With the government’s reforms (and U-turns for that matter) hurtling along at breakneck speed it can be difficult sometimes keeping up. Every now and then, it’s worth taking a look back at their historic and ‘binding’ document, the so called ‘coalition’ government (let’s be honest here, this is really a Tory government, and a viciously rightwing one). This is a key extract, ‘We both want a Britain where social mobility is unlocked; where everyone, regardless of background, has the chance to rise as high as their talents and ambition allow them’ . Anyone who believes in progressive politics would categorically agree. However, it is one thing to say it, another actually doing it.
So what’s the current state of affairs? To be blunt, it’s not particularly great. The lack of social mobility and levels of intergenerational disadvantage is a serious problem. According to the latest OECD figures, Britain is languishing in the international league table for social fairness and advancement, with inherited disadvantage potently strong and over twice as high to the most socially mobile nations like Finland and Denmark.
Bearing in mind that only seven per cent of all people attend private schools, 65 per cent of the legal profession is dominated by this class, with governmental and media professions close behind. This is a gross but stark illustration of the stranglehold the wealthy ruling elite possess over the professions. And if the most recent event on the Tory calendar is anything to go by, we can be sure this problem is set to only get worse. Living by a philosophy that ‘we are all in this together’, they auctioned off some of the most desired internships imaginable to the highest bidder. One of the ‘items’ on offer, was a two-week internship at CMC Markets, which boasted that it would provide an ‘incredible opportunity for a potential young trader to get an inside look at the world of international finance and online trading’. That went for £3,000. Cheap when compared to the two-week internship at Tatler, which fetched for £4000.
Even more shocking, none of this went to charity but the party itself (the share of total Tory donations from the City has doubled since Cameron became leader). What this demonstrates, albeit in an extreme and obtuse manner, is the oligarchisation of professional opportunities within Britain. One’s wealth, background and social networks have become the major defining characteristics in determining professional success and social advancement. So what do we do about this? How do we break these doors of inopportunity?
For a start, we should not be scrapping the Graduate National Internship scheme. This is one of Labour’s most unpublicised and unknown labour market interventions, but one that has really delivered results. Since February 2010, the GNI has helped over 8,500 graduates to secure paid work in SMEs. It only cost £13.6 million or around £1,300 in wage subsidies for each place. It improved and widened access to the professions within strategic and growth industries of the future, like low carbon, the digital realm, engineering construction and more. And with 25 per cent of all interns securing work after their placement, this was making a real difference to young people’s life chances.
The Federation of Small Business hailed it as a ‘highly successful’ scheme. They have called on the government not to scrap it (it ends this month), and invest in another 5,000 places for the year ahead. Their research has found any investment costs, would be positively outweighed by the economic and fiscal impact to our economy. To invest in another 5,000 places would require £8 million, which would immediately reduce benefit payments by at least £1.5 million. With a quarter of interns bagging work after, this would boost the chancellor’s coffers by a further £3.37 million over the course of one year as a result of lower JSA payments. In addition, there would be a further £5.4 million in tax payments . With the government abolishing similar schemes like the Future Jobs Fund and the Young Person’s Guarantee, the hopes and dreams of many graduates are set to be dashed.
Reinstituting this policy is the first step to securing greater opportunities and access to the professions. But we have to go further if we are to break the forever regenerating cycle of disadvantage blighting so many lives in Britain. The Tory ball was a clear example of the forces that predominate. Being wealthy accords one with so many distinct advantages. We need to recognise that nothing less of a cultural change is required. That is why governments must become more interventionist.
One idea would be to set-up a separate additional means-tested scheme to the one proposed by the FSB. This would specifically focus on the poorest graduates. It should widen its base, to incorporate corporate, legal, political, media and other large-scale professions. Means-tested internships are not uncontentious, but it will take nothing less than income-qualified placements to engineer that decisive shift in upward social mobility we all aspire to.
The Future Jobs Fund, a similar scheme targeted at the most excluded in the labour market, created thousands of invaluable working opportunities for some of the poorest youngsters in the country. A full evaluation has yet to be conducted, but initial research and anecdotal evidence suggests that it has been widely successful. One of the key points to emerge is the admission by employers that they would have overlooked many of the individuals they took on in their organisations. These biases can no longer be allowed to fester. If we do not act now, and act decisively, a whole new generation will once again lose out.