‘Labour government had more successes than failures in domestic affairs in the years 1964 to 1970’. Assess the validity of this view.
Firstly, In my personal opinion I do not think there were significantly more successes than failures in terms of domestic policy for the Labour governments between 1964 to 1970. The liberal domestic reforms were led by the competent home secretary, Roy Jenkins, through his backing, the Labour governments passed important liberalising laws; such as the Abortion Act in 1967, the Sexual offences Act 1967 (allowing homosexual activities between males in private) and also the abolition of the death penalty in 1969. This ushered in what some conservatives would claim a “permissive society”.
However I do not agree …show more content…
The Notting Hill riots had left a mark and the continuous influx of immigrants caused domestic issues. This was perhaps the greatest opportunity for the Labour government to enforce its promise of better race relations, exemplified by the Race Relations Act 1965. Moreover the Labour government also extended the Race Relations Act in 1968 to cover unlawful discrimination in employment, housing, education and services. But at the same time, the Commonwealth Immigrants Act meant East African Asians holding British passports lost their automatic right to stay in the UK. The Act amended the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1962, further reducing rights of citizens of the Commonwealth of Nations countries . This bill was infact backed by the Labour government and these two acts seemingly contradicted one another; the first tried to improve racism in the UK, but the second seemed to limit the rights of access for immigrants. Although the 1965 act aimed to create a more accepting society it was contradicted by the 1968 act therefore in my opinion it cannot be argued Labour government had more successes than failures in domestic affairs in the years 1964 to 1970 in terms of race relations.Perhaps Enoch Powell must be blamed for creating an anti-immigration support. No doubt many agreed with his rallying cry of a scenario of “rivers of blood”. Yet, for the Labour government to give in to such evident racial hatred and notcontinue …show more content…
However through other measures, he was able to avoid this at first. One method to try and decrease the balance of payments deficit was the creation of the Department of Economic Affairs and the creation of a ‘National Plan’. This divided the power of the Treasury in two, partly to reduce its power. However, there were many critics of the DEA, and when it was obvious that the National Plan was failing in its aim of increasing productivity and exports, the DEA was eventually proven to be a failure. This can be seen as major failure in Labour’s domestic policy, as it was a humiliating retreat for Wilson, away from his new department that everyone had been so optimistic about. Regardless of this, the first two years of Wilson’s period in office (64-66) can be seen as being relatively successful, and Labour was re-elected in 1966 with a larger majority. But this second period in office was a different matter, and there appeared to be many failures in terms of domestic policy. Britain was forced to devalue the pound in 1967. By just managing to avoid devaluation in 1964, it seemed that devaluation in 1967 was a great political and economic failure by the government. This disagrees with the statement and instead suggests a great failure by the Labour government. The humiliating retreat from the DEA by the government and the
Firstly, In my personal opinion I do not think there were significantly more successes than failures in terms of domestic policy for the Labour governments between 1964 to 1970. The liberal domestic reforms were led by the competent home secretary, Roy Jenkins, through his backing, the Labour governments passed important liberalising laws; such as the Abortion Act in 1967, the Sexual offences Act 1967 (allowing homosexual activities between males in private) and also the abolition of the death penalty in 1969. This ushered in what some conservatives would claim a “permissive society”.
However I do not agree …show more content…
The Notting Hill riots had left a mark and the continuous influx of immigrants caused domestic issues. This was perhaps the greatest opportunity for the Labour government to enforce its promise of better race relations, exemplified by the Race Relations Act 1965. Moreover the Labour government also extended the Race Relations Act in 1968 to cover unlawful discrimination in employment, housing, education and services. But at the same time, the Commonwealth Immigrants Act meant East African Asians holding British passports lost their automatic right to stay in the UK. The Act amended the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1962, further reducing rights of citizens of the Commonwealth of Nations countries . This bill was infact backed by the Labour government and these two acts seemingly contradicted one another; the first tried to improve racism in the UK, but the second seemed to limit the rights of access for immigrants. Although the 1965 act aimed to create a more accepting society it was contradicted by the 1968 act therefore in my opinion it cannot be argued Labour government had more successes than failures in domestic affairs in the years 1964 to 1970 in terms of race relations.Perhaps Enoch Powell must be blamed for creating an anti-immigration support. No doubt many agreed with his rallying cry of a scenario of “rivers of blood”. Yet, for the Labour government to give in to such evident racial hatred and notcontinue …show more content…
However through other measures, he was able to avoid this at first. One method to try and decrease the balance of payments deficit was the creation of the Department of Economic Affairs and the creation of a ‘National Plan’. This divided the power of the Treasury in two, partly to reduce its power. However, there were many critics of the DEA, and when it was obvious that the National Plan was failing in its aim of increasing productivity and exports, the DEA was eventually proven to be a failure. This can be seen as major failure in Labour’s domestic policy, as it was a humiliating retreat for Wilson, away from his new department that everyone had been so optimistic about. Regardless of this, the first two years of Wilson’s period in office (64-66) can be seen as being relatively successful, and Labour was re-elected in 1966 with a larger majority. But this second period in office was a different matter, and there appeared to be many failures in terms of domestic policy. Britain was forced to devalue the pound in 1967. By just managing to avoid devaluation in 1964, it seemed that devaluation in 1967 was a great political and economic failure by the government. This disagrees with the statement and instead suggests a great failure by the Labour government. The humiliating retreat from the DEA by the government and the