Why did the Conservatives dominate in 1951-64, and then lose?

Domination:

Maintained Labour reforms i.e. welfare state, NHS; rebranded Conservatives (Rab Butler)- no
longer party of high unemployment/upper classes. Conservatives adopted most popular
consensus policies re. welfare and nationalisation/mixed economy. Party effectively
restructured by Chairman Lord Woolton after 1945 quick political recovery. Conservatives
enjoyed strong press support.

Age of affluence public generally happy with Conservative government in terms of personal
prosperity. 51 election won at fortunate time; riding on post-war expansion + economic
recovery. Average working wage doubled in 10 years. Affluence felt throughout society.
Never had it so good Macmillan. Conservatives ended food rationing and consciously
associated themselves with growing prosperity in terms of home, car TV ownership +various
forms of consumerism etc. Churchill delivered end to rationing + end to austerity. Highly
popular. Conservatives no longer willing to be seen as party of mass unemployment and
wanted more co-operative relationship with the trade unions.

A series of well qualified, experienced and capable leaders Churchill, Eden and MacMillan

Butler, tax cuts and increase in public spending simultaneously; 55 and 59, majorities
increased due to feel-good factor. 1955 give away budget of 134 tax cuts aimed at middle
classes. 1959 (another election year) 370 million in further tax cuts. Macmillan delivered
more houses 300,000 a year. Prosperity accompanied by growing equality. From 1951-55
small majority made Cons wary of dismantling popular Labour reforms. This benefitted them
in longer term and cemented their status as the natural party of government. MacMillans
commitment to consensus and low unemployment denied the divided Labour party any easy
political targets to attack.

Macmillan, despite Suez/France/Egypt (Eden), maintained party unity and strong media
support at first. Eden personally rather than Conservative Party took the fall for this. A
peaceful and well managed political transition. Together with economic growth gave him a
+ve public image commercial advertising used; Supermac. Coped well with resignation of
Thorneycroft/Powell (58). MacMillan regarded as an effective political operator a
showman with a theatrical style and an effective party manager.

Labour seen as directionless. Defeats of 55 and 59 reinforced divisions within party. Internal
division in Labour party Bevanites (Left) and Gaitskellites (Right). Especially over
foreign policy and the question of nuclear disarmament. Gaitskell struggled to manage and
lead his party, failing to remove clause 4 commitment to nationalised control in 1959 and
being defeated in 1960 on the question of nuclear disarmament by the left.

Decline:

Macmillan seen as out of touch with affluence of society; promotion of Lord Home through
renouncing of peerage to Foreign Office seen as undemocratic. Profumo affair, modified
political image of Macmillan as old, out of touch.

Increasing media sniping in the form of satire favouring change and attacking MacMillan and
other establishment figures, especially so after Profumo affair. MacMillans resignation in
1963 brought Alec Douglas Home to leadership, but he was relatively less effective as a leader
and seen as out of touch. Profumo affair underlined perception of government as corrupt and
out of touch with the public mood.

Demand of society outstripped supply from government in regards to affluence. Stop-go

economics resurfaced - inflation and balance of payments crises caused economic instability
undermining confidence in Conservative economic management by 1960s. Night of the Long
Knives intended to rejuvenate but actually weakened Cabinet and MacMillans authority as
PM. Rejected from EEC in 63 due to de Gaulle veto. De Gaulle was anti-American and
suspicious of the British Empire wanting European mainland focus for EEC. A major setback
as EFTA could not compete in terms of generating economic growth. Short-term concerns
over deflationary policies, relative economic decline compared to USA, Japan + EEC states
and stuttering growth overshadowed longer-term reality of low unemployment and relatively
sustained economic growth, now taken for granted. Opposition to stop-go grew within
Conservative Party e.g. resignation of Powell and Thorneycroft over inflationary economic
strategy. 1961 pay pause in response to inflation led to mounting unemployment.

First real signs of problems in consensus approach in terms of managing inflation and
unemployment at the same time. Nationalised monopolies were expensive, inflexible and
prone to trade union disruption. Modernisation (e.g. Beeching cuts to railway system) though
arguably necessary was often unpopular.

Britain losing world position, decolonisation of Africa, retraction of Empire MacMillans

Wind of Change speech. Spy defections of Philby, Burgess and Maclean to USSR added to
sense that GB establishment, not least its intelligence establishment, was decadent, ineffective
and corrupt. Failure to join EEC in 1963 added to sense that GB lacked an effective strategy in
foreign policy. A palpable sense of decline and pessimism had set in by early 60s. Profumo
affair further attached blame for this perceived decline to the political elite or establishment
associated with the Conservative government.

Labour party reforming, Harold Wilson = new leader. Helped reunify party as both Nye Bevan
and Gaitskell were now dead. White heat of technology seemed to unite Labour Party +
exploited public mood of wanting change symbolised in TW3. 64, success of Liberals took
votes from Conservatives, helped Labour in election. Revival of Liberals under leadership of
Joe Grimand foreshadowed by victory in Orpington by-election in 1962. Gained 11% in 1964
and 9 seats, effectively at Tory expense allowing Labour to squeeze in with majority of 3.

For discussion next time Why was Labour out of power for thirteen years?