Skip to main content

Social Mobility – The New Lie: ‘Dulce et decorum est pro patria pauperibus’.


Time for some classical logic?
Mobility Commission: A tactical withdrawal or simply running away?

The very public resignation of all of the board members of the Social Mobility Commission was painful to watch. The events today have highlighted the profound discomfort that many of us have about the state of our nation and our sense of fair play and equality. We are watching the country stagnate as able talent is set aside on the grounds of being ‘disadvantaged’. We are truly living in a poorer place. Alan Milburn and colleagues finally seem to have woken up to the reality that there is no will within Government to address a deep-rooted problem that affects the whole of the UK. Why they waited till right up to the end to run away, or execute a tactical withdrawal, is disturbing. Indeed, it is now apparent that the UK Government never took Social Mobility seriously. Instead, the Social Mobility Commission appears to be there to cover up the real intentions of a crudely drawn social agenda that has been ‘coloured in’ by loans and fees that subjugate the poorest through debt for most of their working lives.

Is social mobility a serious aim of Government?


It is obvious that the Commission has been under-resourced from the outset. Despite this, a small team has produced much over the years to embarrass governments. They surely have worked very hard. That they have failed in their mission is perhaps explained by them not really being expected to succeed in the first place. They became lost in the ‘long grass’ they were sent into to find a ‘solution’. Originally allowing for “up to ten commissioners” its web site (1) currently states that, in addition to Alan Milburn and Gillian Shephard; “There are 6 other commissioners from business, academia and the voluntary sector”. Yet, as of yesterday, there were only two other commissioners backed by only eight staff. This has been the case for a long time and it is pitiful support for such an enormous challenge. There are many more and better resourced commissions covering resources from forestry to security cameras. Our human resources deserve better. Early in 2016 the Government advertised for four other commissioners to help. This has not been followed through since April 2016. The future of the Commission now seems to be in doubt and comments today by the Education Minister, Justine Greening (coincidentally appointed in July 2016) that the government was doing a "massive amount” fails to convince or reassure. It merely exposes the extent of the neglect since there has been ample time to appoint more commissioners. One can only conclude that the Government has been dragging its heels.

Roots of confusion:


The Social Mobility Commission goes back some years and has its roots in the Child Poverty Act 2010, and latterly the Welfare Reform Act 2012 ‘Life Chances’ and Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016. Originally called the ‘Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, it changed emphasis later to become ‘The Social Mobility Commission’.


Its current remit is very constrained in being expected to:

· Promote social mobility in England;

· On request, provide advice to Ministers about how to improve social mobility in England;

· Report on the progress being made towards improving social mobility in the United Kingdom.

This remit largely constrains it to the borders of England and its problems. Indeed this confusion is reflected in a major report from June of this year ‘Time For Change: An Assessment of Government Policies on Social Mobility 1997-2017’ that shed light on the massive challenge for England and Wales (2). The very recent detailed report ‘State of the Nation 2017: Social Mobility in Great Britain’ was a stinging attack on the inequalities that persist in Great Britain (3). Although part of the United Kingdom, Northern Ireland was omitted. Perhaps looking under the Northern Ireland social inequality rock is going too far. The confusion regarding the geographical boundaries of the Commission’s remit indicate a reluctance to address what is a UK wide problem. This must be sorted out first surely.

Problem: Social Mobility. Solution: Equality for all.

The so called problem of social mobility is not easily defined. Thus a solution seems elusive to those that show little understanding of what the Commission has revealed. Instead of concentrating on ‘Social Mobility’, as if there might be a simple solution, the focus should be on positively seeking out to offer equal chances to all of our citizens. This means ensuring ‘equality of opportunity’ at every level. That is simpler to understand and to resolve. Mobility will then take care of itself. Why should anyone accept that they can be deliberately held back by their circumstances rather than their abilities; where ‘doing your best’ will not be good enough; where you must also pay for, and then live in debt, for being offered a chance to ‘succeed’.

The constraining factor in the end is resource. The gap in resource is easy to understand for someone who grows up in a household with not much to play with; few toys, no books, little internet access, no encouragement, not much food and few clothes and feeling cold in the winter. The notion of equality not mobility lies at the core of the issue. Promoting social mobility to a generation without equality of resources is like deploying urine in a gale.

The government has invented a New Lie for the people of an unequal and divisively ‘poor country’. The government thinks we are gullible enough to believe that it is easy to understand.

‘Dulce et decorum est pro patria pauperibus’.

With due respect to the citizens of Northern Ireland, now facing a political and social catastrophe engineered by the UK Government, the last word goes to Alan Milburn:

“The country seems to be in the grip of a self-reinforcing spiral of ever-growing division. That takes a spatial form, not just a social one. There is a stark social mobility lottery in Britain today”.

1. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/social-mobility-commission/about#who-we-are
2. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/662744/State_of_the_Nation_2017_-_Social_Mobility_in_Great_Britain.pdf
3. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/662744/State_of_the_Nation_2017_-_Social_Mobility_in_Great_Britain.pdf

Mike Larkin, retired from Queen's University Belfast after 37 years teaching Microbiology, Biochemistry and Genetics.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Bristol University student death: Inquest raises many concerns

The inquest into the tragic death of Bristol University Student, Ben Murray, took place this week; almost 12 months since he took his own life.* The coroner recorded a verdict of suicide earlier today but warned the University that it should make detailed inquiries after each death (BBC News ‘University of Bristol told to learn lessons after Ben Murray's suicide’ ). The anniversary of his death is this Sunday the 5th of May. Spring comes as a time of hope for most people but for others it can be a time of considerable anxiety and stress. This is especially the case for students approaching the examination period. As a close colleague of mine often pointed out, “they are all someone’s child”. Our hearts go out to the family of Ben Murray and friends as the inquest goes over again the events of a year ago. The pain is further exacerbated by media reports that he had little or no support in what was his first year at university. The BBC reported that ‘Bristol University studen

A radical overhaul of examinations is needed as soon as possible: UPDATE

UPDATE 23rd March 2021 Since this idea was posted in January, there has been considerable thought across the sector about what would be best for the future. These are very well laid out in a collection of short essays reported last week by the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI). The twelve essays, from different authors and different perspectives, in  ‘Where next for university admissions? ’ are edited by Rachel Hewitt  who sets out the many pitfalls surrounding examinations and university admissions. It seems there are those in favour of post qualification admission (PQA) to university as it should help the least advantaged students. However, arguments against this are presented that means caution must be taken. A powerful response to the HEPI report by the  'The Fair Access Coalition: 10 requirements for a fair admissions process' adds further to the debate. The suggestions are sensible but falls short on demanding adequate resources for students throughout their studi

Higher Education and the ‘intelligent plumbers’ theory

A common tactic when found out is to divert attention elsewhere. The release of student data from 2018/19 by the Department for Education (DfE) yesterday, ‘Widening participation in higher education: 2020’ and ‘Statistics: further education and skills’ tells the same sorry tale of a wide gap in access to universities between the most and least advantaged students. To divert attention from these stark facts in advance, the government used a diversionary tactic by attacking the effectiveness of universities and thus pointing the blame for poor social mobility someplace else. Advocating improvements in further education, something cut back by the same regime for years, hides the real intention. It seems that class divisions will be further exacerbated and any concession to universities fuelling improved social mobility has been abandoned. But the flawed theory is that at least the elite rulers will get access to intelligent plumbers . Three years ago, I heard a leading ‘You