A Fabian policy roundtable seminar at Labour Party Conference

Tuesday 28^th September 2010, Manchester

All parties have been focused on social mobility and increasing opportunity so that people from all backgrounds enjoy the same levels of access to the professions. This Fabian seminar, supported by ICEAW, revisited this discussion for the first time since the Milburn report and a new cuts strategy that may exacerbate inequality in professions further.

Rt Hon David Lammy MP led the discussion with Michael Izza, Chief Executive, ICAEW, Dr Tessa Stone, Chief Executive, BrightsideUNIAID, Patrick Diamond, Senior Research Fellow, Policy Network. The session was chaired by Martin Bright, Founder, New Deal of the Mind and Political Editor of the Jewish Chronicle. 

Participants in this roundtable discussion admitted that the Labour Government’s performance in this area over 13 years had been a disappointing, but it was stressed that people should be aware of the challenges faced by policy makers.

Firstly, advantage is increasingly entrenched in certain income groups. The better off had become even more likely to do well in the last 13 years than previously, leading to clustering of advantage and disadvantage around specific income groups.

Secondly, a central assumption of Alan Milburn's 2009 report on 'Fair Access to the Professions' - that globalisation will create more professional jobs - was not necessarily the case, and so policy makers had to deal with limited supply.

And thirdly, that whilst Labour was very comfortable about the language of widening opportunity, it was less comfortable with its obvious corollary: if more people are going up, more people must come down the social scale.

Discussion focused on the policy implications of these factors and the respective roles of government, business and civil society in restarting this "stalled" social mobility.

Some professions are essentially closed shops, so professional vested interest needs to be broken down. Also, the drive to improve standards in schools remains crucial and must continue. The skills system needs to improve and the lack of coordination between employers and skills bodies addressed.

The relatively benign public expenditure environment between 1997 and 2007 enabled scatter gun approach to skills.. The new climate of austerity makes this impossible, so government will have to be more strategic and more evidence-based to get more value for public money.

It was clear from the discussion that the role of unpaid internships is controversial. Internships are seen as a possible tool to increase social mobility but at present also present formidable barrier, with participants considering how to make them available to those without the private family means to support themselves.

Currently the use of the 'future jobs fund' is one way around it, as it releases funds for training purposes, although this will be lost to government budget cuts. It was felt by some that paying interns was the only way to equalise opportunity and particularly to ensure that the routes to greater social mobility are not blocked to minorities - although others countered that this would be counterproductive, as it would reduce the numbers employers could take on and advantage the better qualified. It was suggested that support across the professions is needed for a 'code of best practice' to ensure internships are not just open to friends of partners but open to everyone.

The skills debate also raises questions about positive discrimination. A comparison was made to the longstanding existence of affirmative action programmes in the United States. It was accepted that the wholesale transfer of such an approach to Britain was complicated, as the US population has a higher percentage of black and ethnic minorities. However some felt that smart positive action - as opposed to blanket positive discrimination - should be considered as the only way of countering deep systemic bias. An example of this is the clause in the Equality Act that allows employers to prefer minority candidates in situations where two candidates have equal ability.

Apprenticeships were seen as another route, but numbers have been hard to drive up amongst British businesses, as people would rather employ immigrants with an already developed skill set than bear cost of training local populations.

This led to a discussion of the problems of equality of esteem between different qualification and career paths. Despite progress in Labour's attempts to boost vocational qualifications and ensure this route was seen as being as valid as the more academic route into the professions traditionally favoured by the middle classes, a big gap still remains nonetheless. 

It was pointed out that you don't need a degree to go into the professions. For example, there is a popular misconception that to be a chartered accountant you had to be a graduate one participant said. Therefore careers services need to make sure people get the best possible information and advice, and disabuse any false barriers to entering the professions. It has to be made clear that university isn’t the only game in town and you can rise to the top without a degree.

A great deal of goodwill between policy makers, business and civil society was seen as necessary to combat what is a cultural problem that discriminates against the poorest in society. One participant suggested that responsibility should be moved away from government, due to a lack of continuity between different ministers and different governments, bringing together organisations doing good work in business and the third sector. 

People agreed that there were limits to how much government can do to drive social mobility. Re-examining the role of the state and introducing greater transparency we seen as key to developing a future agenda. Transparency is also needed in business, and companies should inform new employees about the pay gap in the company they are joining suggested one participant. Currently most firms can hide behind the fact that it’s a general problem, but its not: some are worse than others, and such a policy would expose it and bring about a rapid catch up.

But despite clear worries about the lack of progress Labour made on improving social mobility whilst in power, it was felt that it had made some useful policy interventions and that what was done was a very positive start. But it is crucial that all professions are now fully engaging in this debate. It is in all businesses interests to draw from the widest possible pool of talent when recruiting staff.

Participants pointed out that this agenda doesn’t have to wait for the Labour Party to return to government and that it is being taken forward by the Coalition. But some wanted Labour to keep banging the drum on social mobility. There is a real problem for policy makers in reaching pockets of deprivation, and Alan Milburn's famous declaration that his own journey from Darlington estate to the Cabinet was sadly no longer possible was held to be true.

Overall it was felt that to ensure young people turn into high achievers requires a range of policy interventions, personal qualities and home support: education, employment, community, aspiration, and parenting. 

This event was kindly supported by ICAEW