"Victims of our history", the Labour Party and In Place of Strife, 1968 to 1969
Abstract
This thesis consists of a detailed chronological examination of the events leading
up to the publication of the white paper, In Place of Strife in January 1969, and its
subsequent replacement with a 'solemn and binding' agreement with the Trades
Union Congress in June 1969. The work seeks to address four propositions that
have emerged from the historiography: that Barbara Castle was unduly influenced
by anti-trade union officials; that the contents of the white paper were a knee jerk
reaction to the Conservative proposals; that neither Castle nor Harold Wilson
understood the trade union movement; and that the final agreement, was a failure
that demonstrated the inability of a Labour government to escape from its trade
union roots.
In Place of Strife has received considerable coverage in the diaries,
autobiographies and biographies of politicians and trade union leaders. However,
there remain a number of important gaps, notably; the respective roles of civil
servants, politicians and outside advisors; the detailed debates of the
parliamentary Labour party and the internal discussions of the trade unions,
especially the TUC general council. Drawing from a range of primary sources
including; newly released government papers this study addresses the gaps in our
knowledge and evaluates the existing historiography.
What emerges from this study is that, rather than being unduly influenced by her
officials, Barbara Castle was the main instigator of the white paper. Similarly,
whilst the white paper was influenced by the publication of the Conservative
proposals, it was grounded in a well thought out philosophy of trade union rights
and responsibilities. Similarly, whilst confirming that Castle and Wilson
demonstrated considerable naivety in failing to anticipate the extent of the
antagonism shown by trade unions towards the proposals, the study also reveals a
depth of trade union intransigence that came close to challenging the
government's right to govern. Consequently, Wilson in particular emerges as a
skilled negotiator who extracted as much as was possible given the constraints
placed on him.
Authors
Tyler, Richard JohnCollections
- Theses [3711]