🔗 Share this article

While the beleaguered Tories convenes in its conference city for its yearly gathering, it has much to ponder regarding its next steps. There is uncertainty if a viable path remains open. We are in tough times for a governing group that now has very little, if anything, new or unique to say to voters.

The Missed Opportunity

The situation might have been vastly better if concrete steps had been made on an policy focus that resonates with people nationwide: Social mobility. But the previous administration did not possess the first clue on how to convert the trendy talk on social mobility into concrete action. For the two years after the general election, it discussed what the term truly represented.

I was perplexed, because I’d already told Johnson what levelling up meant when we originally talked about it during the contest for party leader. The expression was language I created and used at the education ministry to talk about social mobility. It served as our guiding principle, and its meaning is straightforward: levelling up is the method by which we realize equality of opportunity – without removing chances away from those who are already advantaged, but rather by providing chances to those that don’t.

Fundamental Idea

An additional vital ministry expression we used, “talent is spread evenly across our country, but opportunity is not”, again was a deliberate expression, embodying the two halves of a equal opportunity plan. Initially, potential shared equally but not developed consistently through our learning institutions. Furthermore, chances not distributed fairly by businesses or our economy. Thus, schools and companies were crucial to achieving improved equality of opportunity. This constituted an priority about the societal structure of our country – supporting individual capabilities and connecting them to opportunities.

The Reality of Implementation

How did the social mobility agenda become under Johnson’s Conservatives? Local investment schemes administered out of the the relevant ministry. Street beautification and rearranged intersections. A white paper was published a significant period after Johnson became leader, which saw ongoing initiatives rebadged under the fresh social mobility slogan.

Therefore, a broader social mobility agenda went unpursued, as well as all the improvement that it might have driven – in investment, business, fiscal strategy, revenue and in place-making. And, of course, in learning, including a higher education sector that has become a punchbag for elected officials – although it remains the strongest driver of social mobility for youth from modest backgrounds, personally, this country has had in recent decades. Perhaps the only engine of social mobility, functioning widely.

Why Hope Matters

Aspiration is essential for our country to prosper. For hope to exist, there needs to be a believable feeling that effort and reward are connected; that if people aspire, they can attain. For political leadership, being able to create a sense of optimism about the years ahead is crucial. Analysis by the Institute for Policy Research at the university and others, published last month, showed that the ministry’s focus zones I introduced as education secretary – locally targeted strategies to improving education outcomes – led to youth in those areas being up to nearly one-fifth more hopeful about their prospects than those in comparable communities without these initiatives in place. The data shows: just making an authentic start on pro-social mobility policy can rapidly and effectively change how people feel about their prospects.

Missed Opportunities

Unaware of these findings, and in the throes of its successor selection process, in that period, the Conservative government closed opportunity areas down. Why would anyone in those regions vote for a organization that did that? This specific initiative is a single instance of what had the potential to be a revolutionary Conservative government agenda on social mobility, but that opportunity was hopelessly squandered. Strategies such as this can generate optimism and ambition. Conversely, as the Tories discovered, reneging on commitments of equal opportunity is the costliest mistake any government can make. The public punished the leadership for its incompetence but, primarily, for its failed pledges on social mobility.

Present Circumstances

At present the responsibility on social mobility and fair access has been transferred to a Labour government. The previous terminology has been cast off. The current administration has its own political rhetoric of “breaking down the barriers to opportunity”. The organization that is steadily supplanting the failing Tories, the alternative party, also has its own language – “economic renewal”. This expression to talk about new opportunities in areas like the one I grew up in, in South Yorkshire. It claims that an former economic strength can be reborn into an modern manufacturing sector.

For voters, it must seem like a déjà vu experience. Same issue, alternative phrasing. But – as yet – no results.

The Way Forward

Whether the government and opposition want to prevent the identical outcome, the respective organizations should learn from the Tories’ mistakes on levelling up; that fair chance language is one thing, but actual achievement of more equal results is far more challenging. Our nation’s persistently low social mobility remains the central problem for our country, with the next generation unable to get a good job beginning, those laboring in occupations with minimal progress after the living expenses are met, and people across the country without any real hope their next generation will be able to do improve in life than they have.

Elected officials can mention improved access however much they like. But where is the party that has the comprehensive policy agenda on equal opportunity? I observe no such party. Whichever party succeeds initially, prevails. Not just for their organization, but, more importantly, for a entire nation that has never needed equal access so desperately.