Why did attitudes towards PH reforms change?

• Raising social concerns:

  Housing conditions were reported by writers and journalists. Contemporary novels written by, e.g. Charles Dickins and Elizabeth Gaskell, create pen-pictures of the w/c conditions in mid-Victorian London.
• Raising social concerns:

  Dickens focused on London, where he had first-hand experiences with poverty. His books were extremely successful, reaching a wide readership partly because they were serialised and so more readily accessible than if they had been published in single volumes.
• Raising social concerns:

  Elizabeth Gaskell, lived in Manchester and witnessed desperate poverty all around her. She wrote movingly of the impact of poor living conditions in her novel 'Mary Barton' that was published in 1848.
• Raising social concerns:

  The conditions described by authors matched with the findings of the investigate journalist Henry Mayhew.
• Raising social concerns:

  Arnold Bennett, at the beginning of the 20th century, wrote a series of novels that had the housing and health of the Staffordshire pottery towns as their backdrop.
• Raising social concerns:

  George Orwell, in his 1937 novel 'The Road to Wigan Pier', documented the bleak living conditions of many w/c people in Yorkshire and Lancashire.
• Economic imperatives:


  Play a large part in changing people's attitudes. It was the same with regard to public health reform.
• Economic imperatives:


  Factory managers, mill owners, bankers, treasury officials and all those affected by public health issues gradually became aware, not only of the cost of reforms themselves, but of the cost of not undertaking reform.
• Economic imperatives:


  The cost of public health could be calculated against the cost of losing a productive worker to one of the so-called 'dirty' diseases.
• Economic imperatives:


  The cost to the nation of the Poor Law, when looked at in terms of maintaining workhouses and paying for relief, was escalating. When local officials set this against the cost of public health reform, many could see a reduction in the poor rate occurring as a result of providing good drains and clean water. Any reduction in rates and taxes would resonate well with voters.
• Economic imperatives:


  A major consideration in persuading people of the need for public health reform had to be, not only the overall cost, but also which sections of society would be paying for clean water and drains for all. The cost of connecting a house to a water supply and to sewerage systems fell upon the householder. The informed m/c, paid out for their own comfort and health, it was by no means clear that they should pay for the poor to have similar facilities.
• Economic imperatives:


  Landlords of the tenements and lodgings, should they be persuaded to link the properties they were letting out to the new drains and water supplies, would inevitably increase rents to cover costs - and the very poor could not pay. This would throw more of the poor into pauperism.
• Economic imperatives:


  There was a way out of this seemingly vicious cycle, and that was for local authorities to step in and take over responsibility for the public health of those living within their catchment area. This did happen but it happened slowly as economic and political imperatives altered the minds and attitudes of those in a position to bring about change.
• Economic imperatives:


  The economic imperative was central to changing attitudes to the provision of public health. The economic benefit derived from a fit workforce was persuasive than any moral imperative.
• Economic imperatives:


  If the initial investment produced an improved workforce, then, so the persuasive argument went, it was worth the initial outlay.
• Economic imperatives:


  The Second Boer War (1899-1902) had a specific impact, as army recruitment showed up the poor physical condition of working men in industrial towns.
• Economic imperatives:


  Gradually, attitudes were changing and this impacted on the role of central government.