🔗 Share this article

While the beleaguered Conservative party gathers in Manchester for its annual party conference, it has a lot to reflect on regarding its next steps. It’s not even clear if a road forward is available. These are tough times for a political party that now has almost nothing, if anything, fresh or distinctive to say to the public.

An Alternate Reality

Things could have turned out so different if real advances had been made on an agenda that matters to people throughout the UK: Equal opportunity. But the previous administration did not possess the basic understanding on how to turn the popular slogan on social mobility into concrete action. Over twenty-four months after the 2019 election, it argued over what the phrase truly represented.

I found it bizarre, because I’d already told the Prime Minister what social mobility entailed when we first spoke about it during the contest for party leader. This terminology was language I created and used at the education ministry to talk about social mobility. It was our core mission, and its meaning is straightforward: social mobility is the approach by which we achieve equal access – not by taking prospects away from those who are already advantaged, but rather by expanding opportunities to those that lack them.

The Core Concept

Another crucial education department term we used, “talent is spread evenly throughout the nation, however access isn’t”, served as a deliberate expression, reflecting the two halves of a social mobility strategy. Initially, potential shared equally but not nurtured uniformly through our schools and colleges. Additionally, access not provided uniformly by businesses or our economy. Thus, learning and employment were essential to achieving improved equality of opportunity. This represented an agenda about the societal structure of our country – investing in human talent and connecting them to chances.

The Actual Outcome

What did the social mobility agenda turn into under Johnson’s Conservatives? Local investment schemes administered out of the DLUHC. Hanging baskets and reconfigured roundabouts and roads. A white paper was launched almost thirty-six months after the leadership change, which saw existing policy approaches repackaged under the recently branded agenda.

As a result, a broader social mobility agenda went undeveloped, as well as all the improvement that it might have driven – in funding, commerce, fiscal strategy, revenue and in community development. Additionally, in education, including a higher education sector that has become a target for elected officials – even though it remains the most powerful engine of social mobility for individuals from less privileged homes, personally, this country has had throughout modern times. Perhaps the primary source of social mobility, working extensively.

Why Hope Matters

Hope is crucial for our country to thrive. To foster ambition, there needs to be a realistic expectation that effort and reward are connected; that if people dream big, they can achieve. For political leadership, being able to foster a sense of optimism about the years ahead is critical. Research by the research body at the academic establishment and others, published last month, showed that the DfE’s 12 “opportunity areas” I launched while in office – community-focused methods to boosting academic achievement – led to youth in those areas being up to 18 percentage points more positive about their prospects than those in comparable communities without these initiatives in place. The research confirms: just making an genuine beginning on pro-social mobility policy can rapidly and effectively change how people perceive their destiny.

Lost Potential

Oblivious to this, and in the middle of its post-Johnson leadership contest, in that period, the Tory administration ended the initiatives. What reason would someone in those communities vote for a organization that did that? The opportunity areas policy is a clear case of what might have become a revolutionary administration strategy on social mobility, but that opportunity was hopelessly squandered. Approaches such as this can inspire hope and aspiration. On the other hand, as the ruling party learned, failing to deliver of equal opportunity is the costliest mistake any government can make. The electorate penalized the government for its incompetence but, primarily, for its broken promises on social mobility.

Present Circumstances

Currently the baton on life chances and fair access has been taken up by a Labour government. The levelling up rhetoric has been cast off. The current administration has its own public messaging of “eliminating hurdles to advancement”. The organization that is increasingly displacing the failing Tories, Reform UK, also has its own message – “reindustrialisation”. It’s a phrase to talk about new opportunities in communities like the one I was raised in, in South Yorkshire. It claims that an former economic strength can reincarnate into an modern manufacturing sector.

For voters, it must feel like a Groundhog Day-style loop. Identical problem, new terminology. However, so far, no progress.

Lessons for the Future

If Labour and Reform UK want to avoid the similar destiny, each group should understand the Tories’ mistakes on social mobility; that social mobility rhetoric is simple terminology, but effective implementation of fairer outcomes is significantly more difficult. Our nation’s persistently low social mobility remains the central problem for our country, with young people unable to get a decent career start, those working hard in occupations with little to show after the living expenses are met, and people across the country without any actual expectation their next generation will be able to do improve in life than they have.

Politicians can mention equal chances as much as they want. But where is the political group that has the complete plan on life chances? I observe no such party. Whichever party succeeds initially, succeeds. Not only for their party, but, crucially, for a complete society that has desperately requires fair chances so badly.