🔗 Share this article

As the beleaguered Conservative party gathers in Manchester for its annual party conference, it has much to ponder regarding its path forward. There is uncertainty if a viable path remains open. These are tough times for a governing group that now has almost nothing, if anything, fresh or distinctive to say to the public.

What Could Have Been

The situation might have been markedly improved if real advances had been made on an priority that is important for people across the country: Equal opportunity. But Boris Johnson’s government hadn’t got the slightest idea on how to turn his zeitgeisty rhetoric on levelling up into concrete action. For the two years after the general election, it debated what the term truly represented.

It seemed strange to me, because I’d already told Johnson what social mobility entailed when we first spoke about it during his leadership campaign. This terminology was a concept I originated and used at the DfE to talk about social mobility. This became our guiding principle, and its definition is unambiguous: social mobility is the approach by which we attain equal access – not through reducing prospects away from those who possess it, but rather by extending options to those that lack them.

Fundamental Idea

An additional vital DfE phrase we used, “potential is equally shared across our country, yet chances are not”, represented another a deliberate expression, embodying the dual components of a social mobility strategy. To begin with, ability distributed uniformly but not developed consistently through our schools and colleges. Additionally, access not provided uniformly by employers or our market. Thus, schools and companies were essential to achieving better life chances. This constituted an mission about the community framework of our country – fostering people’s potential and connecting them to prospects.

The Reality of Implementation

How did levelling up evolve into under the Tory administration? Regional development money managed by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. Decorative floral displays and rearranged intersections. A white paper was published nearly three years after Johnson became leader, which saw existing policy approaches rebadged under the recently branded agenda.

As a result, a wider fairness strategy went unpursued, as well as all the change that it might have driven – in funding, enterprise, financial planning, taxation and in community development. Moreover, in schooling, including a higher education sector that has become a target for politicians of all stripes – even though it remains the primary vehicle of life improvement for individuals from less privileged homes, personally, this country has had throughout modern times. Maybe the primary source of fair chances, operating at scale.

Why Hope Matters

Hope is crucial for our country to thrive. To foster ambition, there needs to be a credible sense that effort and reward are connected; that if people dream big, they can achieve. For political leadership, being able to create a sense of optimism about the future is crucial. Analysis by the Institute for Policy Research at the academic establishment and others, recently released, showed that the DfE’s 12 “opportunity areas” I established during my tenure – place-based approaches to enhancing learning results – led to young people in those communities being up to a significant margin more optimistic about their future than those in similar areas without these schemes in place. The data shows: just making an sincere effort on fair opportunity strategies can quickly and positively change how people view their future.

Lost Potential

Unaware of these findings, and in the throes of its new leader election, in September 2022, the ruling party closed opportunity areas down. What reason would someone in those areas vote for a organization that did that? The opportunity areas policy is one example of what might have become a transformative administration strategy on social mobility, but that chance was totally misused. Approaches such as this can generate optimism and ambition. In contrast, as the Conservatives found out, reneging on commitments of fair chances is the biggest blunder any government can make. The public held accountable the administration for its incompetence but, perhaps most of all, for its unfulfilled commitments on levelling up.

Present Circumstances

Now the mandate on life chances and fair access has passed to a new administration. The old slogan has been discarded. The current administration has its own public messaging of “removing obstacles to success”. The political group that is increasingly displacing the failing Conservative party, the challenger, also has its own language – “reindustrialisation”. It’s a phrase to talk about fresh prospects in communities like the one I grew up in, in the region. It suggests that an historical manufacturing base can be reborn into an revitalized economy.

To the electorate, it must feel like a déjà vu experience. Same issue, alternative phrasing. However, so far, no progress.

Lessons for the Future

Should the current and alternative parties want to prevent the similar destiny, the respective organizations should take lessons from the Tories’ mistakes on levelling up; that social mobility rhetoric is simple terminology, but actual achievement of improved opportunities is far more challenging. Our nation’s endemically weak social mobility remains the key issue for our country, with youth unable to get a proper professional launch, those putting in effort in occupations with minimal progress after the housing costs are covered, and people across the country without any genuine belief their next generation will be able to do improve in life than they have.

Politicians can mention improved access repeatedly. Yet where is the organization that has the complete plan on life chances? I observe no such party. The first to achieve this, wins. Not only for their party, but, significantly, for a entire nation that has urgently needs equality of opportunity so badly.