If Labour is serious about improving life chances among young people in the UK, then it must continue to push bold policies such as the Child Trust Fund or ‘baby bond’. This policy is an opportunity which is too good to be missed.
The Child Trust Fund was initially outlined immediately prior to the 2001 general election. The Prime Minister, the Chancellor and a number of senior ministers all sat on the same platform
as the policy was hailed as Labour’s ‘big idea’. As proposed, the Child Trust Fund will ensure that all newborn children receive an initial endowment in an individual account. This money would then, with the help of additional contributions from both the government and the child’s family, accumulate over eighteen years until young adults would be able to access the account. This would create a nest egg for people to invest in their futures.
The policy was consulted on and some more details were announced late in 2001. Recently though, despite ongoing work behind the scenes, relatively little has been heard from the Treasury or Number 10. This relatively low profile is surprising given that the Child Trust Fund is that rarity in politics – a popular, progressive policy.
The initial plan was extremely well received in the media with papers from The Sun to The Guardian welcoming the proposals. At a time when the dynamic between
the media and the government seems to
be almost universally negative, such coverage can only be dreamed
of. The policy struck
a cord with the public at large and it gave Labour a distinctive profile at the general election. The ‘baby bond’ is bold, it will potentially improve the life chances of millions of children and, what is more, it is popular. Popular, progressive policies are not common and, when they are unearthed, should
be exploited to the hilt.
The Child Trust Fund is important for the left because it raises the issue of wealth distribution. Most thinking on welfare focuses on income and service delivery. However, wealth, or assets, is
of at least equal importance in shaping people’s lives. They allow people not just to live from week to week, but, instead, to have a sense of security and the ability to plan ahead. Assets can open
up opportunities which income alone cannot. If Labour is to achieve anything approaching genuine equality of opportunity, then the current gross inequalities in wealth, and the increasing numbers of people with no assets whatsoever, must be addressed.
Just think about young adults reaching eighteen and surveying their opportunities. Middle-class children
will have a number of advantages over their poorer contemporaries, but none more so than the financial backing that they will be able to draw on either directly or through their parents. This not only makes if more feasible to attend higher education, but also allows them to contemplate foreign travel or work
as a volunteer, which will enrich their lives and help build many important skills. Inequalities in wealth lead to inequalities in opportunity.
If three terms of Labour government are to leave a footprint on history then it has to be bolder in articulating a vision of the good society. A crucial part of this vision will be a genuine commitment to equality of opportunity and all that it entails. If this is the case then assets and the current distribution of wealth must be focused on and the Child Trust Fund must be implemented in full.