160 likes | 174 Views
The Australian echo of Speenhamland. Rob Bray ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods History of Economic Thought Society of Australia 30th Annual Conference 25-27 September 2017. Structure. The Speenhamland system The Poor Law Commissioners’ Report Representation in the economic canon
E N D
The Australian echo of Speenhamland Rob Bray ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods History of Economic Thought Society of Australia 30th Annual Conference 25-27 September 2017
Structure • The Speenhamland system • The Poor Law Commissioners’ Report • Representation in the economic canon • The reappraisal • Implications for social policy • Australia • Reflections
Elizabethan Poor-Laws • Long history • Local Parish level response • Administration by local magistrates • Funded by local taxes • Context 1790 - 1830 • Enclosure & agricultural restructuring and mechanisation • Manufacturing & collapse of cottage industry • French Revolution/Napoleonic wars • Civil unrest
Speenhamland system (1) • Meeting Pelican Inn in Speenhamland, 6th May 1795 • Had power to set minimum wage • Income supplement to bring wages up to a minimum • Family size • Cost of food: ‘gallon loaf’
Speenhamland system (2) • Was widespread • Took various forms • How assistance provided • Employment arrangements • Subject to strong criticisms & sundry pamphleteers • Malthus • Ricardo • Bentham Blaug 1963, 158
Royal Commission into the poor laws • 9 Commissioners 1832-1834 • Edwin Chadwick & Nassau W Senior • Collected extensive data • Findings: • ‘has created whatever it was intended to prevent, and fostered whatever it was intended to discourage • ‘destructive of the morals of the most numerous class and the welfare of all • ‘bounty on indolence and vice
Report of Poor Law Commissioners 1834 • Rejected the allowance system • Lowered wages • Depressed work effort • Increased fertility & weakened family • Gave rise to multi-generational dependence • Consequence: Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 • Targeted • Workhouse based
Reappraisal (1) • Early critiques • Hammond & Hammond (1911), Tawney (1926), Webb & Webb (1929) • Early analysis • Mond (1927), Blackmore & Mellonie (1927 & 1928) • The revisionists • Huzel (1963), Blaug (1963, 1964), Boyer (1989,1990), Block & Somers (2003)
Reappraisal (2) • Population ? • Mixed findings, but certainly no explosion • Productivity ? • No evidence of a downturn • Wages ? • No negative impact • Spending ? • Not associated with allowance system • What did the program do ? • Seasonal unemployment – maintain rural labour supply
The implications for social policy • Pigou (1914) • Mechanism & not public spending the problem • Hirschman (1988) • Perverse effect doctrine • Block & Somers (2003 & 2005) • Direct – Moynihan • Indirect – embedded in new anti-welfare doctrines
Also policy debates • Pre-federation – aversion to outdoor relief • Age Pension – 1906 • Maternity Allowance – 1912 • Child endowment – 1920 on • Royal Commission on Child endowment –1928 • Evidence – especially on employer side • Mills & Brigden
Royal Commission on Child Endowment • Majority report rejected • ‘By removing from parents all financial responsibility for their children, parental responsibility would be weakened, incentive to effort reduced, and the sense of unity of interest between parents lessened’
Conclusion • The results of poor analysis can be persistent • Especially when it can be used as anecdotes to support our priors • Is simplified • and becomes the accepted wisdom • Consequences for economic and social policy.