Labour is no longer the party of social mobility

The Bellman

Be fair: Labour has been really good for the social mobility of several generations of Labour MPs and their children (e.g. Baroness Jay), Lord Mandelson, the dozens of former trade unionists whose flabby arses now occasionally polish the bench-leather of the Upper House - when they bother to attend - and various not-dead-yet-national-treasure 'entertainers', to say nothing of President-Designate Blair and his one-time Deputy.

Andy Carpark

They protected the gifted in the Former Soviet Union. The British educational establishment would shoot the gifted given half the chance.

The country which routinely takes the top slot in the International Mathematical Olympiad with all its candidates winning Gold Medals and several gaining perfect scores is the People's Republic of China. The FSU, Vietnam and the former communist EU Accession States make up the chasing pack.

As a thoroughly sensible social democrat friend once opined to me wistfully, only the English could equate socialism with social envy.

The Access dogma is a feint and always has been. Hatred of excellence is intrinsic to and defining of the British left. As Conan Doyle said, mediocrity recognises nothing but itself.

ex-agent

"Labour is no longer the party of social mobility" ???

When was it ever?

Jeremy

Grammar schools were the ladders up which working class children could ascend - through academic achievement - from one social class to another. The fact that so many Labour politicians, who took this route themselves, then turned around and removed those ladders was a horrible betrayal, not just of the grammars and the opportunity for social mobility which they represented, but of the working class itself.

The results?

"Despite abolishing grammar schools, dumbing down GCSEs and A-levels (to create the illusion of rising standards in state schools)...bullying our best universities into accepting state-school students with below-par grades, social mobility is in retreat.“

If the Tories are serious about education then they must act in this area. They must take the opportunity to restore the grammars - and with them to restore genuine academic standards and achievement - and therebye re-introduce genuine social mobility based upon merit. Failure to act in this crucial area would constitute a further betrayal of our nation's youth. To leave things as they are would be to condemn future generations of our children to lifetimes of ignorance, illiteracy and low achievement. And that, in its turn, would contribute - as it has already contributed - to the further decline of our country.

Paul Wakeford

Actually this is pretty normal behaviour for the left tendency worldwide. Witness the power transfers in true believer states; Cuba (got the job from his brother) and North Korea (get the job from his dad).

logdon

The biggest hypocrites of the lot.

Banging on endlessly and emptily about equality.

Harman harming all by her lunatic attempts at dragging us all down to one level of mediocrity, thus defeating even the very idea of excellence. Or real aspiration.

HoL stuffed with the stinking corruption of politicaly expedient placemen

Take one glance at the innards of the Labour hierarchical machine where nepotism and connection is the key to success.

In other words they create their very own brothers old boy network. And we're expected to take anything they utter seriously?

Just look at them. Incompetent trougher’s all. Tribalist agitators and sychophantic aparatchiks.

The venality of these people knows no bounds. Once champions of the white working and lower middle classes they abandoned their core vote, gleefully espousing the creeds of multiculturalism and favoured business corporatism.

They incredibly assumed that core vote, having nowhere left to run, would still retain it’s loyalty. Idiots all. They pushed and they pushed until it snapped.

That’s some going. To alienate all but the willfully deaf and blind. The rapidly diminishing clingers to the old time religion. To what they, through rose tinted spectacles still regard as a party of the underdog. How wrong can these people be?

Sure Brown and his dozy cohorts try the old divide and rule game.

Tory toffs v whatever chamelion guise is de rigeur for their shallow mentality at that moment.

Brown’s reliance on Tory cuts v Labour investment when we all know it’s an outright lie.

The privately educated Blairs, Harmans and Jowells with straight face telling us that a bog standard comp is the answer to all our educational needs.

They are finished. Hoisted by their own grimey petards of sanctimony and duplicity.

What is there to like about these hollow people?

In the words of the song. Absolutely nothing!

Arthur

It cannot be possible to structure one's entire political philosophy around the class struggle, and simultaneously believe that it is good for people to move from one class to another. Enhanced social mobility means fewer Labour voters; how could Labour ever make a success of it?

mouse1

And let's not forget that the government which abolished assisted places, which were introduced to help poor kids pay for a place in private schools, is now accusing those same private schools of not doing enough to help people from excluded backgrounds.

Dirty Euro

As a socialist social mobility is not my first concern. what is the point in raising one person rather than everyone.
Vinny Jones, and many columnists in the sun have had social mobility while decent people have fallen. I prefer meritocracy and equality.

logdon

Sorry, apologies for the sloppy spelling. Here goes. Again!

The biggest hypocrites of the lot.

Banging on endlessly and emptily about equality. The biggest hypocrites of the lot.

Harman harming all by her lunatic attempts at dragging us all down to one level of mediocrity, thus defeating even the very idea of excellence. Or real aspiration.

HoL stuffed with the stinking corruption of politically expedient placemen

Take one glance at the innards of the Labour hierarchical machine where nepotism and connection is the key to success.

In other words they create their very own brothers old boy network. And we're expected to take anything they utter seriously?

Just look at them. Incompetent trougher’s all. Tribalist agitators and sycophantic aparatchiks.

The venality of these people knows no bounds. Once champions of the white working and lower middle classes they abandoned their core vote, gleefully espousing the creeds of multiculturalism and favoured business corporatism.

They incredibly assumed that core vote, having nowhere left to run, would still retain it’s loyalty. Idiots all. They pushed and they pushed until it snapped.

That’s some going. To alienate all but the wilfully deaf and blind. The rapidly diminishing clingers to the old time religion. To what they, through rose tinted spectacles still regard as a party of the underdog. How wrong can these people be?

Sure Brown and his dozy cohorts try the old divide and rule game.

Tory toffs v whatever chameleon guise is de rigeur for their shallow mentality at that moment.

Brown’s reliance on Tory cuts v Labour investment when we all know it’s an outright lie.

The privately educated Blairs, Harmans and Jowells with straight face telling us that a bog standard comp is the answer to all our educational needs.

They are finished. Hoisted by their own grimy petards of sanctimony and duplicity.

What is there to like about these hollow people?

In the words of the song. Absolutely nothing!

Harman harming all by her lunatic attempts at dragging us all down to one level of mediocrity, thus defeating even the very idea of excellence. Or real aspiration.

HoL stuffed with the stinking corruption of politicaly expedient placemen

Take one glance at the innards of the Labour hierarchical machine where nepotism and connection is the key to success.

In other words they create their very own brothers old boy network. And we're expected to take anything they utter seriously?

Just look at them. Incompetent trougher’s all. Tribalist agitators and sychophantic aparatchiks.

The venality of these people knows no bounds. Once champions of the white working and lower middle classes they abandoned their core vote, gleefully espousing the creeds of multiculturalism and favoured business corporatism.

They incredibly assumed that core vote, having nowhere left to run, would still retain it’s loyalty. Idiots all. They pushed and they pushed until it snapped.

That’s some going. To alienate all but the willfully deaf and blind. The rapidly diminishing clingers to the old time religion. To what they, through rose tinted spectacles still regard as a party of the underdog. How wrong can these people be?

Sure Brown and his dozy cohorts try the old divide and rule game.

Tory toffs v whatever chamelion guise is de rigeur for their shallow mentality at that moment.

Brown’s reliance on Tory cuts v Labour investment when we all know it’s an outright lie.

The privately educated Blairs, Harmans and Jowells with straight face telling us that a bog standard comp is the answer to all our educational needs.

They are finished. Hoisted by their own grimey petards of sanctimony and duplicity.

What is there to like about these hollow people?

In the words of the song. Absolutely nothing!

TomTom

Social Mobility has nothing to do with politicians. It was simply that Grammar Schools set up in Elizabeth England had given access to professions and business previously only available to public school educated. This coupled with two World Wars and the loss of educated elites provided scope.

The disastrous economic policies of politicians from 1921 onwards hindered social mobility but wars and post-WWII expansion of trade gave opportunities within large multinationals that expanding and widened economic opportunity.

Politicians merely slowed progress by disrupting education provision and levy high tax burdens to fund their constituencies of non-working and making labour costs uneconomic.

Appropriating Marx's Surplus Value to The State did nothing to boost economic growth or opportunity. Politicians seek only CONTROL

Michael

I'm afraid that I find it symptomatic of political decline that even the Spectator feels it necessary to put the death, sad though it might be, of an ex footballer as a headline on its web pages.
I think you can date the decline in British politics to the time when conservative politicians started publicly admitting to an interest in adults kicking a ball about. Mellor I think was the first, which says it all really.

William Blake's Ghost

It's hardly a surprise since this government has been obsessed with 'birth' considerations (e.g. race,sex,age,background)throughout.

It's just a further example of how the Labour party are now reminiscent of that empty foul smelling crab shell you see washed up on the beach.

Paul

"Birth, not worth, has become more and more a determinant of people's life chances."

The game's up for the lousy shower and Milburn still has to use glib soundbites!

seb2

Time will tell if you are right that the tories can become more committed to social mobility than labour, but cameron's current proposals, to reduce taxes on inherited wealth, to cut budgets for state funded schools and to prevent new schools from being selective, do not suggest he has any meanigful committment to a social mobility agenda whatsoever.

logdon

This was published at 9.10 . It's now 13.05 and no comments, including mine.

For me the Speccie has grown into a great debating base however four hours of wilderness is a mighty long time.

David Blackburn

Dear CoffeeHousers,

Sorry that your comments have not displayed this morning, there has been a caching problem. If any of your comments have been lost, please contact me at dblackburn@spectator.co.uk

Any Colour but Brown

Labour is the party of the greatest social mobility - sadly, it's all downward into the mire of abject poverty, so that the champagne socialists can have the very best that our taxes can buy.

cuffleyburgers

"As a socialist social mobility is not my first concern. what is the point in raising one person rather than everyone.
Vinny Jones, and many columnists in the sun have had social mobility while decent people have fallen. I prefer meritocracy and equality"

Dear Dirty, given your self-confessed socialist inclinations it is hardly surprising you have missed the point - but the whole point about social mobility is exactly that it is correlated to meritocracy - in words of one syllable, people who have the ability to get on can do, have a chance to have a decent education and get into good careers, something which, now that a substantial proportion of the output of the state sector is illiterate and/or innumerate is currently difficult.

In my opinion, a high degree of equality of opportunity is a good thing (although it is NOT a core function of government, it should certainly inform decisions about certain aspects of policy especially education)

The natural variation beteen individuals in terms of motivation, energy, intelligence, social skills etc means that equality of output is impossible to enforce and it is a sign of the stupidity of the labour party that they have ben prepared to beggar the entire country in order to try.

Tim Carpenter (LPUK)

They are the Fabians, a patronising self-appointed elite who have never been for mass mobility (as in anyone in the masses being able to rise up if capable), but only for themselves, their children or pets.

walter greaves

Grammar schools were abolished, mainly by the conservatives, precisely because they were vehicles for social mobility. Every working class child who got a place was matched by a middle class parent writing to their MP to complain. the same thing would happen again. can we all now shut up about grammar schools please?

the other vehicle for social mobility was the quadrupling of the number of white collar jobs between 1950 and 1970, which enabled people to move up, without someone else having to move down. this will never happen again, and we should get over it. Social mobility is a dead duck.

Alf Tupper C.R.O.F.

Dirty Euro.

"I prefer meritocracy and equality."

If a meritocracy is a society in which citizens can get ahead through their own abilities, then they would be better off than those lacking in those abilities. An insistence on equality would seem to run counter to such an arrangement surely?

Vinnie Jones has used his talents to the full, he has hurt no-one on the way and so fair play to him. You say he has prospered while 'decent people have fallen'? What's indecent about Vinnie Jones?

Nicholas

"Grammar schools were abolished, mainly by the conservatives, precisely because they were vehicles for social mobility"

Another Labour lie. Why let the facts get in the way of an opportunity to tell lies about the Conservatives.

Circular 10/65 (1965, Wilson, Labour) was the document issued by the Department of Education and Science (DES) requesting Local Education Authorities (LEAs) in England and Wales to begin converting their secondary schools to the Comprehensive System. For most of England and Wales, it marked the abolition of the old grammar schools and secondary moderns, and the Eleven Plus examination. Circular 10/65 was the initiative of recently appointed Education Secretary Anthony Crosland; it is sometimes called the Crosland Circular. It reflected the LABOUR government's view that the existing Tripartite System of education was flawed, and had to be replaced with comprehensive schools.

It is my view that the abolition of the grammar schools, which had been effective in bringing strength and purpose to the ordinary classes since the time of Elizabeth the First, was the fulcrum of Britains decline, the beginning of the end for decency, aspiration and social responsibility, the beginning of dumbing down and the conspiracy of mediocrity.

It is the classic example of unintended consequences that litter Labour's history. The theft of aspiration in the name of equality and fairness. Pulling all down to the lowest common denominator. It was an act of destruction that contributed more than anything else to the woeful slide of Britain from 1970 to the present.

Why oh why are socialists such bloody liars?

Alf Tupper C.R.O.F.

Nicholas.

I am with you entirely regarding the worth of Grammar Schools; the wilful dismantling of the system was scandalous.

However, surely the period of Tory strength in the '80s gave them the opportunity to roll things back? What stopped them?

Nicholas

"However, surely the period of Tory strength in the '80s gave them the opportunity to roll things back? What stopped them?"

Good question, well put. One of the things that concerns me most about Conservative governments is their apparent unwillingness to re-visit and dismantle Labour constructions. It may be that we are about to get a Conservative government which inherits the most entrenched and extreme (if secretive) socialist infrastructure ever seen in Britain, a closely woven web of fake charities, quangos, deliberately polarising "causes" which create "victims" and "demons" and of course Common Purpose. What will they do about it? So far their announcements have been uninspiring.

Dave Brooking

As a child of working class parents who was given the opportunity of being educated in an excellent Grammar School in a small English country town (in the 60s) I fully support the return of the Grammar School or something similar (possibly with a more sensible selection system).

However, the quality of my school was underpinned by teachers of a routinely high standard (in all respects ranging from academic to moral standards) --if we did return to Grammar Schools where would these teachers come from in the numbers required?

Alf Tupper C.R.O.F.

Nicholas.

Again we concur: Cameron is shaping up to head a government which could justifiably be labelled socialist-lite.

Dave Brooking.

Your point goes to the heart of the problem. I think education was the first site chosen in the movement to rot the nation out from its core - if you want to steal a country from its people, a good place to start is to hamstring its youth by steeping them in ignorance and self-hatred.

Dirty Euro

cuffleyburgers You have missed the point. Social mobility in itself is meaningless, what matters is a meritocracy.

Plus grammar schools were just there to keep working and middle class kids apart.

Rhoda Klapp

Nicholas, agreed, the policy of rolling back Labour's failed laws would be popular and Labour couldn't copy it.

Dave Brooking, there's no way modern teachers could match those of the sixties, or that the best ones of the sixties could operate in a modern school.

Afootnote, my local GS had about 40-50 staff, in the 60s. All teachers except the caretaker and the head's secretary (I'm leaving out the kitchens here) and all the teachers were men except for two.
Last week I attended Klapp major's graduation ceremony. In the education part of the (dodgy) university, propbably 90% of the graduates were female. Only in maths and science was there anything like an equal split. Education has been feminised. I wonder how the gender split is in public schools compared to comprehensives?

Publius

@Dirty Euro
As Cuffleyburgers has tried to explain to you, and as you clearly fail to grasp, meritocracy has always been a problem for the left - which is why it is so amusing to hear you as a self-confessed socialist banging on about it.

Not only is meritocracy as it is normally understood impossible to square with the holy grail of "equality", but meritocracy admits human nature, which the left is keen to deny.

As for your fatuous comment that grammar schools "were just there to keep working and middle class kids apart", it is so crassly ignorant that it's scarcely worth commenting on.