🔗 Share this article

As the struggling Tories convenes in its conference city for its yearly gathering, it has much to ponder regarding its path forward. It’s not even clear if a clear direction is available. We are in challenging circumstances for a political party that now has little, if anything, new or unique to say to voters.

The Missed Opportunity

It could have been markedly improved if real advances had been made on an agenda that resonates with people throughout the UK: Levelling up. However Boris Johnson’s government lacked the basic understanding on how to convert his zeitgeisty rhetoric on levelling up into actual implementation. Over twenty-four months after the 2019 election, it argued over what the term even meant.

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 concept I originated and used at the DfE to talk about social mobility. It was our departmental mantra, and its definition is unambiguous: social mobility is the method by which we attain fair chances – not by taking chances away from those who already have it, but rather by providing options to those that don’t.

Essential Principle

The other key DfE phrase we used, “potential is equally shared around the UK, yet chances are not”, again was a purposeful phrase, embodying the dual components of a social mobility strategy. To begin with, potential shared equally but not developed consistently through our education system. Second, opportunities not spread evenly by the private sector or our economy. As a result, schools and companies were key to achieving improved equality of opportunity. This was an priority about the societal structure of our country – supporting human talent and linking them with prospects.

What Levelling Up Became

What did levelling up turn into under Johnson’s Conservatives? Local investment schemes managed by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. Decorative floral displays and redeveloped traffic systems. A white paper was published almost thirty-six months after the Prime Minister took office, which saw current strategies relabelled under the new levelling up banner.

Therefore, a comprehensive equal opportunity plan went undeveloped, as well as all the change that it might have driven – in funding, commerce, fiscal strategy, tax and in local regeneration. Additionally, in learning, including a university system that has become a punchbag for politicians of all stripes – although it remains the most powerful engine of upward movement for young working-class people, personally, this country has had over the past 30 years. Possibly the only engine of social mobility, working extensively.

Why Hope Matters

Aspiration is essential for our country to prosper. For hope to exist, there needs to be a believable feeling that dedication and outcome are connected; that if people aspire, they can succeed. For all administrations, being able to create a outlook of positivity about the future is critical. Analysis by the Institute for Policy Research at the academic establishment and others, published last month, showed that the DfE’s 12 “opportunity areas” I introduced as education secretary – locally targeted strategies to improving education outcomes – led to youth in those communities being up to nearly one-fifth more positive about their life ahead than those in equivalent locations without these schemes in place. The research confirms: just making an genuine beginning on fair opportunity strategies can quickly and positively change how people view their prospects.

Missed Opportunities

Unaware of these findings, and in the midst of its post-Johnson leadership contest, in autumn 2022, the ruling party closed opportunity areas down. What reason would someone in those communities vote for a organization that took that action? The targeted programme is one example of what could have been a transformative Conservative government agenda on social mobility, but that possibility was completely wasted. Methods such as this can create belief and drive. In contrast, as the Conservatives learned, breaking the promise of equal opportunity is the most expensive error any government can make. The public penalized the government for its failure but, above all, for its unfulfilled commitments on social mobility.

The Current Landscape

At present the baton on social mobility and equal chances has been transferred to a Labour government. The previous terminology has been cast off. The current administration has its own political rhetoric of “removing obstacles to success”. The political group that is increasingly displacing the failing Conservative party, the alternative party, also has its own terminology – “industrial revival”. It’s a phrase to talk about additional chances in communities like the one I grew up in, in South Yorkshire. It promises that an industrial past can revive into an revitalized economy.

To the electorate, it must seem like a repetitive cycle. Similar challenge, alternative phrasing. Yet, currently, little improvement.

Lessons for the Future

Should the current and alternative parties want to prevent the same fate, both these parties should take lessons from the Conservatives’ failure on levelling up; that social mobility rhetoric is easy to say, but effective implementation of more equal results is much harder. The UK’s endemically weak equal opportunity remains the central problem for our country, with the next generation unable to get a good job beginning, those laboring in employment with minimal progress after the living expenses are met, and individuals nationwide without any genuine belief their children will be able to do any better in life than they have.

Elected officials can discuss improved access however much they like. But where is the party that has the comprehensive policy agenda on social mobility? I observe no such party. Whoever gets there first, succeeds. Not just for their organization, but, more importantly, for a entire nation that has desperately requires fair chances so badly.