How far was the emergence of the Labour Party due to the decline of the Liberal Party?

One of the highlights and most discussed issues in British politics in the twentieth
century has been the decline of the Liberal Party and in turn the rise of Labour. This is
emphasised by G.R. Searle who states that this change has been “the most important
single development in early twentieth-century political life.” This opinion has been
supported by many historians and many different interpretations have been discussed in
relation to this issue. However, regardless of the different interpretations concerning this
change, it is undeniable that a rapid change did in fact occur. In 1906 the Liberal Party
peeked with 400 elected MPs, declining to a mere forty in 1924. On the contrary, the
Labour Party made noticeable progress with having just thirty seats in 1906, to an
increase of 151 seats in 1924.
It is clear to see that whilst the Liberal Party was losing voters, Labour was
gaining support. Several reasons have been put forward by historians explaining this shift
in terms of voting. Firstly, one of the main arguments consists of the fact that the Labour
Party managed successfully to appeal to the working classes and raise class-
consciousness. Starting work on a local level and integrating and engaging with the local
communities, Labour managed to expand its growth. The advance of socialist Sunday
schools and Labour churches really made a social and cultural impact on the local level,
contributing to Labour’s development. Another point of importance is that the Liberals
simply could not deal with the challenges thrown at them the way Labour managed to
handle them. Although the Labour Party did not have a clear constitution in its early
years and its organisation was ‘loose’ compared to that of the Liberals, it managed to
sweep and retain working-class support, the Liberal Party failing to remain the party of
the left. Maintaining strong working-class support was of great importance to Labour, as
they were able to strengthen and rise rapidly due to this. An important aspect of this is
Labour’s involvement in trade unionism, and historian McKibbin argues that it was in
fact this involvement that secured Labour the support of the working class. He goes on to
say: “The Labour Party was not based upon broadly articulated principle, but rather upon
a highly developed class-consciousness and intense class loyalties.”
Certain historians have argued that due to the fact that a large proportion of
working-class males were excluded from the vote, Labour did not pose such a major
threat to Liberalism in the pre-war years. However, other historians dispute this view and
instead argue that the Liberal Party weakened due to internal conflict. Before the First
World War, the Liberal Party had won three successive General Elections. They were
Labour’s main competitor for the working-class vote. A great contributor to the decline
of the Liberal Party was Asquith’s resignation as Prime Minister in 1916. The new
leadership, under Lloyd George split the party into factions; the Asquithian factions and
the National Liberals, which had to fight against one another in the 1918 General
Election. Furthermore, some historians highlight the fact that the pre-war franchise as
well as denying the vote to members of the working-class did so to a large proportion of
the working-class, so it cannot be assumed that all the disenfranchised members would
have voted Labour.
However, the Labour Party was at certain disadvantages in comparison to the
Liberals. Although historians have put forward a credible argument about the fact that it
cannot be assumed that all the disenfranchised members would have voted Labour had
they been granted the vote, the majority of the members did in fact belong to the
working-class. However, although it is impossible to calculate how many of these
disenfranchised members would have voted Labour, it could be speculated that at least a
bulk would have voted Labour, not only due to Labour’s involvement with raising
awareness for the working class, but also due to its increasing involvement with the trade
union movement. The Labour Party was also faced with financial limitations. Full-time
agents were important for the running of political parties in terms of ensuring they reach
their full potential. Before the war, Labour could only afford a few full-time agents,
slowing down their progress. Another financial limitation that posed a threat to Labour
was the Osborne judgement. Walter Osborne, winning the campaign against individual
members from trade unions funding the Labour Party, meant that the party did not have
enough funds to support its candidates and only a limited number of candidates could be
put forward. Furthermore, what can be seen by these restrictions is the fact that the
Labour Party’s full potential was limited, at least in the pre-war years.
The Liberals tried to retain working-class support by introducing a series of social
reforms which became known as New Liberalism. These reforms concentrated on issues
such as health care, education and unemployment. They promoted a harmonious society
where freedom of individuality is important, rather than class-consciousness. The
Liberals clearly underwent a major reform in order to retain voters, now being more
centrists and clearly trying to represent every section of society, unlike Labour focusing
on the working-class. “Community, compromise and agreement were thus seen as the
alternatives to a socialist-type Labour Party committed to changing society in favour of
the working-class.” New Liberalism catered to the needs of all member’s of society,
rather than just focusing on class interest. Some historians have argued that the new
reforms that the Liberal Party adopted were indeed effective in terms of reviving the
party.