William Beveridge

"The trouble in modern democracy is that men do not approach to leadership 'til they have lost the desire to lead anyone."

"Scratch a pessimist and you find often a defender of privilege."

"Ignorance is an evil weed, which dictators may cultivate among their dupes, but which no democracy can afford among its citizens."

"The state is or can be master of money, but in a free society it is master of very little else."

"Any proposals for the future, while they should use to the full the experience gathered in the past, should not be restricted by consideration of sectional interests established in the obtaining of that experience. Now, when the war is abolishing landmarks of every kind, is the opportunity for using experience in a clear field. A revolutionary moment in the world’s history is a time for revolutions, not for patching."

"Organisation of social insurance should be treated as one part only of a comprehensive policy of social progress. Social insurance fully developed may provide income security; it is an attack upon Want. But Want is one only of five giants on the road of reconstruction and in some ways the easiest to attack. The others are Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness."

"Social security must be achieved by co-operation between the State and the individual. The State should offer security for service and contribution. The State in organising security should not stifle incentive, opportunity, responsibility; in establishing a national minimum, it should leave room and encouragement for voluntary action by each individual to provide more than that minimum for himself and his family."

"The object of government in peace and in war is not the glory of rulers or of races, but the happiness of the common man."

"It was the Beveridge Report that provided the battlefield on which the decisive struggle to win a national commitment to New Jerusalem was waged and won... As appropriate for a prophet and a brilliant Oxford intellect, Beveridge thought a lot of himself, so that righteousness went hand in hand with authoritarian arrogance and skill at manipulating the press to make him the Field Marshal Montgomery of social welfare."

"[I]n his report on Full Employment in 1944 Beveridge urged an unquantified outlay of government funds in order to stimulate enough demand to bring about full employment, while admitting that such a policy in 1938 would have caused a balance-of-payments deficit of £130 million... Beveridge's answer to the conundrum lay in re-equipping industry and expanding output and exports, yet he offered no detailed analysis, no pondered advice, as to how these desirable objects were to be achieved; no costings of the investment needed and how it was to be funded; and he certainly failed to consider what effect the burden of the welfare state and the cost of maintaining full employment might have on such industrial investment. In any case he placed the need to modernise British industry and raise its productivity only third in priority in his "chosen route of planned national outlay"."

"Full Employment in a Free Society is really a sermonising tract, gloriously sweeping over difficulties human and technological to the promised land beyond. And, in the last resort, Sir William justified the practicality of his vision by simple analogy with the achievements of the wartime British economy: "The significance of war in relation to employment is that the scope of State outlay is increased immensely and indefinitely and that the State formally and openly gives up any attempt to balance its budget or limit its outlay by considerations of money". Similarly with regard to his plan for a welfare state, we are told by his daughter and biographer: "To the critics who inquired 'Can we pay for it?' the impatient reply was given, 'We can always pay for wars, this one costs £15 million a day. We will just have to afford the Beveridge Plan'.""

"Beveridge loved parties and recreation as much as he loved work and conversation. He gave much hospitality in The Lodgings, and there was always gusto and gaiety and some challenge. I saw a lot of him after his retirement in 1954. I had come to love the now benign Beveridge. He retained a sort of boyishness and excitement, and his charm and tact could be consummate."

"William Beveridge, architect of the modern welfare state, understood the danger that people might settle down to life on benefits, so proposed compulsory re-training schemes. And realising the even greater risks for school-leavers, who were not used to earning a wage, his report argued that "for boys and girls there should ideally be no unconditional benefit at all"."

"William Beveridge reads today like an Old Testament prophet: full of moral declamation and visionary objective. His 1942 report set goals to attack the five giant evils: Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness. The ecstatic reception of his report (or at least the abridged version) was the response of a society in the midst of an existential war, still traumatised by the scourge of unemployment in the previous decade."

"He understood that his plan would be immeasurably strengthened by broad public support. So he shaped his proposals around the principle that "benefit in return for contributions, rather than free allowances from the State, is what the people of Britain desire". Everyone would put something in, and everyone would get something out. Beveridge appealed both to altruism and self-interest. This is often described as a welfare "contract" or "bargain". But that would be to misunderstand why the welfare state used to be so popular. As the Labour MP Jon Cruddas argues, it was popular because it represented an emotional connection, a way of thinking about the type of society that Britain was after the war — a covenant between each to look after all."

"The new liberals...wanted an "unservile state" which took on only those welfare functions which would liberate the citizenry into citizenship. Lord Beveridge was a fine example of the breed, imbued with what Mrs Thatcher might hail as Victorian values, particularly a strong sense of social responsibility and a tremendous emphasis on the relationship between freedom, knowledge and self-control."

"On my experience of his later years at least, while he was the greatest administrative genius I have seen he was almost certainly the worst administrator. He could not get on with his fellow administrators... He did not really understand politics, still less politicians, and in his tidy, administrative mind there was not always enough place for human reactions and human frailties... He was a hard master, but he certainly taught one of his research assistants the meaning of work, and the need for a thorough attack on the facts before one jumped into any theories about a subject."