In 1911 there were a million miners in England and Wales, spread over seven major coalfields. They constituted at least 30 per cent of the electorate in thirty-six constituencies, more than 10 per cent in another thirty-eight. Before 1906, most of these seats were consistently Liberal. Labour's challenge in these areas could thus be of major significance. However, despite Labour's post-war success in mining areas, there was no sign of a simple and inevitable transfer of support from the Liberals to Labour even by 1914. Liberal strength was based on more than a (waning) Nonconformity and trade union support which was passing to Labour. Regions had differing economic interests, and their miners different practices and traditions. How parties acted politically and represented or interpreted these facts was of considerable importance. Popular political attitudes did not automatically change once the MFGB affiliated to the Labour party in 1909. It was one thing to convince the leading figures in the MFGB and its constituent elements, another to convince local members to become active in Labour organisations or to vote for Labour candidates. They needed convincing, and ‘union politics’ were not on their own a sufficiently powerful argument. To imply an inexorable march of Labour overstates the power of the pre-war Labour dynamic, and fails to put sufficient stress on the varying elements behind a regionalised, and partial, pre-war Labour advance in the mining areas.

Initially, Labour made most headway in the North-West (Section I).