Editing Harold Wilson (section)

==First premiership (1964–1970)<span class="anchor" id="First premiership"></span><!-- linked from redirects [[First premiership of Harold Wilson]], [[First prime ministership of Harold Wilson]] -->==
=== Appointment ===
Labour won the [[1964 United Kingdom general election|1964 general election]] with a narrow majority of four seats, and Wilson became [[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom|prime minister]], at 48 the youngest person to hold that office since [[Lord Rosebery]] 70 years earlier. During 1965, by-election losses reduced the government's majority to a single seat; but in [[1966 United Kingdom general election|March 1966]] Wilson took the gamble of calling another general election. The gamble paid off, because this time Labour achieved a 96-seat majority<ref>{{cite news |title=VOTE2001 &#124; THE ELECTION BATTLES 1945–1997 |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/in_depth/election_battles/1966_over.stm |work=[[BBC News]] |access-date=27 December 2011 |archive-date=31 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170331231214/http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/in_depth/election_battles/1966_over.stm |url-status=live }}</ref> over the Conservatives, who the previous year had made [[Edward Heath]] their leader.

===Domestic affairs===
The 1964–1970 Labour government carried out a broad range of reforms during its time in office, in such areas as social security,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmsocsec/56/9112407.htm|title=House of Commons&nbsp;— Social Security&nbsp;— Minutes of Evidence|work=Publications.parliament.uk|date=13 December 1999|access-date=15 March 2016|archive-date=19 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171119215652/https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmsocsec/56/9112407.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> civil liberties,<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=JbTbAAAAQBAJ&q=labour+government+1967+family+planning&pg=PA489|title=British Political History, 1867–2001: Democracy and Decline&nbsp;— Malcolm Pearce, Geoffrey Stewart&nbsp;— Google Books|page=489|date=13 September 2013|access-date=15 March 2016|isbn=9781136453533|last1=Pearce|first1=Malcolm|last2=Stewart|first2=Geoffrey|publisher=Routledge |archive-date=9 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211009103743/https://books.google.com/books?id=JbTbAAAAQBAJ&q=labour+government+1967+family+planning&pg=PA489|url-status=live}}</ref> housing,<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pfp_sdl12MsC&q=harold+wilson+rent+act+1965&pg=PA75|title=Directions in Housing Policy: Towards Sustainable Housing Policies for the UK&nbsp;— A. E. Holmans&nbsp;— Google Books|page=75|date=28 January 1997|access-date=15 March 2016|isbn=9781446226650|last1=Holmans|first1=A.&nbsp;E.|publisher=Sage Publications (CA) |archive-date=9 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211009120846/https://books.google.com/books?id=pfp_sdl12MsC&q=harold+wilson+rent+act+1965&pg=PA75|url-status=live}}</ref> health,<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bRwlBQAAQBAJ&q=united+kingdom+1968+clean+air+act+public+health&pg=PA1189|title=Proceedings of the Second International Clean Air Congress&nbsp;— Google Books|page=1189|access-date=15 March 2016|isbn=9781483272436|last1=Englund|first1=H.&nbsp;M.|last2=Beery|first2=W.&nbsp;T.|date=2 October 2013|publisher=Elsevier |archive-date=9 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211009093408/https://books.google.com/books?id=bRwlBQAAQBAJ&q=united+kingdom+1968+clean+air+act+public+health&pg=PA1189|url-status=live}}</ref> education,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000132953|title=International yearbook of education, v. 28|publisher=UNESCO International Bureau of Education|year=1967|access-date=12 December 2020|archive-date=17 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194150/https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000132953|url-status=live}}</ref> and worker's rights.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=j9p9pcQ0PY8C&pg=PA28|title=The Great Alliance: Economic Recovery and the Problems of Power, 1945–1951|last=Phillips|first=Jim|date=1 January 1996|publisher=Pluto Press|isbn=9780745310374|access-date=12 December 2020|archive-date=17 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194152/https://books.google.com/books?id=j9p9pcQ0PY8C&pg=PA28|url-status=live}}</ref>

It is perhaps best remembered for the liberal social reforms introduced or supported by [[Home Secretary]] [[Roy Jenkins]]. Notable amongst these was the partial decriminalisation of [[male homosexuality]] and [[Abortion in the United Kingdom|abortion]], reform of divorce laws, the abolition of theatre censorship and [[Capital punishment in the United Kingdom|capital punishment]] (except for a small number of offences&nbsp;— notably [[High treason in the United Kingdom|high treason]]) and various pieces of legislation addressing [[race relations]] and [[racial discrimination]].<ref name="Thorpe64702001">{{cite book |last1=Thorpe |first1=Andrew |title=A History of the British Labour Party |date=2001 |publisher=Palgrave |isbn=0-333-92908-X|pages=145–165}}</ref>

His government also undertook the easing of [[means testing]] for non-contributory welfare benefits, the linking of pensions to earnings, and the provision of industrial-injury benefits. Wilson's government also made significant reforms to [[education in the United Kingdom|education]], most notably the expansion of [[comprehensive education]] and the creation of the [[Open University]].<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/>

====Economic policies====
Wilson's government put faith in [[economic planning]] as a way to solve Britain's economic problems. The government's strategy involved setting up a [[Secretary of State for Economic Affairs|Department of Economic Affairs]] (DEA) which would draw up a National Plan which was intended to promote growth and investment. Wilson believed that scientific progress was the key to economic and social advancement, as such he famously referred to the "white heat of technology", in reference to the modernisation of British industry. This was to be achieved through a new [[Ministry of Technology]] (shortened to "Mintech") which would coordinate research and development and support the swift adoption of new technology by industry, aided by government-funded infrastructure improvements.<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/>

In practice, however, events derailed much of the initial optimism. Upon coming to power, the government was informed that they had inherited an exceptionally large deficit of £800 million on Britain's [[balance of trade]]. This partly reflected the preceding government's expansive fiscal policy in the run-up to the 1964 election. Immediately the pound came under enormous pressure, and many economists advocated [[devaluation]] of the pound in response, but Wilson resisted, reportedly in part out of concern that Labour, which had previously devalued sterling in 1949, would become tagged as "the party of devaluation". Wilson also believed that a devaluation would disproportionately harm low-income Britons with savings and poorer [[Commonwealth of Nations]] countries in the [[sterling area]]. The government instead opted to deal with the problem by imposing a temporary surcharge on imports, and a series of deflationary measures designed to reduce demand and therefore the inflow of imports.<ref>{{Harvp|Thorpe|1997|p=125-145}}</ref> In the latter half of 1967, an attempt was made to prevent the recession in activity from going too far in the form of a stimulus to consumer durable spending through an easing of credit, which in turn prevented a rise in unemployment.<ref name="inequality">{{cite book |last=Townsend |first=Peter |editor-last=Bosanquet |editor-first=Nicholas |publisher=[[Fabian Society]] |title=Labour and inequality: Sixteen Fabian Essays |isbn=978-0-7163-4004-1|year=1972 }}</ref>

After a costly battle, market pressures forced the government to devalue the pound by 14% from $2.80 to $2.40 in November 1967.<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/> Wilson was much criticised for a broadcast soon after in which he assured listeners that the "pound in your pocket" had not lost its value.<ref>{{cite news |title=1967: Wilson defends 'pound in your pocket' |date=19 November 1967 |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/19/newsid_3208000/3208396.stm |work=[[BBC News]] |access-date=16 January 2019 |archive-date=24 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200824050638/http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/19/newsid_3208000/3208396.stm |url-status=live }}</ref> Economic performance did show some improvement after the devaluation, as economists had predicted. The devaluation, with accompanying austerity measures which ensured resources went into exports rather than domestic consumption, successfully restored the trade balance to surplus by 1969. In retrospect Wilson has been widely criticised for not devaluing earlier, however, he believed there were strong arguments against it, including the fear that it would set off a round of competitive devaluations, and concern about the impact price rises following a devaluation would have on people on low incomes.<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/>

The government's decision over its first three years to defend sterling's parity with traditional deflationary measures ran counter to hopes for an expansionist push for growth. The National Plan produced by the DEA in 1965 targeted an annual growth rate of 3.8%, however, under the restrained circumstances the actual average rate of growth between 1964 and 1970 was a far more modest 2.2%. The DEA itself was wound up in 1969. The government's other main initiative Mintech did have some success at switching research and development spending from military to civilian purposes, and of achieving increases in industrial productivity, although persuading industry to adopt new technology proved more difficult than had been hoped.<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/> Faith in indicative planning as a pathway to growth,<ref>An influential study at the time, [[Andrew Shonfield]]'s ''Modern Capitalism'' (OUP, 1965), provided intellectual backing for the belief that indicative planning largely underlay the superior growth performance of France and Germany compared to the UK.</ref> embodied in the DEA and Mintech, was at the time by no means confined to the Labour Party. Wilson built on foundations that had been laid by his Conservative predecessors, in the shape, for example, of the [[National Economic Development Council]] (known as "Neddy") and its regional counterparts (the "little Neddies").<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/> Government intervention in industry was greatly enhanced, with the National Economic Development Office greatly strengthened and the number of "little Neddies" was increased, from eight in 1964 to twenty-one in 1970. The government's policy of selective economic intervention was later characterised by the establishment of a new super-ministry of technology, a connexion not always publicly grasped, under [[Tony Benn]].<ref name="ReferenceN">''The Labour Government 1964–70'' by Brian Lapping.</ref>

The continued relevance of industrial [[nationalisation]] (a centrepiece of the post-War Labour government's programme) had been a key point of contention in Labour's internal struggles of the 1950s and early 1960s. Wilson's predecessor as leader, [[Hugh Gaitskell]], had tried in 1960 to tackle the controversy head-on, with a proposal to expunge [[Clause Four]] (the public ownership clause) from the party's constitution, but had been forced to climb down. Wilson took a characteristically more subtle approach: No significant expansion of public ownership took place under Wilson's government, however, he placated the party's left-wing by renationalising the steel industry under the [[Iron and Steel Act 1967]] (which had been denationalised by the Conservatives in the 1950s) creating the [[British Steel Corporation]].<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/>

One innovation of the Wilson government was the creation in 1968 of the [[Girobank]], a publicly owned bank which operated via the [[General Post Office]] network: As most working-class people in the 1960s did not have bank accounts, this was designed to serve their needs, as such it was billed as the "people's bank".<ref>{{cite web |title=THE NATIONAL GIRO |url=https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/ea8cf00b-5d7e-4c7c-b8fe-264110303bd1 |publisher=The National Archives |access-date=28 January 2020 |archive-date=28 January 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200128163504/https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/ea8cf00b-5d7e-4c7c-b8fe-264110303bd1 |url-status=live }}</ref> Girobank was a long-term success, surviving until 2003.<ref>{{cite news |title=Girobank disappears in A&L brand makeover |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2857020/Girobank-disappears-in-AandL-brand-makeover.html |publisher=The Telegraph |access-date=21 January 2020 |date=7 July 2003 |archive-date=22 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200622095731/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2857020/Girobank-disappears-in-AandL-brand-makeover.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

Wilson's government presided over a rate of [[Unemployment in the United Kingdom|unemployment]] which was low by historic (and later) standards but did rise during his period in office. Between 1964 and 1966 the average rate of unemployment was 1.6%, while between 1966 and 1970 the average stood at 2.5%.<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/> He had entered power at a time when unemployment stood at around 400,000. It still stood at 371,000 by early 1966 after a steady fall during 1965, but by March 1967 it stood at 631,000. It fell again towards the end of the decade, standing at 582,000 by the time of the general election in June 1970.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.socialiststudies.org.uk/cinc%201930s.shtml|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20121028013514/http://www.socialiststudies.org.uk/cinc%201930s.shtml|url-status=dead|title=Socialist Studies – Capitalism in Crisis – Unemployment in the 1930s.|archivedate=28 October 2012}}</ref>

Despite the economic difficulties faced by Wilson's government, it was able to achieve important advances in several domestic policy areas. As reflected by Wilson in 1971:

{{blockquote|It was a government which faced disappointment after disappointment and none greater than the economic restraints in our ability to carry through the social revolution to which we were committed at the speed we would have wished. Yet, despite those restraints and the need to transfer resources from domestic expenditure, private and public, to the needs of our export markets, we carried through an expansion in the social services, health, welfare and housing, unparalleled in our history.<ref>Harold Wilson, The Labour Government 1964–1970: A Personal Record</ref>}}

====Social issues====
{{Main|Labour government, 1964–1970#Social issues}}
Several liberalising social reforms were passed through parliament during Wilson's first period in government. These dealt with the death penalty, homosexual acts, abortion, [[Censorship in the United Kingdom|censorship]] and the [[voting age]]. There were new restrictions on [[Modern immigration to the United Kingdom|immigration]].<ref>{{cite web |date=16 December 2016 |title=Labour dealt with immigration in 1965 – and it can do so again {{!}} Martin Kettle |url=http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/16/labour-immigration-poll-ratings-managed-migration |access-date=1 December 2022 |website=The Guardian }}</ref> Wilson personally, coming culturally from a provincial non-conformist background, showed no particular enthusiasm for much of this agenda.<ref>''The Battle of Britain: The Home Front'', by George Goldsmith Carter.</ref>

====Education====
{{Main|Labour government, 1964–1970#Education}}
[[Education in the United Kingdom|Higher education]] held special significance for a Labourite of Wilson's generation, given its role in both opening up opportunities for ambitious youth from working-class backgrounds and enabling Britain to seize the potential benefits of scientific advances. Under the first Wilson government, for the first time in British history, more money was allocated to education than to defence.<ref name="ReferenceB">''The Decade of Disillusion: British Politics in the Sixties'', edited by David Mckie and Chris Cook.</ref> Wilson continued the rapid creation of new universities, in line with the recommendations of the [[Robbins Report]], a [[bipartisanship (UK)|bipartisan]] policy already in train when Labour took power.

Wilson promoted the concept of an [[Open University]], to give adults who had missed out on tertiary education a second chance through [[part-time study]] and [[distance learning]]. His political commitment included assigning implementation responsibility to [[Jennie Lee, Baroness Lee of Asheridge|Baroness Lee]], the widow of [[Aneurin Bevan]].<ref name="ponting">''Breach of Promise – Labour in Power, 1964–70'' by Clive Ponting.</ref> By 1981, 45,000 students had received degrees through the Open University.<ref name="ponting"/> Money was also channelled into local-authority run colleges of education.<ref name="ReferenceN"/>

Wilson's record on [[Secondary education in the United Kingdom|secondary education]] was motivated by growing pressure for the abolition of the selective principle underlying the "[[eleven-plus]]", and replacement with Comprehensive schools which would serve the full range of children (see the article '[[grammar schools debate]]'). Comprehensive education became Labour Party policy. From 1966 to 1970, the proportion of children in comprehensive schools increased from about 10% to over 30%.<ref name="ReferenceA">''Changing party policy in Britain: an introduction'' by Richard Kelly.</ref>

Labour pressed local authorities to convert grammar schools into comprehensives. Conversion continued on a large scale during the subsequent Conservative [[Edward Heath|Heath]] administration, although the Secretary of State, [[Margaret Thatcher]], ended the compulsion of local governments to convert.

Wilson's first government reluctantly  decided it could not fulfil its long-held promise to raise the school leaving age to 16, because of the investment required in infrastructure, such as tens of thousands  of new classrooms and teachers.

Overall, public expenditure on education rose as a proportion of GNP from 4.8% in 1964 to 5.9% in 1968, and the number of teachers in training increased by more than a third between 1964 and 1967.<ref>''A Short History Of The Labour Party'' by Henry Pelling.</ref> The percentage of students staying on at school after the age of sixteen increased similarly, and the student population increased by over 10% each year. Pupil-teacher ratios were also steadily reduced. As a result of the first Wilson government's educational policies, opportunities for the working-class were improved; overall access to education in 1970 was broader than in 1964.<ref name="socialists1">''Socialists in the Recession: The Search for Solidarity'' by Giles Radice and Lisanne Radice.</ref> As summarised by Brian Lapping,

{{blockquote|The years 1964–70 were largely taken up with creating extra places in universities, polytechnics, technical colleges, colleges of education: preparing for the day when a new Act would make it the right of a student, on leaving school, to have a place in an institution of further education.<ref name="ReferenceN"/>}}

In 1966, Wilson was created the first [[Chancellor (education)|Chancellor]] of the newly created [[University of Bradford]], a position he held until 1985.{{Cn|date=February 2025}}

====Housing====
{{Main|Labour government, 1964–1970#Housing}}
Housing was a major policy area under the first Wilson government. During Wilson's time in office from 1964 to 1970, more new houses were built than in the last six years of the previous Conservative government. The proportion of [[Council house|council housing]] rose from 42% to 50% of the total,<ref name="shorthistory">''A Short History of the Labour Party'' by Alastair J. Reid and Henry Pelling.</ref> while the number of council homes built increased steadily, from 119,000 in 1964 to 133,000 in 1965 and 142,000 in 1966. Allowing for demolitions, 1.3&nbsp;million new homes were built between 1965 and 1970,<ref name="ponting"/> To encourage homeownership, the government introduced the Option Mortgage Scheme (1968), which made low-income housebuyers eligible for subsidies (equivalent to tax relief on mortgage interest payments).<ref>''Housing policy: an introduction'' by Paul N. Balchin and Maureen Rhoden.</ref> This scheme had the effect of reducing housing costs for buyers on low incomes<ref name="autogenerated2">''Capitalism and public policy in the UK'' by Tom Burden and Mike Campbell.</ref> and enabling more people to become owner-occupiers.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=166 |title=Speech Archive |publisher=British Political Speech |access-date=10 April 2014 |archive-date=15 October 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171015183320/http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=166 |url-status=live }}</ref> In addition, house owners were exempted from capital gains tax. Together with the Option Mortgage Scheme, this measure stimulated the private housing market.<ref>''The Evolution of the British Welfare State'' by Derek Fraser.</ref> Wilson in a 1967 speech said: "..the grime and muddle and decay of our Victorian heritage is being replaced. The new city centres with their university precincts, their light, clean and well-spaced civic buildings, will not merely brighten the physical environment of our people, they will change the very quality of urban life in Britain."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=165|title=British Political Speech &#124; Speech Archive}}</ref>

Significant emphasis was also placed on town planning, with new conservation areas introduced and a new generation of new towns built, notably [[Milton Keynes]]. The New Towns Acts of 1965 and 1968 together gave the government the authority (through its ministries) to designate any area of land as a site for a [[new town]].<ref name="byrne1">''Social Services: Made Simple'' by Tony Byrne, BA, BSc(Econ.), and Colin F. Padfield, LLB, DPA(Lond).</ref>

====Urban renewal====
{{Main|Labour government, 1964–1970#Urban renewal}}
Many subsidies were allocated to local authorities faced with acute areas of [[severe poverty]] (or other social problems).<ref name="ReferenceN"/> The [[Housing Act 1969]] provided local authorities with the duty of working out what to do about 'unsatisfactory areas'. Local authorities could declare 'general improvement areas' in which they would be able to buy up land and houses and spend environmental improvement grants. On the same basis, taking geographical areas of need, a package was developed by the government which resembled a miniature poverty programme.<ref name="cook">''The decade of disillusion: British politics in the '60s'' by David McKie and Chris Cook.</ref> In July 1967, the government decided to pour money into what the Plowden Committee defined as Educational Priority Areas, poverty-stricken areas where children were environmentally deprived. Some poor inner-city areas were subsequently granted EPA status (despite concerns that Local Education Authorities would be unable to finance Educational Priority Areas).<ref name="taylor"/> From 1968 to 1970, 150 new schools were built under the educational priority programme.<ref name="inequality"/>

====Social Services and welfare====
{{Main|Labour government, 1964–1970#Social Services and welfare}}
[[File:This is a photograph of Harold Wilson visiting an Retirement Home in Washington, UK. The photograph was taken at some point in the late 1960's. (9713931559).jpg|thumb|upright|Wilson on a visit to a retirement home in [[Washington, County Durham]]]]

Various reforms to social welfare were also carried out during Wilson's time in office.<ref name="Ministry of Social Security 35-40">{{cite report |title=Report of the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance for the year 1965 |url=https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=coo.31924071641652&seq=55 |pages=35-40 |date=July 1966 |via=HathiTrust}}</ref><ref name="Chandler195">{{cite book |last1=Chandler |first1=J.A. |date=2007 |title=Explaining Local Government Local Government in Britain Since 1800 |url=https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Explaining_Local_Government/b0glBHiU9oAC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Explaining+Local+Government+Local+Government+in+Britain&printsec=frontcover |page=195 }}</ref><ref name="Trevitt">{{cite magazine |last1=Trevitt |first1=Vittorio |title=The British Labour Party and Welfare: The Legacies of the Attlee and Wilson Governments |url=https://www.historyisnowmagazine.com/blog/2024/10/18/the-british-labour-party-and-welfare-the-legacies-of-the-attlee-and-wilson-governments |magazine=History is Now Magazine |date=18 October 2024 }}</ref><ref name="Mulé92">{{cite book |last1=Mulé |first1=Rosa |date=2001 |title=Political Parties, Games and Redistribution |url=https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Political_Parties_Games_and_Redistributi/FbtDBbxfDU8C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Political+Parties,+Games+and+Redistribution+Rosa+Mul%C3%A9+earnings-related+supplements+1966&pg=PA92&printsec=frontcover |page=92 |publisher=Cambridge University Press }}</ref> According to [[Tony Atkinson]], social security received much more attention from the first Wilson government than it did during the previous thirteen years of Conservative government.<ref name="inequality"/> Following its victory in the [[1964 United Kingdom general election|1964 general election]], Wilson's government began to increase social benefits. [[Prescription charges]] for medicines were abolished immediately,{{efn|however, they were reinstated two years later}} while pensions were raised to a record 21% of average male industrial wages. In 1966, the system of [[National Assistance]] (a social assistance scheme for the poor) was overhauled and renamed [[Supplementary Benefit]]. Before the 1966 election, the [[widow's pension]] was tripled. Due to austerity measures following an economic crisis, prescription charges were re-introduced in 1968 as an alternative to cutting the hospital building programme, although those sections of the population who were most in need (including supplementary benefit claimants, the long-term sick, children, and pensioners) were exempted from charges.<ref name="ReferenceC">{{cite book |title=Labour's First Century |editor-first1=Duncan |editor-last1=Tanner |editor-link1=Duncan Tanner |editor-first2=Pat |editor-last2=Thane |editor-link2= Pat Thane |editor-first3=Nick |editor-last3=Tiratsoo |date=2000 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |page=??? |url=https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Labour_s_First_Century/Ogih0ZGu2DMC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Labour%27s+First+Century&printsec=frontcover}}</ref>

The widow's earning rule was also abolished,<ref name="ponting"/> while a range of new social benefits was introduced. An Act was passed which replaced National Assistance with [[Supplementary Benefit]]s. The new Act laid down that people who satisfied its conditions were entitled to these noncontributory benefits. The means test was replaced with a statement of income, and benefit rates for pensioners (the great majority of claimants) were increased, granting them a real gain in income.  Unlike the National Assistance scheme, which operated on a discretionary basis, the new Supplementary Benefits scheme was a right of every citizen who found himself or herself in severe difficulties. Those persons over the retirement age with no means who were considered to be unable to live on the basic pension (which provided less than what the government deemed as necessary for subsistence) became entitled to a "long-term" allowance of an extra few shillings a week. Some simplification of the procedure for claiming benefits was also introduced.<ref name="ReferenceN"/> From 1966, an exceptionally severe disablement allowance was added, "for those claimants receiving constant attendance allowance which was paid to those with the higher or intermediate rates of constant attendance allowance and who were exceptionally severely disabled."<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4wxjQFu2zsMC&q=From+1966%2C+following+a+recommendation+of+the+McCorquodale&pg=PA471|title=Social Security Law in Context|isbn=9780198763086|last1=Harris|first1=Neville&nbsp;S.|year=2000|publisher=Oxford University Press |access-date=1 November 2020|archive-date=17 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194150/https://books.google.com/books?id=4wxjQFu2zsMC&q=From+1966,+following+a+recommendation+of+the+McCorquodale&pg=PA471|url-status=live}}</ref> Redundancy payments were introduced in 1965 to lessen the impact of unemployment, and earnings-related benefits for maternity,<ref>{{cite web |author=The Committee Office, House of Commons |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmsocsec/56/9112407.htm |title=House of Commons – Social Security – Minutes of Evidence |publisher=Publications.parliament.uk |date=13 December 1999 |access-date=10 April 2014 |archive-date=19 November 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171119215652/https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmsocsec/56/9112407.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> unemployment, sickness, industrial injuries and widowhood were introduced in 1966, followed by the replacement of flat-rate family allowances with an earnings-related scheme in 1968.<ref name="cook"/> From July 1966 onwards, the temporary allowance for widows of severely disabled pensioners was extended from 13 to 26 weeks.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Labour Party (Great Britain). Conference|title=Report of the Annual Conference and Special Conference of the Labour Party|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zOwNAQAAMAAJ&q=From+July,+1966,+the+temporary+allowance+for+the+widow+of+a+severely+disabled+pensioner+was+extended+from+1+3+weeks+to+26+weeks.|website=Google Books|access-date=13 September 2015|archive-date=17 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194153/https://books.google.com/books?id=zOwNAQAAMAAJ&q=From+July,+1966,+the+temporary+allowance+for+the+widow+of+a+severely+disabled+pensioner+was+extended+from+1+3+weeks+to+26+weeks.|url-status=live}}</ref>

Increases were made in pensions and other benefits during Wilson's first year in office that were the largest ever real term increases carried out up until that point.<ref name="Timmins">''The Five Giants: A Biography of the Welfare State'' by Nicholas Timmins.</ref> Social security benefits were markedly increased during Wilson's first two years in office, as characterised by a budget passed in the final quarter of 1964 which raised the standard benefit rates for old age, sickness and invalidity by 18.5%.<ref name="Taxation">''Taxation, Wage Bargaining, and Unemployment'' by Isabela Mares.</ref> In 1965, the government increased the national assistance rate to a higher level relative to earnings, and via annual adjustments, broadly maintained the rate at between 19% and 20% of gross industrial earnings until the start of 1970.<ref name="inequality"/> Through a series of ad hoc annual upratings, as noted by one study, Wilson's government "generally maintained the value of benefits in relation to earnings".<ref>Testing the Limits of Social Welfare International perspectives on policy changes in nine countries edited by Robert Morris, University Press of New England, 1988, p.45 </ref>

In the five years from 1964 up until the last increases made by the First Wilson Government, pensions went up by 23% in real terms, supplementary benefits by 26% in real terms, and sickness and unemployment benefits by 153% in real terms (largely as a result of the introduction of earnings-related benefits in 1967).<ref name="auto1">''The Labour Party in Crisis'' by Paul Whiteley.</ref>

====Agriculture====
Under the First Wilson Government, subsidies for farmers were increased.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/34 |title=Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1968 |publisher=Legislation.gov.uk |access-date=6 August 2014 |archive-date=24 August 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160824191848/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/34 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="Crossman">Richard Crossman, ''The diaries of a cabinet minister, Volume 3: Secretary of State for Social Services, 1968–1970''.</ref> Farmers who wished to leave the land or retire became eligible for grants or annuities if their holdings were sold for approved amalgamations, and could receive those benefits whether they wished to remain in their farmhouses or not. A Small Farmers Scheme was also extended, and from 1 December 1965, forty thousand more farmers became eligible for the maximum £1,000 grant. New grants to agriculture also encouraged the voluntary pooling of smallholdings, and in cases where their land was purchased for non-commercial purposes, tenant-farmers could now receive double the previous "disturbance compensation".<ref name="Labour 1968">''Labour: A Dictionary Of Achievement'', published by the Labour Party, Transport House, Smith Square, London, S.W.1. Printed by C.W.S. Printing Factory, Elgar Road, Reading (October 1968).</ref> A Hill Land Improvement Scheme, introduced by the Agriculture Act 1967, provided 50% grants for a wide range of land improvements, along with a supplementary 10% grant on drainage works benefitting hill land.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=1970-03-25a.1592.0|title=Orders of the Day — Hill Land Improvement Scheme|work=theyworkforyou.com|access-date=15 January 2019|archive-date=7 August 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170807021939/https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=1970-03-25a.1592.0|url-status=live}}</ref> The Agriculture Act 1967 also provided grants to promote farm amalgamation and to compensate outgoers.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZSc3GUjfIwwC&q=Livestock+Rearing+Act+1951+sheep+cattle&pg=PT15 |title=Cherished Heartland: Future of the Uplands in Wales – Peter Midmore, Richard J. Moore-Colyer – Google Books |date=30 August 2006 |access-date=6 August 2014 |isbn=9781904773061 |last1=Midmore |first1=Peter |last2=Moore-Colyer |first2=Richard&nbsp;J. |publisher=Institute of Welsh Affairs |archive-date=17 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194155/https://books.google.com/books?id=ZSc3GUjfIwwC&q=Livestock+Rearing+Act+1951+sheep+cattle&pg=PT15 |url-status=live }}</ref>

====Health====
The proportion of GNP spent on the [[National Health Service]] rose from 4.2% in 1964 to about 5% in 1969. This additional expenditure provided for an energetic revival of a policy of building health centres for [[general practitioner]]s, extra pay for doctors who served in areas particularly short of them, significant growth in hospital staffing, and a significant increase in a hospital building programme. Far more money was spent each year on the NHS than under the 1951–64 Conservative governments, while much more effort was put into modernising and reorganising the health service.<ref name="ReferenceN"/> Stronger central and regional organisations were established for bulk purchase of hospital supplies, while some efforts were made to reduce inequalities in standards of care. In addition, the government increased the intake to medical schools.<ref name="inequality"/>

The [[1966 Doctor's Charter]] introduced allowances for rent and ancillary staff, significantly increased the pay scales, and changed the structure of payments to reflect "both qualifications of doctors and the form of their practices, i.e. group practice". These changes not only led to higher morale, but also resulted in the increased use of ancillary staff and nursing attachments, growth in the number of health centres and group practices, and a boost in the modernisation of practices in terms of equipment, appointment systems, and buildings.<ref name="byrne1"/> The charter introduced a new system of payment for GPs, with refunds for surgery, rents, and rates, to ensure that the costs of improving his surgery did not diminish the doctor's income, together with allowances for the greater part of ancillary staff costs. In addition, a Royal Commission on medical education was set up, partly to draw up ideas for training GPs (since these doctors, the largest group of all doctors in the country, had previously not received any special training, "merely being those who, at the end of their pre-doctoral courses, did not go on for further training in any speciality").<ref name="ReferenceN"/>

In 1967, local authorities were empowered to provide free [[family planning]] advice and [[means-tested]] [[contraceptive devices]].<ref name="ReferenceC"/> In addition, [[Medical education in the United Kingdom|medical training]] was expanded following the Todd Report on medical education in 1968.<ref name="byrne1"/><ref>''General practice under the National Health Service 1948–1997'' by Irvine Loudon, John Horder, Charles Webster.</ref> In addition, National Health expenditure rose from 4.2% of GNP in 1964 to 5% in 1969 and spending on hospital construction doubled.<ref name="shorthistory"/> The Health Services and Public Health Act 1968 empowered local authorities to maintain workshops for the elderly either directly or via the agency of a voluntary body. A [[Health Advisory Service]] was later established to investigate and confront the problems of long-term psychiatric and mentally subnormal hospitals in the wave of [[Ely Hospital|numerous scandals]].<ref name="byrne1"/> The [[Clean Air Act 1968]] extended powers to combat [[Air pollution in the United Kingdom|air pollution]].<ref name="Longman">''The Longman Companion to The Labour Party 1900–1998'' by Harry Harmer.</ref> More money was also allocated to hospitals treating the mentally ill.<ref name="ReferenceN"/> In addition, a Sports Council was set up to improve facilities.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_wphBQAAQBAJ&q=dennis+skinner+miners+swimming+pool+sports+council&pg=PT41|title=Sailing Close to the Wind|isbn=9781782061588|last1=Skinner|first1=Dennis|last2=Maguire|first2=Kevin|date=18 September 2014|publisher=Quercus |access-date=1 November 2020|archive-date=17 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194151/https://books.google.com/books?id=_wphBQAAQBAJ&q=dennis+skinner+miners+swimming+pool+sports+council&pg=PT41|url-status=live}}</ref> Direct government expenditure on sports more than doubled from £0.9 million in 1964/65 to £2 million in 1967/68, while 11 regional Sports Councils had been set up by 1968. In Wales, five new health centres had been opened by 1968, whereas none had been opened from 1951 to 1964, while spending on health and welfare services in the region went up from £55.8 million in 1963/64 to £83.9 million in 1967/68.<ref name="Labour 1968"/>

=== Social policies ===
====Workers====
{{Main|Labour government, 1964–1970#Workers}}
The [[Industrial Training Act 1964]] set up an Industrial Training Board to encourage training for people in work,<ref name="Longman"/> and within seven years there were "27 ITBs covering employers with some 15 million workers."<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=sDbRCaCPD7wC&q=labour+government+council+for+academic+awards+1964&pg=PA251|title=Teaching and Training in Post-compulsory Education|isbn=9780335222674|last1=Bryant|first1=Robin|last2=Dunnill|first2=Richard|last3=Flanagan|first3=Karen|last4=Hayes|first4=Dennis|date=1 December 2007|publisher=McGraw-Hill Education |access-date=1 November 2020|archive-date=17 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194149/https://books.google.com/books?id=sDbRCaCPD7wC&q=labour+government+council+for+academic+awards+1964&pg=PA251|url-status=live}}</ref> From 1964 to 1968, the number of training places had doubled.<ref name="Labour 1968"/> The Docks and Harbours Act (1966) and the Dock Labour Scheme (1967) reorganised the system of employment in the docks in order to put an end to [[casual employment]].<ref name="shorthistory"/> The changes made to the Dock Labour Scheme in 1967 ensured a complete end to casual labour on the docks, effectively giving workers the security of jobs for life.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thespiritof45.com/How-We-Did-it |title=Ken Loach's film The Spirit Of '45 – How We Did it |publisher=Thespiritof45.com |access-date=10 April 2014 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131105051327/http://www.thespiritof45.com/how-we-did-it |archive-date=5 November 2013 }}</ref> Trade unions also benefited from the passage of the [[Trade Disputes Act 1965]]. This restored the legal immunity of trade union officials, thus ensuring that they could no longer be sued for threatening to strike.<ref name="taylor">''Mastering Economic and Social History'' by David Taylor.</ref>

The First Wilson Government also encouraged married women to return to teaching and improved Assistance Board Concessionary conditions for those teaching part-time, "by enabling them to qualify for pension rights and by formulating a uniform scale of payment throughout the country." Soon after coming into office, midwives and nurses were given an 11% pay increase,<ref name="Labour 1968"/> and according to one MP, nurses also benefited from the largest pay rise they had received in a generation.<ref>[https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1969/oct/31/pensions-and-education#S5CV0790P0_19691031_HOC_46 PENSIONS AND EDUCATION (Hansard, 31 October 1969.)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160312115253/http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1969/oct/31/pensions-and-education#S5CV0790P0_19691031_HOC_46 |date=12 March 2016 }} vol 790 cc509-608 – api.parliament.uk. Retrieved 13 February 2012.</ref> In May 1966, Wilson announced 30% pay rises for doctors and dentists—a move which did not prove popular with unions, as the national pay policy at the time was for rises of between 3% and 3.5%.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/4/newsid_2502000/2502925.stm |title=1966: Doctors and dentists get huge pay rise |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171008100355/http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/4/newsid_2502000/2502925.stm |archive-date=8 October 2017 |work=BBC Home: On this day – 1950–2005 |date=4 May 1966 |access-date=14 January 2012}}</ref>

Much needed improvements were made in junior hospital doctors' salaries. From 1959 to 1970, while the earnings of manual workers increased by 75%, the salaries of registrars more than doubled while those of house officers more than trebled. Most of these improvements, such as for nurses, came in the pay settlements of 1970. On a limited scale, reports by the [[National Board for Prices and Incomes]] encouraged incentive payments schemes to be developed in local government and elsewhere. In February 1969, the government accepted an "above the ceiling" increase for farmworkers, a low-paid group. Some groups of professional workers, such as nurses, teachers, and doctors, gained substantial awards.<ref name="inequality"/>

====Transport====
The Travel Concessions Act 1964, one of the first Acts passed by the First Wilson Government, provided concessions to all pensioners travelling on buses operated by municipal transport authorities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://archive.commercialmotor.com/article/10th-november-1967/98/two-pronged-fare-concessions-bid|title=Two-pronged fare-concessions bid|work=commercialmotor.com|access-date=15 January 2019|archive-date=10 September 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170910102145/http://archive.commercialmotor.com/article/10th-november-1967/98/two-pronged-fare-concessions-bid|url-status=live}}</ref> The [[Transport Act 1968]] established the principle of government grants for transport authorities if uneconomic passenger services were justified on social grounds. A [[National Freight Corporation]] was also established to provide integrated rail freight and road services. Public expenditure on roads steadily increased and stricter safety precautions were introduced, such as the [[breathalyser]] test for [[drunken driving]],<ref name="ReferenceB"/> under the 1967 Road Traffic Act.<ref name="ReferenceN"/> The Transport Act gave a much needed financial boost to [[British Rail]], treating them like they were a company which had become bankrupt but could now, under new management, carry on debt-free. The act also established a national freight corporation and introduced government [[rail subsidies]] for passenger transport on the same basis as existing subsidies for roads to enable local authorities to improve public transport in their areas.<ref name="ReferenceN"/>

The road-building programme was also expanded, with capital expenditure increased to 8% of GDP, "the highest level achieved by any post-war government".<ref name="labour1">''Ten Years of New Labour'', edited by Matt Beech and Simon Lee.</ref> Central government expenditure on roads went up from £125 million in 1963/64 to £225 million in 1967/68, while a number of [[road safety]] regulations were introduced, covering [[seat belt]]s, lorry drivers' hours, car and lorry standards, and an experimental 70 mile per hour speed limit. In Scotland, spending on [[trunk road]]s went up from £6.8 million in 1963/64 to £15.5 million in 1966/67, while in Wales, spending on Welsh roads went up from £21.2 million in 1963/64 to £31.4 million in 1966/67.<ref name="Labour 1968"/>

====Regional development====
Encouragement of regional development was given increased attention under the First Wilson Government, to narrow economic disparities between the various regions. A policy was introduced in 1965 whereby any new government organisation should be established outside London and in 1967 the government decided to give preference to development areas. A few government departments were also moved out of London, with the [[Royal Mint]] moved to [[South Wales]], the Giro and Inland Revenue to [[Bootle]], and the Motor Tax Office to [[Swansea]].<ref name="beckerman">''The Labour government's Economic record: 1964–1970'', edited by Wilfred Beckerman.</ref> A new Special Development Status was also introduced in 1967 to provide even higher levels of assistance.<ref name="ponting"/> In 1966, five development areas (covering half the population in the UK) were established, while subsidies were provided for employers recruiting new employees in the Development Areas.<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/> A Highlands and Islands Development Board was also set up to "re-invigorate" the north of Scotland.<ref name="Labour 1968"/>

The Industrial Development Act 1966 changed the name of Development Districts (parts of the country with higher levels of [[Unemployment in the United Kingdom|unemployment]] than the national average and which governments sought to encourage greater investment in) to Development Areas and increased the percentage of the workforce covered by development schemes from 15% to 20%, which mainly affected rural areas in Scotland and Wales. Tax allowances were replaced by grants to extend coverage to include firms which were not making a profit, and in 1967 a Regional Employment Premium was introduced. Whereas the existing schemes tended to favour capital-intensive projects, this aimed for the first time at increasing employment in depressed areas. Set at 30s per employee per week and guaranteed for seven years, the Regional Employment Premium subsidised all [[Manufacturing in the United Kingdom|manufacturing industry]] (though not services) in Development Areas, amounting to an average subsidy of 7% of labour costs.<ref name="ponting"/><ref>{{cite book |last=Tomlinson |first=Jim |title=The Labour Governments 1964–1970, Volume 3, Economic Policy |publisher=Manchester University Press |location=Manchester |year=2004 |page=86}}</ref>

Regional unemployment differentials were narrowed, and spending on regional infrastructure was significantly increased. Between 1965–66 and 1969–70, yearly expenditure on new construction (including power stations, roads, schools, hospitals and housing) rose by 41% in the United Kingdom as a whole. Subsidies were also provided for various industries (such as [[shipbuilding]] in [[Clydeside]]), which helped to prevent many job losses. It is estimated that, between 1964 and 1970, 45,000 government jobs were created outside London, 21,000 of which were located in the Development Areas.<ref name="beckerman"/> The Local Employment Act, passed in March 1970, embodied the government's proposals for assistance to 54 "intermediate" employment exchange areas not classified as full "development" areas.<ref name="Britannica1971">''Britannica Book of the Year 1971'', Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., William Benton (Publisher).</ref>

Funds allocated to regional assistance more than doubled, from £40&nbsp;million in 1964/65 to £82&nbsp;million in 1969/70, and from 1964 to 1970, the number of factories completed was 50% higher than from 1960 to 1964, which helped to reduce unemployment in development areas. In 1970, the unemployment rate in development areas was 1.67 times the national average, compared to 2.21 times in 1964. Although national rates of unemployment were higher in 1970 than in the early 1960s, unemployment rates in the development areas were lower and had not increased for three years.<ref name="ponting"/> Altogether, the impact of the first Wilson government's regional development policies was such that, according to one historian, the period 1963 to 1970 represented "the most prolonged, most intensive, and most successful attack ever launched on regional problems in Britain."<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/>

====International development====
A new [[Ministry of Overseas Development]] was established, with its greatest success at the time being the introduction of interest-free loans for the poorest countries.<ref name="ponting"/> The Minister of Overseas Development, [[Barbara Castle]], set a standard in interest relief on loans to developing nations which resulted in changes to the loan policies of many donor countries, "a significant shift in the conduct of rich white nations to poor brown ones". Loans were introduced to [[developing countries]] on terms that were more favourable to them than those given by governments of all other developed countries at that time. In addition, Castle was instrumental in setting up an Institute of Development Studies at the [[University of Sussex]] to devise ways of tackling global [[Socioeconomic inequality|socio-economic inequalities]]. Overseas aid suffered from the austerity measures introduced by the first Wilson government in its last few years in office, with British aid as a percentage of GNP falling from 0.53% in 1964 to 0.39% in 1969.<ref name="ReferenceN"/>

====Taxation====
Wilson's government made a variety of changes to the [[Taxation in the United Kingdom|tax system]]. Largely under the influence of the Hungarian-born economists [[Nicholas Kaldor]] and [[Thomas Balogh]], an idiosyncratic [[Selective Employment Tax]] (SET) was introduced that was designed to tax employment in the service sectors while subsidising employment in manufacturing. (The rationale proposed by its economist authors derived largely from claims about potential economies of scale and technological progress, but Wilson in his memoirs stressed the tax's revenue-raising potential.) The SET did not long survive the return of a Conservative government. Of longer-term significance, [[Capital gains tax in the United Kingdom|capital gains tax]] (CGT) was introduced across the UK on 6 April 1965.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.warr.co.uk/Changes-To-Capital-Gains-Tax.htm |title=Warr & Co Chartered Accountants – Article – Changes To Capital Gains Tax |publisher=Warr.co.uk |access-date=20 April 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090531082945/http://www.warr.co.uk/Changes-To-Capital-Gains-Tax.htm |archive-date=31 May 2009}}</ref> Across his two periods in office, Wilson presided over significant increases in the overall tax burden in the UK. In 1974, three weeks after forming a new government, Wilson's new chancellor [[Denis Healey]] partially reversed the 1971 reduction in the top rate of tax from 90% to 75%, increasing it to 83% in his first budget, which came into law in April 1974. This applied to incomes over £20,000 (equivalent to £{{formatnum:{{Inflation|UK|20000|1974|{{Inflation-year|UK}}|r=0}}}} in {{Inflation-year|UK}}),{{Inflation-fn|UK|df=y}} and combined with a 15% surcharge on 'unearned' income (investments and dividends) could add up to a 98% marginal rate of personal income tax. In 1974, as many as 750,000 people were liable to pay the top rate of income tax.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn25.pdf |title=IFS: Long-Term trends in British Taxation and Spending |access-date=6 August 2014 |archive-date=2 February 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150202090902/http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn25.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref>

Various changes were also made to the tax system which benefited workers on low and middle incomes. Married couples with low incomes benefited from the increases in the single personal allowance and marriage allowance. In 1965, the regressive allowance for national insurance contributions was abolished and the single personal allowance, marriage allowance and wife's earned income relief were increased. These allowances were further increased in the tax years 1969–70 and 1970–71. Increases in the age exemption and dependant relative's income limits benefited the low-income elderly.<ref name="inequality"/> In 1967, new tax concessions were introduced for widows.<ref name="books.google.co.uk">{{cite book |last1=Thane |first1=Pat |last2=Evans |first2=Tanya |title=Sinners? Scroungers? Saints? |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HZvhMJWK930C&q=harold+wilson+widows+tax+concessions+1967&pg=PA129 |url-status=live |date=May 2012 |publisher=OUP Oxford |access-date=1 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194151/https://books.google.com/books?id=HZvhMJWK930C&q=harold+wilson+widows+tax+concessions+1967&pg=PA129 |archive-date=17 April 2021 |isbn=9780199578504}}</ref>

Increases were made in some of the minor allowances in the 1969 Finance Act, notably the additional personal allowance, the age exemption and age relief and the dependent relative limit. Apart from the age relief, further adjustments in these concessions were implemented in 1970.<ref name="inequality"/>

1968 saw the introduction of aggregation of the investment income of unmarried minors with the income of their parents. According to Michael Meacher, this change put an end to a previous inequity whereby two families, in otherwise identical circumstances, paid differing amounts of tax "simply because in one case the child possessed property transferred to it by a grandparent, while in the other case the grandparent's identical property was inherited by the parent."<ref name="inequality"/>

In the 1969 budget, income tax was abolished for about 1 million of the lowest-paid and reduced for a further 600,000 people,<ref name="Crossman"/> while in the government's last budget (introduced in 1970), two million small taxpayers were exempted from paying any income tax altogether.<ref>"Le contrat dans les pays anglo-saxons: théories et pratiques" by Jean-Louis Breteau.</ref>

====Liberal reforms====
{{main|Labour government, 1964–1970#Liberal reforms}}
A wide range of liberal measures were introduced during Wilson's time in office. The [[Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Act 1970]] made provision for the welfare of children whose parents were about to divorce or be judicially separated, with courts (for instance) granted wide powers to order financial provision for children in the form of maintenance payments made by either parent.<ref name="byrne1"/> This legislation allowed courts to order provision for either spouse and recognised the contribution to the joint home made during marriage.<ref name="Longman"/> That same year, spouses were given an equal share of household assets following divorce via the Matrimonial Property Act. The [[Race Relations Act 1968]] was also extended in 1968 and in 1970 the [[Equal Pay Act 1970]] was passed.<ref name="ReferenceC"/> Another important reform, the [[Welsh Language Act 1967]], granted 'equal validity' to the declining [[Welsh language]] and encouraged its revival. Government expenditure was also increased on both sport and the arts.<ref name="shorthistory"/> The Mines and Quarries (Tips) Act 1969, passed in response to the [[Aberfan disaster]], made provision for preventing disused tips from endangering members of the public.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsUK/planning/legislation/minewaste.html |title=Legislation & policy: mineral ownership &#124; Planning &#124; MineralsUK |publisher=Bgs.ac.uk |access-date=10 April 2014 |archive-date=3 January 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180103200113/http://www.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/planning/legislation/mineWaste.html |url-status=live }}</ref> In 1967, [[corporal punishment]] in [[borstal]]s and [[Her Majesty's Prison Service|prisons]] was abolished.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oVH0fVcMx5cC&q=UK+corporal+punishment+1948&pg=PP149 |title=Seeking a Role: The United Kingdom 1951–1970 – Brian Harrison – Google Books |date=26 March 2009 |access-date=6 August 2014 |isbn=9780191606786 |last1=Harrison |first1=Brian |publisher=OUP Oxford |archive-date=17 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210417194149/https://books.google.com/books?id=oVH0fVcMx5cC&q=UK+corporal+punishment+1948&pg=PP149 |url-status=live }}</ref> seven regional associations were established to develop the arts, and government expenditure on cultural activities rose from £7.7 million in 1964/64 to £15.3 million in 1968/69. A Criminal Injuries Compensation Board was also set up, which had paid out over £2 million to victims of criminal violence by 1968.<ref name="Labour 1968"/>

The [[Commons Registration Act 1965]] provided for the registration of all [[common land]] and [[village green]]s, whilst under the [[Countryside Act 1968]], local authorities could provide facilities "for enjoyment of such lands to which the public has access".<ref name="byrne1"/> The Family Provision Act 1966 amended a series of pre-existing [[Property law|estate laws]] mainly related to persons who died intestate. The legislation increased the amount that could be paid to surviving spouses if a will had not been left, and also expanded upon the jurisdiction of [[county court]]s, which were given the jurisdiction of high courts under certain circumstances when handling matters of estate. The rights of adopted children were also improved with certain wording changed in the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1938 to bestow upon them the same rights as natural-born children. In 1968, the [[Nurseries and Child-Minders Regulation Act 1948]] was updated to include more categories of childminders.<ref>''Family day care: international perspectives on policy, practice and quality'' by Ann Mooney and June Statham.</ref> A year later, the [[Family Law Reform Act 1969]] was passed, which allowed people born outside marriage to inherit on the [[intestacy]] of either parent.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/relationships/overview/legitimacyadoption/ |title=Marriage: legitimacy and adoption – UK Parliament |publisher=Parliament.uk |access-date=26 September 2011 |archive-date=26 December 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171226112421/http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/relationships/overview/legitimacyadoption/ |url-status=live }}</ref> In 1967, [[Homosexuality in England|homosexuality]] was partially decriminalised (in England & Wales only) by the passage of the [[Sexual Offences Act 1967|Sexual Offences Act]].<ref name="ReferenceN"/> The [[Public Records Act 1967]] also introduced a [[thirty-year rule]] for access to public records, replacing a previous fifty-year rule.<ref name="SeldonHickson">''New Labour, Old Labour: The Wilson and Callaghan Governments, 1974–79'' edited by Anthony Seldon and Kevin Hickson.</ref>

====Industrial relations====
Wilson made periodic attempts to mitigate inflation, largely through [[Wage control|wage]]-[[price controls]]—better known in Britain as "prices and [[incomes policy]]".<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/> (As with indicative planning, such controls—though now generally out of favour—were widely adopted at that time by governments of different ideological complexions, including the [[Presidency of Richard Nixon|Nixon administration]] in the United States.) Partly as a result of this reliance, the government tended to find itself repeatedly injected into major industrial disputes, with late-night "beer and sandwiches at Number Ten" an almost routine culmination to such episodes. Among the most damaging of the numerous strikes during Wilson's periods in office was a six-week stoppage by the [[National Union of Seamen]], beginning shortly after Wilson's [[1966 United Kingdom general election|re-election in 1966]], and conducted, he claimed, by "politically motivated men".

With public frustration over strikes mounting, Wilson's government in 1969 proposed a series of changes to the legal basis for industrial relations (labour law), which were outlined in a White Paper "[[In Place of Strife]]" put forward by the Employment Secretary [[Barbara Castle]]. Following a confrontation with the [[Trades Union Congress]], which strongly opposed the proposals, and internal dissent from [[Home Secretary]] [[James Callaghan]], the government substantially backed-down from its intentions. The Heath government (1970–1974) introduced the [[Industrial Relations Act 1971]] with many of the same ideas, but this was largely repealed by the post-1974 Labour government. Some elements of these changes were subsequently to be enacted (in modified form) during the premiership of [[Margaret Thatcher]].<ref name="Thorpe64702001"/>

====Record on income distribution====
Despite the economic difficulties faced by the first Wilson government, it succeeded in maintaining low levels of unemployment and inflation during its time in office. Unemployment was kept below 2.7%, and inflation for much of the 1960s remained below 4%. Living standards generally improved, while public spending on housing, social security, transport, research, education and health went up by an average of more than 6% between 1964 and 1970.<ref name="white heat">''White Heat: A History of Britain in the Swinging Sixties'', Dominic Sandbrook.</ref> The average household grew steadily richer, with the number of cars in the United Kingdom rising from one to every 6.4 persons to one for every five persons in 1968, representing a net increase of three million cars on the road. The rise in the standard of living was also characterised by increased ownership of various consumer durables from 1964 to 1969, as demonstrated by television sets (from 88% to 90%), refrigerators (from 39% to 59%), and washing machines (from 54% to 64%).<ref name="ReferenceN"/>

By 1970, income in Britain was more equally distributed than in 1964, mainly because of increases in cash benefits, including family allowances.<ref>''The Struggle for Labour's Soul: Understanding Labour's political thought since 1945'' by Raymond Plant, Matt Beech and Kevin Hickson.</ref>

According to the historian, [[Dominic Sandbrook]]:

{{blockquote|In its commitment to social services and public welfare, the Wilson government put together a record unmatched by any subsequent administration, and the mid-sixties are justifiably seen as the 'golden age' of the welfare state.<ref name="white heat"/>}}

As noted by [[Ben Pimlott]], the gap between those on lowest incomes and the rest of the population "had been significantly reduced" under Wilson's first government.<ref>''Harold Wilson'' by Ben Pimlott.</ref> The first Wilson government thus saw the distribution of income became more equal,<ref name="socialists1"/> while big reductions in poverty took place.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20240714195554/https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/improving-our-understanding-of-uk-poverty-will-require-better-data/ Improving our understanding of UK poverty will require better data by Adam Corlett, 6 January 2021]</ref><ref>''Poverty in Britain, 1900–1965'' by Ian Gazeley.</ref> These achievements were mainly brought about by several increases in social welfare benefits,<ref>''Understanding Social Policy'' by Michael James Hill.</ref> such as supplementary benefit, pensions and family allowances, the latter of which were doubled between 1964 and 1970 (although most of the increase in family allowances did not come about until 1968). A new system of rate rebates was introduced, which benefited one million households by the end of the 1960s.<ref name="ponting"/> Increases in national insurance benefits in 1965, 1967, 1968 and 1969 ensured that those dependent on state benefits saw their [[disposable income]]s rise faster than manual wage earners, while income differentials between lower-income and higher-income workers were marginally narrowed. Greater progressivity was introduced in the tax system, with greater emphasis on direct (income-based) as opposed to indirect (typically expenditure-based) taxation as a means of raising revenue, with the amount raised by the former increasing twice as much as that of the latter.<ref name="whiting">''The Labour Party and Taxation: Party Identity and Political Purpose in Twentieth-Century Britain'' by Richard Whiting.</ref> Also, despite an increase in unemployment, the poor improved their share of the national income while that of the rich was slightly reduced.<ref name="labour1945">''The Labour Party since 1945'' by Eric Shaw.</ref> Despite various cutbacks after 1966, expenditure on services such as education and health was still much higher as a proportion of national wealth than in 1964. In addition, by raising taxes to pay their reforms, the government paid careful attention to the principle of redistribution, with disposable incomes rising for the lowest paid while falling amongst the wealthiest during its time in office.<ref>''The Labour Party Since 1945'' by Kevin Jeffreys.</ref>

Between 1964 and 1968, benefits in kind were significantly progressive, in that over the period those in the lower half of the income scale benefited more than those in the upper half. On average those receiving state benefits benefited more in terms of increases in real disposable income than the average manual worker or salaried employee between 1964 and 1969.<ref name="beckerman"/> From 1964 to 1969, low-wage earners did substantially better than other sections of the population. In 1969, a married couple with two children were 11.5% per cent richer in real terms, while for a couple with three children, the corresponding increase was 14.5%, and for a family with four children, 16.5%.<ref name="api.parliament.uk">[https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1970/may/27/clause-14 Clause 14, ALTERATIONS OF PERSONAL RELIEFS (Hansard, 27 May 1970)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170308075856/http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1970/may/27/clause-14 |date=8 March 2017 }}  api.parliament.uk. Retrieved 13 February 2012.</ref> From 1965 to 1968, the income of single pensioner households as a percentage of other one adult households rose from 48.9% to 52.5%. For two pensioner households, the equivalent increase was from 46.8% to 48.2%.<ref name="inequality"/> In addition, mainly as a result of big increases in cash benefits, unemployed persons and large families gained more in terms of real disposable income than the rest of the population during Wilson's time in office.<ref name="socialists1"/>

As noted by Paul Whiteley, pensions, sickness, unemployment, and supplementary benefits went up more in real terms under the First Wilson Government than under the preceding Conservative administration:

"To compare the Conservative period of office with the Labour period, we can use the changes in benefits per year as a rough estimate of comparative performance. For the Conservatives and Labour respectively increases in supplementary benefits per year were 3.5 and 5.2 percentage points, for sickness and unemployment benefits 5.8 and 30.6 percentage points, for pensions 3.8 and 4.6, and for family allowances −1.2 and −2.6. Thus the poor, the retired, the sick and the unemployed did better in real terms under Labour than they did under Conservatives, and families did worse."<ref name="auto1"/>

Between 1964 and 1968, cash benefits rose as a percentage of income for all households but more so for poorer than for wealthier households. As noted by the economist Michael Stewart,

"it seems indisputable that the high priority the Labour Government gave to expenditure on education and the health service had a favourable effect on income distribution."<ref name="beckerman"/>

For a family with two children in the income range £676 to £816 per annum, cash benefits rose from 4% of income in 1964 to 22% in 1968, compared with a change from 1% to 2% for a similar family in the income range £2,122 to £2,566 over the same period. For benefits in kind the changes over the same period for similar families were from 21% to 29% for lower-income families and from 9% to 10% for higher-income families. When taking into account all benefits, taxes and Government expenditures on social services, the first Wilson government succeeded in bringing about a reduction in income inequality. As noted by the historian [[Kenneth O. Morgan]],

"In the long term, therefore, fortified by increases in supplementary and other benefits under the Crossman regime in 1968–70, the welfare state had made some impact, almost by inadvertence, on social inequality and the maldistribution of real income".<ref>''Labour in Power, 1945–1951'' by Kenneth O. Morgan.</ref>

Public expenditure as a percentage of GDP rose significantly under the 1964–1970 Labour government, from 34% in 1964–65 to nearly 38% of GDP by 1969–70, whilst expenditure on social services rose from 16% of national income in 1964 to 23% by 1970.<ref name="ponting"/> These measures had a major impact on the living standards of low-income Britons, with disposable incomes rising faster for low-income groups than for high-income groups during the 1960s. When measuring disposable income after taxation but including benefits, the total disposable income of those on the highest incomes fell by 33%, whilst the total disposable income of those on the lowest incomes rose by 104%.<ref name="ponting"/> As noted by one historian, "the net effect of Labour's financial policies was indeed to make the rich poorer and the poor richer".<ref>''To Build A New Jerusalem: The British Labour Movement from the 1880s to the 1990s'' by A. J. Davies.</ref>

===Foreign affairs===
====United States====
[[File:Lyndon B. Johnson meets with Prime Minister Harold Wilson C2537-5 (cropped).jpg|thumb|left|Wilson with US President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] at the [[White House]] in 1966]]

Wilson believed in a strong "[[Special Relationship]]" with the United States and wanted to highlight his dealings with the White House to strengthen his prestige as a statesman. President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] disliked Wilson and ignored any "special" relationship. The [[Vietnam War]] was a sore point.<ref>Marc Tiley,  "Britain, Vietnam and the Special Relationship." ''History Today'' 63.12 (2013).</ref> Johnson needed and asked for help to maintain American prestige. Wilson offered lukewarm verbal support and no military aid. Wilson's policy angered the left-wing of his Labour Party, who [[opposed the Vietnam War]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Vickers |first=Rhiannon |date=2008 |title=Harold Wilson, the British Labour Party, and the War in Vietnam |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26923428 |journal=Journal of Cold War Studies |volume=10 |issue=2 |pages=41–70 |doi=10.1162/jcws.2008.10.2.41 |jstor=26923428 |s2cid=57561207 |issn=1520-3972}}</ref> Wilson and Johnson also differed sharply on British economic weakness and its declining status as a world power. Historian Jonathan Colman concludes it made for the most unsatisfactory "special" relationship in the 20th century.<ref>Jonathan Colman, ''A 'Special Relationship'? Harold Wilson, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Anglo-American Relations 'At the Summit', 1964–68'' (2004).</ref>  The only point of total agreement was that both Johnson and Wilson emphatically supported Israel in the 1967 [[Six-Day War]].<ref>Six Days: How the 1967 War Shaped the Middle East by Jeremy Bowen</ref>

====Europe====
[[File:Bundesarchiv B 145 Bild-F019859-0022, Staatsbesuch Harold Wilson, Ludwig Erhard.jpg|right|thumb|Wilson with West German Chancellor [[Ludwig Erhard]] in 1965]]

Among the more challenging political dilemmas Wilson faced was the issue of [[United Kingdom membership of the European Economic Area|British membership of the European Community]], the forerunner of the present [[European Union]]. An entry attempt was vetoed in 1963 by French President [[Charles de Gaulle]]. The Labour Party in Opposition had been divided on the issue, with Hugh Gaitskell having come out in 1962 in opposition to Britain joining the [[European Communities|European Community]].<ref>{{cite ODNB|id=33309|title=Gaitskell, Hugh Todd Naylor|last = Brivati|first = Brian|author-link = Brian Brivati|date=6 January 2011}}</ref> After initial hesitation, Wilson's Government in May 1967 lodged the UK's second application to join the European Community. It was vetoed by de Gaulle in November 1967.<ref>{{cite book|first=David |last=Gowland|title=Britain and European Integration Since 1945: On the Sidelines|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dvt-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA69|year=2008|publisher=Routledge|page=69|display-authors=etal|isbn=9781134354528|access-date=15 January 2019|archive-date=10 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200110180415/https://books.google.com/books?id=dvt-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA69|url-status=live}}</ref> After De Gaulle lost power, Conservative prime minister [[Edward Heath]] negotiated [[Accession of the United Kingdom to the European Communities|Britain's admission to the EC]] in 1973.

Wilson in opposition showed political ingenuity in devising a position that both sides of the party could agree on, opposing the terms negotiated by Heath but not membership in principle. Labour's 1974 manifesto included a pledge to renegotiate terms for Britain's membership and then [[Referendum Act 1975|hold a referendum]] on whether to stay in the EC on the new terms. This was a constitutional procedure without precedent in British history.

Following Wilson's return to power, the renegotiations with Britain's fellow EC members were carried out by Wilson himself in tandem with Foreign Secretary [[James Callaghan]], and they toured the capital cities of Europe meeting their European counterparts. The discussions focused primarily on Britain's net [[Public finance|budgetary]] contribution to the EC. As a small agricultural producer heavily dependent on imports, Britain suffered doubly from the dominance of:
:(i) agricultural spending in the EC [[Government budget|budget]],
:(ii) agricultural [[import tax]]es as a source of EC [[revenue]]s.

During the renegotiations, other EEC members conceded, as a partial offset, the establishment of a significant [[European Regional Development Fund]] (ERDF), from which it was agreed that Britain would be a major net beneficiary.<ref>Andrew Moravcsik, "The Choice for Europe" (Cornell, 1998).</ref>

In the subsequent referendum campaign, rather than the normal British tradition of "collective responsibility", under which the government takes a policy position which all cabinet members are required to support publicly, members of the Government were free to present their views on either side of the question. The electorate [[1975 United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum|voted on 5 June 1975]] to continue membership, by a substantial majority.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/6/newsid_2499000/2499297.stm 1975: UK embraces Europe in referendum] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180620044520/http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/6/newsid_2499000/2499297.stm |date=20 June 2018 }} BBC On This Day.</ref>

====Asia====
[[Joint warfare in South Vietnam, 1963–1969|American military involvement in Vietnam]] escalated continuously from 1964 to 1968 and President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] brought pressure to bear for at least a token involvement of British military units. Wilson consistently avoided any commitment of British forces, giving as reasons British military commitments to the [[Malayan Emergency]] and British co-chairmanship of the [[1954 Geneva Conference]].<ref>Rhiannon Vickers, "Harold Wilson, the British Labour Party, and the War in Vietnam." ''Journal of Cold War Studies'' 10#2 (2008): 41–70. [http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/jcws.2008.10.2.41 online] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191216133217/https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/jcws.2008.10.2.41 |date=16 December 2019}}</ref>

His government offered some rhetorical support for the US position (most prominently in the defence offered by the Foreign Secretary [[Michael Stewart, Baron Stewart of Fulham|Michael Stewart]] in a much-publicised "[[teach-in]]" or debate on Vietnam). On at least one occasion the British government made an unsuccessful effort to mediate in the conflict, with Wilson discussing peace proposals with [[Alexei Kosygin]], the [[Premier of the Soviet Union|Chairman]] of the [[USSR Council of Ministers]]. On 28 June 1966 Wilson 'dissociated' his Government from [[Operation Rolling Thunder|American bombing]] of the cities of [[Hanoi]] and [[Haiphong]]. In his memoirs, Wilson writes of "selling LBJ a [[bum steer]]", a reference to Johnson's Texas roots, which conjured up images of cattle and cowboys in British minds.<ref name="Government1"/>

Part of the price paid by Wilson after talks with President Johnson in June 1967 for US assistance with the UK economy was his agreement to maintain a military presence [[East of Suez]].<ref>''The Oxford Illustrated History of the British Army'' (1994), p. 359.</ref> In July 1967 [[Secretary of State for Defence|Defence Secretary]] [[Denis Healey]] announced that Britain would abandon her mainland bases [[East of Suez]] by 1977, although [[Airmobile|airmobile forces]] would be retained which could if necessary be deployed in the region. Shortly afterwards, in January 1968, Wilson announced that the proposed timetable for this withdrawal was to be accelerated and that British forces were to be withdrawn from Singapore, Malaysia, and the [[Persian Gulf]] by the end of 1971.<ref>{{cite book |last=French |first=David |title=The British Way in Warfare, 1688–2000 |publisher=Routledge |year=1990 |page=220 |isbn=978-0-04-445789-3}}</ref>

Wilson was known for his strongly pro-Israel views.<ref>{{cite web |last=Philpot |first=Robert |title=Wilson, true friend of Israel |url=https://www.thejc.com/comment/opinion/wilson-true-friend-of-israel-1.58771 |url-status=live |work=[[The Jewish Chronicle]] |date=7 October 2014 |access-date=28 August 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210828105126/https://www.thejc.com/comment/opinion/wilson-true-friend-of-israel-1.58771 |archive-date=28 August 2021}}</ref> He was a particular friend of Israeli Premier [[Golda Meir]], though her tenure largely coincided with Wilson's 1970–1974 hiatus. Another associate was West German [[Chancellor of Germany (Federal Republic)|Chancellor]] [[Willy Brandt]]; all three were members of the [[Socialist International]].<ref>[http://www.jamd.com/search?assettype=g&assetid=2634403&text=wilson+meir+brandt] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150713180501/http://www.jamd.com/search?assettype=g&assetid=2634403&text=wilson+meir+brandt|date=13 July 2015}}</ref>

====Africa====
The British "retreat from Empire" had made headway by 1964 and was to continue during Wilson's administration. [[Southern Rhodesia]] was not granted independence, principally because Wilson refused to grant independence to the white minority government headed by Rhodesian prime minister [[Ian Smith]] which was not willing to extend unqualified [[voting rights]] to the native African population. Smith's defiant response was a [[Unilateral Declaration of Independence (Rhodesia)|Unilateral Declaration of Independence]], on 11 November 1965. Wilson's immediate recourse was to the United Nations, and in 1965, the [[Security Council]] imposed sanctions, which were to last until official independence in 1979. This involved [[Beira Patrol|British warships blockading the port of Beira]] to try to cause economic collapse in Rhodesia. Wilson was applauded by most nations for taking a firm stand on the issue (and none extended diplomatic recognition to the Smith régime). A number of nations did not join in with sanctions, undermining their efficiency. Certain sections of public opinion started to question their efficacy, and to demand the toppling of the régime by force. Wilson declined to intervene in Rhodesia with military force, believing the British population would not support such action against their "kith and kin". The two leaders met for discussions aboard British warships, {{HMS|Tiger|C20|2}} in 1966 and {{HMS|Fearless|L10|2}} in 1968. Smith subsequently attacked Wilson in his memoirs, accusing him of delaying tactics during negotiations and alleging duplicity; Wilson responded in kind, questioning Smith's good faith and suggesting that Smith had moved the goal-posts whenever a settlement appeared in sight.<ref name="Government1">Harold Wilson, "The Labour Government, 1964–70: a Personal Record".</ref> The matter was still unresolved at the time of Wilson's resignation in 1976.  Wilson had a good relationship with [[Siaka Stevens]] of Sierra Leone; the two leaders attempted to work together to find a solution to the question of [[Biafra]] in Nigeria.<ref>Biafra by Peter Schwab, 1971 – pg. 105</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=4 January 1998 |title=British interests, Nigerian tragedy |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/british-interests-nigerian-tragedy-1136684.html |access-date=1 December 2022 |newspaper=[[The Independent]] |first1=Michael |last1=Leapman }}</ref> But despite this, the British government was actively sending arms, munitions and other equipment to the [[Military dictatorship in Nigeria|Nigerian military junta]], and consistently denied any wrongdoing by the government of [[Nigeria]]: Nigerian writer [[Chinua Achebe]] wrote that this may have cost him his position.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/21/buried-50-years-britain-shamesful-role-biafran-war-frederick-forsyth |title=Opinion: Buried for 50 years: Britain's shameful role in the Biafran war |first1=Frederick |last1=Forsyth |newspaper=[[The Guardian]] |date=21 January 2000 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Boubjailly |first=Vance |date=25 January 1970 |title=An Epitaph For Biafra |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1970/01/25/archives/an-epitaph-for-biafra-an-epitaph-for-biafra.html |access-date=13 July 2024 |newspaper=[[The New York Times]] |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>

=== Electoral defeat and resignation ===
By 1969, the Labour Party was suffering serious electoral reverses, and by the turn of 1970 had lost a total of 16 seats in by-elections since the previous general election.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/background/pastelec/ge70.shtml |title=BBC Politics 97 |publisher=BBC |date=18 June 1970 |access-date=26 September 2011 |archive-date=20 January 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120120233721/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/background/pastelec/ge70.shtml |url-status=live}}</ref>

By 1970, the economy was showing signs of improvement, and by May that year, Labour had overtaken the Conservatives in the opinion polls.<ref>''Twentieth-century Britain: a political history'' by W. D. Rubinstein, p. 298.</ref> Wilson responded to this apparent recovery in his government's popularity by calling [[1970 United Kingdom general election|a general election]], but, to the surprise of most observers, was defeated at the polls by the Conservatives under Heath. Most opinion polls had predicted a Labour win, with a poll six days before the election showing a 12.4% Labour lead. Writing in the aftermath of the election, ''The Times'' journalist George Clark wrote that the 1970 contest would be "remembered as the occasion when the people of the United Kingdom hurled the findings of the opinion polls back into the faces of the pollsters and at the voting booths proved them wrong—most of them badly wrong".<ref name="ClarkTimes">{{cite book |last=Clark |first=George |title=The Times Guide to the House of Commons 1970 |date=1970 |publisher=Times Newspapers Limited |location=London |page=26 |chapter=The General Election Campaign, 1970}}</ref> Heath and the Conservatives had attacked Wilson over the economy. Towards the end of the campaign, bad trade figures for May added weight to Heath's campaign and he claimed that a Labour victory would result in a further devaluation. Wilson considered Heath's claims "irresponsible" and "damaging to the nation".<ref name="ClarkTimes2">{{cite book |last=Clark |first=George |title=The Times Guide to the House of Commons 1970 |date=1970 |publisher=Times Newspapers Limited |location=London |pages=30–31 |chapter=The General Election Campaign, 1970}}</ref> Ultimately, however, the election saw Labour's vote share fall to its lowest since [[1935 United Kingdom general election|1935]].<ref name="RoseTimes">{{cite book |last=Rose |first=Richard |author-link=Richard Rose (political scientist) |title=The Times Guide to the House of Commons 1970 |date=1970 |publisher=Times Newspapers Limited |location=London |page=31 |chapter=Voting Trends Surveyed}}</ref> Several prominent Labour figures lost their seats, notably [[George Brown, Baron George-Brown|George Brown]] who was still Deputy Leader of the Labour Party.<ref name="Times70">{{cite book |title=The Times Guide to the House of Commons 1970 |date=1970 |publisher=Times Newspapers Limited |location=London |page=249}}</ref>