🔗 Share this article

As the existentially challenged Conservative party meets in Manchester for its yearly gathering, it has much to ponder regarding its path forward. There is uncertainty if a clear direction remains open. We are in tough times for a governing group that now has very little, if anything, new or unique to say to the public.

The Missed Opportunity

It could have been vastly better if real advances had been made on an policy focus that matters to people throughout the UK: Levelling up. But the former leadership did not possess the slightest idea on how to transform the trendy talk on social mobility into concrete action. Over twenty-four months after the general election, it argued over what the phrase truly represented.

I found it bizarre, because I had previously explained to the Prime Minister what levelling up entailed when we first spoke about it during the contest for party leader. This terminology was a term I developed and used at the DfE to talk about life chances. It served as our departmental mantra, and its meaning is unambiguous: social mobility is the method by which we achieve equal access – without removing prospects away from those who possess it, but rather by providing chances to those that don’t.

The Core Concept

Another crucial DfE phrase we used, “talent is spread evenly around the UK, however access isn’t”, represented another a deliberate expression, representing the two parts of a social mobility strategy. First, potential shared equally but not cultivated evenly through our education system. Additionally, chances not distributed fairly by businesses or our market. As a result, schools and companies were essential to achieving improved equality of opportunity. This represented an mission about the community framework of our country – investing in individual capabilities and providing access to opportunities.

What Levelling Up Became

What did the social mobility agenda become under the previous government? Local investment schemes overseen from the DLUHC. Decorative floral displays and redeveloped traffic systems. A government strategy was released almost thirty-six months after the leadership change, which saw current strategies repackaged under the recently branded agenda.

Therefore, a comprehensive equal opportunity plan went ignored, as well as all the change that it might have driven – in funding, business, financial planning, revenue and in local regeneration. Moreover, in learning, including a higher education sector that has become a target for leaders across parties – although it remains the most powerful engine of upward movement for individuals from less privileged homes, including myself, this country has had throughout modern times. Possibly the sole mechanism of equal opportunity, functioning widely.

The Importance of Aspiration

Hope is crucial for our country to succeed. For hope to exist, there needs to be a realistic expectation that dedication and outcome are linked; that if people dream big, they can achieve. For any government, being able to foster a feeling of hope about the years ahead is critical. Research by the research body at Bath University and others, newly available, showed that the ministry’s focus zones I introduced as education secretary – community-focused methods to improving education outcomes – led to students in those areas being up to nearly one-fifth more positive about their future than those in equivalent locations without these initiatives in place. The data shows: just making an genuine beginning on pro-social mobility policy can quickly and positively change how people feel about their destiny.

Missed Opportunities

Ignoring this evidence, and in the midst of its post-Johnson leadership contest, in that period, the ruling party ended the initiatives. Why should any person in those regions vote for a political group that made that decision? The opportunity areas policy is a clear case of what could have been a game-changing Tory policy platform on social mobility, but that opportunity was completely wasted. Approaches such as this can create belief and drive. On the other hand, as the Conservatives found out, reneging on commitments of social mobility is the most expensive error any government can make. Voters held accountable the government for its ineffectiveness but, primarily, for its unfulfilled commitments on social mobility.

Present Circumstances

Currently the responsibility on social mobility and equal chances has been transferred to a opposition party. The previous terminology has been cast off. The new government has its own policy language of “eliminating hurdles to advancement”. The political group that is gradually replacing the failing incumbents, the challenger, also has its own terminology – “industrial revival”. The terminology to talk about new opportunities in areas like the one I was raised in, in my hometown. It promises that an industrial past can reincarnate into an revitalized economy.

For voters, it must appear as a déjà vu experience. Same issue, alternative phrasing. Yet, currently, little improvement.

Lessons for the Future

If Labour and Reform UK want to avoid the identical outcome, the respective organizations should learn from the previous government’s errors on social mobility; that fair chance language is simple terminology, but successful delivery of more equal results is significantly more difficult. Our nation’s endemically weak life chances remains the key issue for our country, with the next generation unable to get a good job beginning, those laboring in occupations with little to show after the housing costs are covered, and people across the country without any real hope their children will be able to do improve in life than they have.

Elected officials can mention improved access however much they like. However, which party has the party that has the complete plan on life chances? I observe no such party. Whichever party succeeds initially, wins. Not just for themselves, but, significantly, for a entire nation that has urgently needs fair chances so urgently.