LibLink: Mark Pack – The secret concessions behind the 1911 Parliament Act

Before he departed for his blogging holiday, The Voice’s Mark Pack had an interesting piece on the Total Politics site looking at the 100-year history of the 1911 Parliament Act.

Here’s an extract from Mark’s piece:

The 1911 Act had its immediate cause in the 1909 People’s Budget from Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George, which raised taxes for the richest to pay for military armaments and social works. As he put it:

“This is a war Budget. It is for raising money to wage implacable warfare against poverty and squalidness.”

The sums now seem modest – including the equivalent in today’s terms of introducing an extra 2.5% (2.5%, not 25%) on the income tax rate for incomes above £285,000. But at the time they triggered outrage amongst many Conservatives and a three year political struggle, which included two general elections called as the Lords first tried to block the Liberal Party’s financial plans and then attempted to see off a Liberal Party assault on its powers.

Eventually, faced with the threat of 250 new hereditary Liberal peers being created to remove the Conservative party’s large permanent majority in the Lords, Conservative peers agreed to the 1911 Parliament Act. It ended their power to block financial measures that  had a majority in the Commons and also replaced their ability to block other legislation with the power to delay it.

However, in return the Conservative peers managed to retain their permanent majority and also a purely hereditary basis for the Lords. Moreover, one of the major elements of that 1909 Budget was seen off – a land tax.

You can read Mark’s piece in full here.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in LibLink.
Advert

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • cim
    Matt (Bristol): for single-member AV it's not terrible, but most ways of including it in multi-member STV break the proportional representation aspect very badl...
  • Rif Winfield
    Jack, you are absolutely right, as were Tom Ellis and the young David Lloyd George. The tragedy of the Newport meeting in January 1896 was that it set back the ...
  • Diana Simpson
    You would have a problem of public transport capacity to cope with kids going home in the rush hour(s) rather than before it. Our local buses are missed out whi...
  • Chloe
    "We did use RON in single-winner STV / AV elections at my Students Union. But I’m not sure I see it as constructive practical politics" That's where it sho...
  • Chloe
    Richard; Who picks up the tab for the net fiscal deficit of the Scottish & Welsh governments . Jana is correct - ultimate sovereignty is with Westminster. ...