as the importance of standard of living also had a major
impact.
A stronger alternative reason for the Conservative domination was the increase in standards of living.
Between 1951 & 1964, wages had rose from £8.30 per week to £18.35. In combination with the availability
of credit & tactical lowering of taxes before elections, this meant people’s purchasing power increased
considerably. This was further enhanced by the availability of white goods, which allowed women more
time to work. As a result, many people’s living standards increased, and people began to gain badges of
middle-class respectability. For example, car ownership increased by 500% and TV ownership grew to 91%.
The Conservative party took the credit for this – Macmillan’s in a speech in 1957 said that the people had
“never had it so good”. Therefore, voters associated the Conservatives with economic prosperity, & so
were less willing to vote for another party because it could jeopardise their better standards of lives.
Admittedly, the increased standards of living were largely based on short- termism and stop-go policies
that led to stagflation. Moreover, Labour’s weaknesses, mainly that they were seen to be linked to
austerity, provided contrast that highlighted the association between the Conservatives and economic
prosperity. However, most of the voting public weren’t acutely aware of the dangers of the economic
policies underlying their increased living standards. The increased prosperity was much clearer as it
directly impacted their daily lives. Therefore, the increased standards of living informed the peoples’
choices to vote for the Conservatives much more than Labour’s weaknesses, making this a more important
reason.
Another major reason for the Conservative Party dominating the electoral popularity of the
Conservatives’ leaders. Many of the party leaders (& Prime Ministers) from 1951 to 1964 were seen as
charismatic & popular among the public. For example, Churchill (PM from 1951-55) was seen as the great
war hero, whilst Macmillan (PM from 1957-63) was seen as an unflappable and relatable gentleman.
Macmillan’s reputation was also boosted by his rallying speech in response to the Suez crisis that made
reference to Dunkirk. As the leaders were often the figureheads of the party, this helped to increase the
popularity of the Conservative party. By contrast, Attlee (leader of Labour from 1933-55) was seen as past
his prime & Gaitskell’s rejection of British entry into the EEC made him & Labour unpopular with many pro-
Europeans. This meant that people were more likely to vote for the Conservatives. However, this was far
from the only reason for Conservative domination. This is because the 1945 elections had shown that
Churchill, despite his popularity, wasn’t seen as a suitable peacetime leader. Eden (PM from 1955-57) had
also tarnished his reputation during the October-November 1956 Suez Crisis. Yet the Conservatives still
stayed in power till 1964. This may be because who the leaders of each Party were didn’t directly influence
the lives of the voters very much, & so had a minimal impact on their choice of vote. By contrast, the
improved standards of living had a very imminent effect on their lives. This shows that the electoral
popularity of the Conservatives likely had less influence than the weaknesses of Labour, such as their
2
