Did the Attlee government of 1945-1951 have a coherent programme for changing Britain Essays

Did the Attlee government of 1945-1951 have a coherent programme for changing Britain Essays Did the Attlee government of 1945-1951 have a coherent programme for changing Britain Essay Did the Attlee government of 1945-1951 have a coherent programme for changing Britain Essay Essay Topic: Dunkirk The Labour governments period in office between 1945 and 1951 after a landslide victory over Churchill the commander of the allied forces after victory in the second world war the can be explained by the huge number of votes for the labour government by members of the forces wanting to can the country they left, labours office can be divided into two distinct periods. The first period saw the government attempting the extension of wartime economic planning, the implementation of their nationalisation programme, and a level of social planning concurrent with the organisation of the welfare state. The construction of the post-war consensus rested on the Governments ability to deliver its aims of full employment, coupled to the provision of a comprehensive welfare state. This was to be achieved through government being permitted to manage the economy, and the implementation of its nationalisation programme, both with the cooperation of the Trade Unions Movement. The Attlee years 1945-1951. The economy was facing much strain after the war; the government was facing a financial Dunkirk. Although labour paved on with an extensive reform programme, just as they had promised in their campaign. The economic policy of the government was in favour of working class families. Rationing was still present in favour of keeping living cost down; development at regional level was pushed to avoid any returns of mass unemployment much of the surplus from the armed forces joined in on the development at regional level keeping the unemployment figures low as 9 million bodies were tied up in the armed forces after the war these people needed to be absorbed into the work force without having a period of wide spread unemployment. Progressive rates of tax were kept in place to keep the cost for the public low. Britain had to get used to not producing munitions and supplies for the army and start producing according to the publics demand, and as consumers had money saved from the war as they could not spend it they are ready and waiting to buy showing a possibility of a danger that the pressure of demand would become excessive and find vent in inflation (A. Cairncross), and there were fears that full employment would lead to unions opening the doors on wage inflations, Attlee was able to convince the union to slow down union activity in the early post war years so the economy could get back on its feet. Not helping this matter was the fact that Britain had managed to incur the largest external debt in history, balance of payments after the war amounted to  £10,000 million, a lend lease from America met half of this amount the rest had to be found my selling foreign investment and by borrowing sterling of dollars. However the debt after the war continued to escalate Attlee told the House of Commons British earning form exports were currently no more than  £350 million a year to which other receipts of foreign exchange might add a further  £50 million. Total outgoings, on the other hand, including military expenditure abroad and the food and other supplies previously paid for by the United States, were running at the rate of  £2000 million a year. This left a gap of  £1200 million a year to be met by fresh borrowing abroad (A. Cairncross The British economy since 1945). Forecast suggest that balance of payments would continue for a least three years and the figure of  £125 0 million extra was expected before balance would be restored. This meant that imports had to be kept below that of pre war days and exports had to be raised to that of pre war days as well, in order for the country to start making money again and get out of debt. However Britain needed to raise exports a considerable amount because exports in pre war days only covered 55% of the cost of imports, the rest was made up my net shipping earnings and foreign investment and with the lost of half of Britains merchant marine core during the war Britains exporting power had decreased severely. After the war much of the world economies were in deficient as other countries had to borrow from aboard namely America to sustain their imports and as these supplies cost dollars a shortage in dollars followed. Because of this Britains gold and dollars reserves depleted, even though there was enough sterling around the world to pay for Britains exports if payment were made in sterling this also hindered to pay back America The worldwide dollar shortage affected Britain due to dollars being favoured over sterling in international dealings and hindered the repayment of America. After the war it was clear that Britain needed assistance in terms of finance and as the United States was in a position to help and a loan or grant was needed. After negotiations a loan was secured with conditions attached to it Under the Brentton Woods Agreement Britain would be free to defer making the pound convertible until the end of the period of transition, however this was brought forward to mid 1947. The loan lifted some pressure Several major industries were taken into public ownership private companies were not running these industries well and nationalisation was popular. Nationalisation was prominent in the fuel and power industries as well as transport and communication. Nationalisation cost the government huge amount of money to bring them up to speed this in a time when public spending should be kept to a minimum, however this is justified in the coal industry as coal was in high demand after the war both at home and abroad as the need for fuel was high in Europe and increased our exports. It is a common thought that the labour government implemented nationalisation too early and needed to concentrate on policy for post war reconstruction. After 1942 when the Beveridge report was published it was clear by the reaction of the public that the next government needed a reform. And the Attlees government responded by a rapid reform in welfare much of which was set up by the coalition government but the labour government was left to give depth to these ideas, payments of these services was met by national insurance contributions by way of the National Insurance Act. This brought together benefits to insure against sickness, unemployment, and housing, after the war many house were destroyed and due do and increasing population help by the baby boom houses were needed. However maybe the most important reform was the National Health Service (NHS), this introduced free access to hospitals and general practitioner services effectively free care from cradle to grave 1949 saw the devaluation of the pound in order to make British exports more competitive overseas, above all in America markets. The opposition said that the devaluation was humiliation and further added that the country was under mismanagement. The nation sway can be seen in the results of the 1950 general election, although Attlee stayed in office there was a swing towards the conservative party. 950 saw the Korean War this event coincided two other major developments that eventually became over shadowed by the War, the Schuman plan and the emerge ion of the European Payments Union. Rearmament became a major issue and the government wanted to expand munitions by four fold during a time when there was little raw materials and primary commodities of all kinds had risen steeply in price and t he terms of trade were in coarse of shifting against the UK by nearly 20%, this lead to a two year long sterling crisis(Cairncross), the labour government lost power half way through this crisis. The event saw cracks in a previously solid government as some labour MPs felt that the reason for fighting this war on communism was to show America support because of the amount of money lent to us by the States, a tear in ranks turned into a major split when a large defence budget was announced. Rearmament issues gave way to much criticism for the government. More discontent can be see when S. Cripps proposed cut backs in the NHS to spend on rearmament, which Bevan refused to accept. Bevans resignation showed a split and division over strategy and the fragmentation of the party was noticed, leading to the Tories regained power at the election in October 1951. There are two types of consensus about Attlee reign. One side believe it went some of the way towards satisfying wartime demands for a change in Britain. The economy recovered from the ravage of war while avoiding a return in mass unemployment, and the government followed through their promised to implement the Beveridge report. The other side claims the Attlees government disillusioned its members by its modest reform, and lack of breaking down class barriers and that the party was not true to its socialist ideas and was not left wing enough. Another criticism is that the government introduce to much socialism and if the government concentrated on rebuild itself industrially rather than concentrate on welfare reform. This opinion was taken my the conservative government in the 80s to undermine the labour party and its achievements, how every economic history shows that labour boosted industrial production, manufacturing output and the volume of exports. Conclusion Labour did so much for the working class the people of its party during this period, the working class who made up the majority of the population enjoyed job security fresh opportunities opened up in education for the youth, pensions approximated as never before to a living income. Affordable, decent housing came within the react of thousands of lower income families and the NHS treated millions of patients. The changes to the country that were needed after war was largely met by the labour government by the end of its term. The enormous rearmament programme towards the end of Attlees labour government life over shadowed this position. The economy although at a deficit would return back to balance as soon as terms of trade returned to normal levels. The consumer boom came after the government left office but it showed that the action the government took was correct. The labour government succeeded in what it set out to do in difficult conditions. Although I am not saying it was all plain sailing, 1947 brought endless crises for Attlee and the government seemed happy for the balance of payments situation to deplete the reserves. Much of parliaments time and money was spent on moving a number of industries from the private sector to the public sector without any real understanding on how to run them themselves. Post war policy did not save Britain but avoided complete disaster and set the stage for the boom that followed. The Labour government made several changes ones which were immense and long lasting. In little more than five years, the Labour Government managed to nationalize nearly one-fifth of the British economy in a largely peaceful, almost uneventful, fashion, nationalization which survived virtually intact until Margaret Thatcher. Alongside this achievement was the Labour Governments creation and marked expansion of the Welfare State. While some of the reforms such as the National Insurance Act built directly upon wartime and pre-war initiatives, others such as the National Health Service went far beyond the scope of any wartime policies or suggestions in the Beveridge Report. Yet despite these massive changes, in the aggregate Labours changes were a mosaic of reform and conservatism. Education, while reformed in 1944 due to the Churchill War Governments Butler Act, for the most part still remained untouched as an institution in British society, and the class structure changed very little between 1945 and 1951. Nevertheless, the Welfare State and nationalization, with all of its perhaps inevitable warts, offered a basis for future social advance. (Morgan), In the end the Labour Government offered to the British people a new concept of citizenship, universal and comprehensive(Morgan) for the first time. I believe Attlee did have a coherent plan for Britain however obstacles got in the way of where the Labour Government wanted to finish.

Homework Harm and Struggles Let Us Ban It

Homework Harm and Struggles Let Us Ban It Homework Ban: Failure in Class or a Recharge Before Next Day’s School? Disputes about homework and its amount will probably exist as long as education itself. Students oppose it, teachers and some parents enforce it, and some parents begin to doubt the practice and ask questions about how exactly this additional workload is going to help their children to be curious thinkers if all kids want to do every day is to get a bit more sleep. This gloomy picture made us come up with two issues up front: first, we will scrutinize real pros and cons of heavy homework load, and second, we will offer you a solution to your ordeal. If today’s tasks are just impossible (as if other daily tasks are much easier!) just let us know, and we will help you out of any written task you can think of. We have been dealing with stressed students and abundant assignments long enough to know how to accomplish them efficiently and not to compromise your grades. Now back to the question of homework. What Science Has to Say About Homework Role in Students’ Academic Success Scholars including biologists and children psychologists have long studied how kids’ bodies and minds function and arrived at a conclusion that home task does not essentially improve learning outcomes of students. Only certain limited amounts of work at home do boost learning and make students more confident in applying their theoretical gains to real-life challenges. But the tradition of abundant homework with heavy stress on memorization dates back to times ages ago when kids’ needs were not taken into account and adults treated kids in ways they believed were right, not in ways that were actually right. Since then the education system was thoroughly overhauled, both for the benefit of students and the country, but the concept of homework did not change much. Moreover, in various countries approach to homework is different, in some teachers assign loads of it, and in some kids have plenty of time to rest and enjoy themselves after school, and their academic level does not trail behind the US students level. Recently, the debate has moved to the public sphere, with thoughtful arguments in media both for and against homework. HuffPost claims that only 30 minutes of work is allowed. The Atlantic takes the more measured stand and calculates what load suits what age. Teachers, parents, and experts all voice their sincere beliefs and facts to support their positions. But can these debates be boiled down to some concise lists? Actually, yes. We will begin with a more inspiring part: 10 Solid Reasons Homework Should Be Eliminated (or at least heavily limited in amount). Unfortunately, the existence of these facts will not make colleges and schools skip home tasks overnight, but at least you will be equipped to support your position about homework when asking a teacher to give fewer tasks for home studies. And these arguments will be related neither to laziness nor to boredom (these two are too easy to dismiss). Stealing home time that can be spent resting, communicating with parents, siblings or friends – or just engaging in enriching things that you really like. Students spend in school long hours that can be compared to a full workday – and they are required to do more work at home. In adults’ world it is called overtime and is paid for at double rates, and here it is considered a benefit for students just for the sake of its own. Unnecessary work that does not actually impact knowledge or academic success. For homework to be useful and impact study outcomes positively, many factors are to be taken into consideration while tasks are assigned. Namely, the age of students, the total load of homework for the day, the complexity of the material, its familiarity to students, and many more. But usually, tasks are just dumped on a student’s plate, both discussed and undiscussed in class. What a teacher did not manage to cover in class is supposed to be mastered by students on their own. This is not what homework should be like, experts say. Making students fail at next day tests. Long hours of afterschool work exhaust students even more, and the next day they feel fatigued and distressed, and they hardly remember things they need to pass tests (especially if large home tasks were in a different subject). So they fail, and instead of benefiting from homework they have low scores in tests as well. Pressure on mental health and a negative impact on mood. It is obvious that additional challenging work is no good for developing self-perception and attitudes to the world. The unnecessary challenge to students who have other tasks like job, sports or looking after siblings. Instead of pursuing healthy pastime or hobbies that can develop into careers, students spend time doing useless tasks. And then they are expected to know for sure what they want to do in the future! No assistance in doing tasks. One of the biggest problems with homework. Students have no one to ask if they have troubles with homework, and so they just repeat their mistakes over and over. Standardization of ways students has to learn things. People are wired for different channels of learning, and while some can learn by reading, others just physically need to listen or to watch a video to understand something. Writing is not everybody’s talent. Yes, writing in itself is challenging. Not everyone can come up with a decent essay in, say, history or sociology. Just skip it. The content of tasks does not coincide with the content covered in class. One more improper way to give home task. The lack of time in class and overly packed curricula are not the problems of students, they are problems of boards and educators who design curricula without knowing what goes on in real classrooms. But since teachers are required to meet milestones, they dump the load on students to study at home. This is a total no-no from a scientific viewpoint, but it happens often. Artificial reason for bitter arguments between parents and kids. Yes, teenage is hard, and fights over homework only aggravate already tense and complex relations between parents and kids. 8 Facts That Show That Homework Can Be Useful (Under Certain Conditions) Helps to reduce time spent on gadgets in time of digital intoxication. Yes, maybe, it does not require browsing the web for a couple of hours and typing a paper for three more hours. Helps to learn time management (if given in reasonable amounts). Yes, if a load is manageable then time distribution planning is important. But today homework just consumes all waking time of students. No management needed. Helps master critical thinking and train memory. Yes, if a material was already covered in class and discussed. Then going over it can help students see the connection they did not notice or ask questions that go beyond the surface of events. If they see the material for the first time, they have more questions than answers – and no one is here to answer them. Gives a sense of responsibility and accomplishment. Yes, if work is manageable then completing it before doing something for fun makes kids feel responsible and proud. Boosts research skills. Yes, if students have a framework of knowledge already and are required to elaborate it through research. A doubtful benefit, as researches show today. But anyhow, creating a written project does require research planning, drafting and creating a final version. This is a good training session in switching between tasks. Topics for discussions with parents. Cool, if parents can participate and help children grasp the topics better. Refreshing study materials in memory before tests. Yes, but home task should include only the subject related to the next day’s test. Then it will not divert time and attention and will help to understand and memorize stuff better. So, What Is the Conclusion About Homework? As any medicine, it has its proper dosage and plans of administering. If everything is observed carefully, a home task is a valuable tool to boost learning and develop students’ thinking. But if the load is too big or too complex, it poisons minds, exhausts bodies and in general makes school a gruesome place. So it is up to teachers (and education boards and committees) to manage homework amounts more carefully and so inspire kids’ curiosity and openness to learning. If nothing else helps, we are the last bastion that will take a punch and save your grades by delivering fast and high-quality homework assistance. Remember that.