His acceptance of a role with the Conservative-led government as adviser on social mobility raised some eyebrows and prompted dark mutterings about ‘Blairites’. But, as he argued in his lecture, social mobility is too important to put on hold. Tapping into people’s desire to get on and do well is essential to Labour’s electoral success too, especially in the south of England.

There is an obvious series of political bear-traps being laid by the government. The Tories paint ‘equality’ as drab uniformity and sameness. Council estates, comprehensive schools, take-it-or-leave-it social services. Labour must never fall into the trap of becoming associated with the failed policies of previous generations such as tower block estates. Indeed, Labour has a duty to expose the failings of systems and policies for which it is responsible. If there’s a whiff that Labour’s vision of equality is a council house, nine-to-five job, mediocre local school and hospital and a vote every five years, then the modern electorate will reject us out of hand. Equality must be expressed in new and attractive ways.

The second trap is that Labour’s calls for equality look hypocritical if its leading lights behave in ways that look elitist. The more Labour politicians shout about equality, the closer the scrutiny becomes on their choices of schools for their children, number of properties they own, cars they drive, expenses they claim, and golf clubs they belong to. This is not a plea for a new Puritanism. It is a plea for equality to be properly explained, especially by those who seek to advocate it. Consider the public row that Labour MP Diane Abbott created when she sent her child to a fee-paying school, made worse by the suggestion it was what any ‘West Indian mother’ would do.

Thirdly, for Labour to talk about equality is to open the party up to accusations of class war. The British people have shown that they have no objections to being governed by people that went to public school, whether it was Clement Attlee, Tony Blair, Boris Johnson or David Cameron. If there is any sense amongst the public that the taxation system is being used by Labour to ‘punish’ the rich, or to ‘make the pips squeak’ as Denis Healey once promised, then even moderate-income earners will make common cause with high-income earners, and even the super-rich. This is not because middle England earns enough to necessarily be personally affected by punitive tax rates, but because they consider and hope that one day they might be. People look up, not down.

A fourth danger is that the phraseology of equality becomes mistranslated. All too often when some Labour politicians talked about ‘fairness’ they meant that there should be more women high court judges, or black bankers. When great chunks of the electorate talked about ‘fairness’ they meant that no-one should be allowed to live on benefits while their neighbours struggled to work and pay taxes, or that their son or daughter should be able to buy or rent a home nearby as a higher priority than a family of Somalis or Afghans. If ever there was a disconnect between politicians and people it is over what counts as ‘fair’.

Labour must be upfront – an egalitarian society means that everyone can try to fulfill their aspirations. An individualistic, Tory society is one that holds people back, as Tawney explained long ago. Labour must be the party that comprehends, appreciates, values, nurtures and supports individual aspiration. This is the way to win back the recalcitrant C2 voters, who deserted Labour between 2007 and 2010. C2s work hard, earn their qualifications, start businesses, take on risk, and want the best for their children. They want a government which helps them in all these things, and, if it can’t help, they want it to get out of the way.

Aspiration is a trait which runs through people of all social classes, but the higher up the income ladder, the more aspiration becomes a sense of entitlement, and the higher the bar of aspiration is set. Lower down, the horizons are lower, the support less, and to reach even a low bar becomes a greater struggle. To create a framework of aspiration, Labour must see how people on higher incomes use their position to lock in the future for their children, and replicate it for the children of middle- and low-income earners. The children of high-income earners receive a good education, whether from the state or privately. They have parental support, and rooms full of encyclopedias and educational games. The talk from an early age is of ‘which university’ not ‘whether to go to university’. School holidays and weekends are packed with stimulating visits and trips. Social life revolves partly around conversation with adults. Holiday jobs, internships, and gap years can be found in parliament, law firms, publishers or newspaper offices. And at the back of the mind of the young person is usually the knowledge that their parents will provide the ultimate safety net if a risk fails or a job falls through.

Children from middle- or low-income families have very few of these advantages. They may have loving, supportive parents, excellent teachers, and personal drive, but the absence of networks, easily grasped opportunities and raised horizons will hold them back.

The state can never replace the family. But the family can be given practical help by the state, especially a decentralised, democratic state.
Labour, in Liam Byrne’s policy review should explore ways in which parents, local authorities, schools, businesses and especially the third sector can give children from middle- and low-income families the same kind of support that upper middle-class children get within their own stratum of society. This should not be targeted at children at risk of criminal behaviour, or already within the criminal justice system, who require a different kind of support. Many families feel that only kids who get into trouble get sports schemes and day trips. Labour should provide a network of support including mentoring, university summer schools, trips to the theatre, opera and ballet, and access to quality internships within the professions.

Alan Milburn is right to plug away at social mobility, but he knows full well that a Tory-led government won’t deliver it. The prize of an egalitarian society, where everyone can unlock their potential, will only come under Labour.

Photo: Victoria Peckham