It is in Britain’s DNA that everyone should have a fair chance in life. Yet too often demography is destiny in our country. Being born poor often leads to a lifetime of poverty. Poor schools ease people into poor jobs. Advantage and disadvantage cascade down the generations. Over decades we have become a wealthier society but we have struggled to become a fairer one.
Compared with many other developed nations the UK has high levels of child poverty and low levels of social mobility. Ours is a highly unequal society – where, even after tax and benefits, the top tenth of the working age population enjoys as much income as the whole bottom half. Gaps in income are in turn dwarfed by gaps in wealth. The top tenth of households has 77 times the wealth of the bottom tenth. When one in six children – 2.3 million – is officially classified as poor, and absolute poverty is increasing, it exacts a high social price. There is an economic price too in wasted potential and lower growth.
The global financial crisis has brought these concerns to the fore. In its wake a new public consensus has begun to emerge that unearned wealth for a few at the top, growing insecurity for many in the middle, and stalled life chances for those at the bottom is not a viable social proposition for Britain. As birth not worth has become more a determinant of life chances, higher social mobility – reducing the extent to which a person’s class or income is dependent on the class or income of their parents – has become the new holy grail of public policy. This is a development I regard as most welcome.
The job of the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission that I chair is to assess, candidly and independently, whether what this and future Governments actually do, as distinct from what they say, is helping or hindering the prospect of Britain becoming a more mobile society. Of course, there are many things determining life chances that are way beyond the reach of government: individual temperament, family life, social attitudes. And there are many questions that other institutions in civil society – employers, professions, universities to name but three - have to answer if social progress is to be achieved. That is why the Commission’s focus is also on the policy and practice of all those institutions that can make such an important contribution to improving and equalising life chances.
This blog is one of the places we will be sharing our activities, engaging with the public, communicating our findings and advocating for government and others to do more. On it, you’ll hear from me and the Commission’s other nine members as well as from the Secretariat that supports us.
I hope you find it interesting, and we have the chance to engage meaningfully with you on these very important issues.
2 comments
Comment by Sam Spruce posted on
As per usual your conscious and expressed "intentions" are really very noble. However the 'a priori' assumption is that everyone could theoretically climb aboard the luxury yacht that is the middle class. Unfortunately that is an impossibility. What is required is that the wealth gap be reduced. The whole notion that poor people are a drain on society and therefore should have less and the wealthy are the movers and shakers and so they clearly 'deserve' more is divisive nonsense. It is not about how 'poor' people climb up the ladder in a ruthless and competitive culture but rather how to act inclusively as a homogeneous society where everyone is valued and has the basics necessary to be part of the culture. You say "I hope you find it interesting, and we have the chance to engage meaningfully with you on these very important issues." I say "I hope you mean that."
Comment by Brigida posted on
Excellent post but I was wondering if you could write a litte more on this topic?
I'd be very grateful if you could elaborate a little bit more.
Cheers!