Labour Divisons (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
Labour Divisions
Context: Labour after 1951
The Labour Party narrowly lost the 1951 general election despite receiving 14 million votes, a higher total than any of Labour's previous electoral victories. Many activists believed the party would soon return to power. However, Labour faced deep internal problems that intensified throughout the 1950s.
Despite achieving their highest ever vote total, Labour lost the 1951 election due to the peculiarities of the British electoral system. This paradox created confusion among party members who expected a swift return to power.
The party experienced difficulties on multiple fronts. Attlee continued as leader until 1955, but the wartime generation of Labour leaders was ageing and often in poor health. Although party unity had been well maintained during their time in government (1945-51), both ideological and personal divisions began to surface during the 1950s. These splits seriously damaged Labour's effectiveness as an opposition to the Conservative government.
Leadership rivalry: Bevan versus Gaitskell
The most damaging split centred on two prominent Labour figures: Aneurin ('Nye') Bevan and Hugh Gaitskell. This rivalry combined both ideological differences and clashing personalities, creating tensions that would define Labour politics throughout the decade.
Key figure: Aneurin ('Nye') Bevan (1897-1960)
Bevan had served as Minister of Health in Attlee's government and created the National Health Service. He was a hero to the Labour Left. In 1951, Bevan resigned from the government to protest against the introduction of prescription charges, a decision that gained him support from many Labour MPs and trade unionists. His resignation highlighted the growing split between Labour's left wing, which opposed any dilution of free healthcare principles, and those willing to make pragmatic compromises.
Bevan's resignation over prescription charges became a defining moment in Labour's post-war history. His decision to prioritize principle over party unity set a precedent that would influence Labour politics for decades.
Key figure: Hugh Gaitskell (1906-63)
Gaitskell served as Chancellor of the Exchequer from 1950 to 1951 and was responsible for introducing prescription charges. He positioned himself on the right of the Labour Party. When Attlee stepped down in 1955, Gaitskell stood for the leadership and defeated Bevan in the election. Gaitskell subsequently attempted to reform the Labour Party but encountered fierce resistance.
The 1955 leadership contest
When Attlee stepped down in 1955, both Gaitskell and Bevan contested the Labour Party leadership. Gaitskell, perceived as being on the right of the Labour Party, defeated Bevan, who was seen as the leader of the left-wingers. This contest crystallised the ideological divisions within the party and set the stage for further conflicts over the party's future direction.
Ideological divisions: left versus right
The left-wingers within Labour wanted the party to adopt more socialist policies and maintain its traditional commitment to public ownership. They opposed what they saw as compromises with capitalism and sought a more radical approach to social and economic transformation.
Growing opposition to the party leadership also emerged from the trade unions. These divisions intensified over Britain's nuclear weapons policy, creating one of the most contentious debates in Labour's history.
The nuclear weapons controversy
Unilateral nuclear disarmament refers to the policy of renouncing the use and possession of nuclear weapons without waiting for any international consultation or agreement.
This became the defining issue that split the Labour Party in the late 1950s and early 1960s.
Bevan's reversal on unilateral disarmament
Initially, Bevan opposed Britain developing nuclear weapons. However, in 1957 he announced his opposition to unilateral nuclear disarmament, arguing that such a policy would send a British Foreign Secretary "naked into the conference-chamber". This reversal angered many Labour left-wingers who had supported him. The links between the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) and the Labour Left may well have diverted some voters away from Labour.
Bevan's famous "naked into the conference-chamber" metaphor captured the pragmatic argument that Britain needed nuclear weapons to maintain diplomatic leverage in international negotiations. This speech marked a dramatic shift from his earlier left-wing positions.
Frank Cousins and trade union opposition
Until the late 1950s, the trade unions had been content with full employment and their leaders were essentially moderates. In 1956, however, a left-winger named Frank Cousins became leader of one of the most powerful unions, the TGWU (Transport and General Workers Union). Cousins then led fierce union opposition to Gaitskell over Britain's nuclear weapons.
Key figure: Frank Cousins (1927-92)
Cousins became leader of the TGWU in 1956. In 1958, he led an unsuccessful bus strike against the Macmillan government. At the Labour Party conference in October 1960, Cousins bitterly opposed Gaitskell's leadership of the Labour movement, specifically over nuclear weapons. Cousins had led the unions into taking left-wing positions hostile to the party leadership. These divisions carried on into the 1970s and 1980s.
Cousins' leadership of the TGWU marked a significant shift in trade union politics. The TGWU was Britain's largest union, and its move to the left gave considerable power to those opposing Gaitskell's moderate policies.
The 1959 election disappointment
Despite internal divisions, Labour entered the 1959 election campaign with some optimism. Gaitskell proved to be a confident and effective campaigner, promoting moderate policies that Labour thought would be popular with voters. The extent of Labour's defeat came as a genuine surprise as well as a disappointment.
The Clause IV controversy
After the 1959 defeat, divisions became even more apparent and battles over the future direction of the Labour Party were fought at the annual party conferences at Blackpool in 1959 and at Scarborough in 1960.
Nationalisation means state ownership of key industries. The demand for the state to control 'the commanding heights of the economy' had been a central principle of the Labour Party from its beginning.
Clause IV was the clause of the party constitution that committed the party to nationalisation.
Gaitskell's attempt to abolish Clause IV represented a fundamental challenge to Labour's socialist identity and provoked fierce opposition from traditional party members.
At the 1959 conference, held just before the general election, Gaitskell put forward the idea of abolishing Clause IV of the party constitution. It soon became clear, however, that opposition from the left wing and from some union leaders would prove too strong. Gaitskell backed down without putting it to the vote.
The Scarborough conference 1960
The Scarborough conference of 1960 became legendary in Labour's history because of Hugh Gaitskell's emotional speech when trying to convince the conference to reject unilateral nuclear disarmament. Although he lost the vote in 1960, he succeeded in overturning that result a year later.
The Famous "Fight, Fight, and Fight Again" Speech
In his speech, Gaitskell declared:
"We may lose the vote today, and the result may deal this party a grave blow. It may not be possible to prevent this, but there are some of us, I think many of us, who will not accept that this blow need be mortal: who will not believe that such an end is inevitable. There are some of us, Mr Chairman, who will fight, and fight, and fight again, to save the party we love. We will fight, and fight, and fight again, to bring back sanity and honesty and dignity, so that our party—with its great past—may retain its glory and its greatness."
Gaitskell's arguments centred on loyalty to the party and the need to maintain Labour's credibility with voters. He used emotional language about fighting to save the party and returning it to "sanity and honesty", appealing to delegates' sense of party tradition and electability rather than ideological purity.
Labour's recovery after 1960
Labour's political position slowly improved after 1960 as the party appeared more united. Cultural shifts in the country made the public more critical of the Conservative government by the beginning of the 1960s. In 1963, the death of Hugh Gaitskell opened the way for Labour to elect Harold Wilson as leader. Wilson would lead the party to electoral victory in 1964.
Key Points to Remember:
-
Labour suffered deep internal divisions during the 1950s despite narrowly losing the 1951 election with 14 million votes—the party struggled with an ageing leadership and splits over ideology and personality.
-
The Bevan-Gaitskell rivalry combined ideological differences (left versus right) with personality clashes that damaged Labour's effectiveness in opposition.
-
The nuclear weapons debate split the party, with Bevan reversing his position in 1957 and Frank Cousins leading trade union opposition to Gaitskell's leadership from 1956 onwards.
-
The 1960 Scarborough conference saw Gaitskell's passionate "fight, and fight, and fight again" speech defending his leadership, despite losing the vote on unilateral disarmament (though he overturned this result a year later).
-
Labour's divisions over Clause IV (nationalisation) and defence policy were gradually overcome after 1960, allowing Harold Wilson to lead a more united party to power in 1964 following Gaitskell's death in 1963.