Still less equal than others, by Jim Murphy

23 Feb 06
Social mobility has stalled, despite the government's best efforts to raise the aspirations of children from working-class homes. Effective reform of local services will be crucial to turning this around

24 February 2006

Social mobility has stalled, despite the government's best efforts to raise the aspirations of children from working-class homes. Effective reform of local services will be crucial to turning this around

This generation of politicians is the first since the war to govern in a period of stalled social mobility. The policies of the 1970s and 1980s left a legacy of stagnation of social change that this government has relentlessly tried to overcome since it first came into office.

The growth of the middle class has stopped and 'relative social mobility' has declined: the odds of working-class children earning considerably more than their parents have worsened.

Our vision of public service reform is rooted in a commitment to social mobility, equality of opportunity and citizen empowerment. But this is not a simple focus on creating conditions to succeed. The government also firmly believes that we have a primary duty to tackle the problem of absolute poverty.

We have to continue focusing on the personalisation of services and empowering individuals to be active in shaping services rather than passive consumers. There has been too much focus on a philosophical debate around choice. Choice in public services is a tool for progressive change because it is one of the ways in which provision is improved. Resources go to the better providers, less effective organisations are exposed and action can be taken to improve failing services.

The simplest criticism of choice is that it excludes disadvantaged people who, for whatever reason, cannot exercise that choice effectively. We cannot brush that charge aside. The infrastructure has to be there for the disadvantaged, from accessible information to a public transport system that works. The alternative to this is choice as a tool of regressive politics to entrench social division: the historical choice that allows the middle class access to better services.

We know from studies that the main barriers to and determinants of relative social mobility are: educational attainment; the family; and the strategies families adopt to support their children, particularly in early childhood. The most important of these include access to financial, social and cultural capital, ie, not just money but values, behaviours and networks of contacts that affect access to opportunities, attitudes, expectations and aspirations.

We also know that the physical environment is important: the neighbourhood and the impact of area deprivation are issues local authorities are all too familiar with.

Central government is working in partnership with local government to narrow inequalities of opportunity for all children, and to improve the full range of local services for children.

But local authorities have the chance to see the whole picture, to provide the services to the child and the support for the adult. By using the resources at their disposal, they can affect outcomes. For example, they can deliver accessible childcare while giving parental support through classes or other means, and skills training through local colleges and employers.

There is also a role for the voluntary sector and social enterprise here. We must consider whether we can widen their involvement through simple adjustments. Some of these are contractual, such as security of funding and long-term capacity building. Others are cultural, such as training and awareness.

We also have to recognise that there are limits to the power of government. Opportunity in itself is not enough. We need to foster a sense of personal responsibility and a transformation in aspirations — which can come about only if people are confident that there are real opportunities out there.

Modern society will reach its potential only when citizens individually and collectively are able to use their knowledge and capacity to shape their lives and their communities. At a local level, we need a stronger framework of opportunity and responsibility in which to express these rights — double devolution, not just to the town hall but to neighbourhoods and individual citizens.

This sort of empowerment can take a range of forms, such as individual budgets for social care, choice-based lettings, neighbourhood management and better consultation with councils.

Since 1997, the government has introduced a range of policies designed to reduce the barriers to social mobility: substantial additional investment in education, childcare and early years development; a commitment to eliminate child poverty by 2020 and substantial additional support for families with children, particularly the poorest; innovative measures such as the Child Trust Fund to give young people improved access to financial capital; and action to reduce worklessness (such as the New Deal) and to increase income from work (such as the national minimum wage).

Reforming services at the local level has a vital part to play in reinvigorating social mobility in the UK. So let's make sure we are the last generation to have lived and governed in a period of stalled social mobility.

Jim Murphy is parliamentary secretary at the Cabinet Office

PFfeb2006

Did you enjoy this article?

AddToAny

Top