Social Mobility Commission

In April 2011, when the Government's Child Poverty Strategy was published, it announced (p. 22, §1.41; p. 66, §5.21) that the Child Poverty Act would be amended so that the Child Poverty Commission would "be replaced by a new Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission". The commission's "broader scope" incorporating social mobility was described in the Strategy as "the Government's new approach", designed "to ensure that the Commission considers the issue of child poverty within the wider context of children's life chances and inter-generational poverty" and "the crucial links between child poverty, children's life chances and social mobility". The SMCP Commission's role was described as being "to monitor progress against the broad range of child poverty, life chances and social mobility indicators, towards the end goal of eradicating child poverty."

In July 2015 a Commons statement on the renaming of the commission as the SMC was made by Iain Duncan Smith[nb 1] as Work and Pensions Secretary: "Governments will no longer focus on just moving families above a poverty line. Instead, we want to focus on making a meaningful change to children’s lives by extending opportunity for all, so that both they and their children can escape from the cycle of poverty and improve their life chances."[12]

In semantic terms the 2011 name-change was criticised for putting together the terms "child poverty" and "social mobility" without addressing the potential "internal contradictions" of trying to deal with both at the same time, or specifying "the relative priority or importance of the two issues".[13]

In a political studies paper published in the Political Quarterly in 2012, the renaming was interpreted ideologically as a covert rejection of any aspirations regarding child poverty. Noting the commission's shift from child poverty per se to "the broad range of child poverty, life chances and social mobility indicators", the paper argued that: "While continuing to pay lip service to the goal of ending child poverty, much of the government's energy has been devoted to trying to redefine the problem of poverty, moving beyond what it sees as a narrow preoccupation with relative low income." Severely criticising this scope creep as a climbdown from the principles of the Child Poverty Act, the paper argued: "In truth, neither the letter nor the spirit of the law has been fully adhered to, and only a lack of sustained public or media attention has spared the government the embarrassment of anyone noticing how far its policy and strategy falls short of its professed goals."[14]

Apart from this push factor away from ending child poverty, it has also been theorised sociologically that the pull towards headlining social mobility in government policy during the 2010s occurred due to growing "underclass anxiety" about the political and social actions of the economically disadvantaged, especially following the 2011 England riots and latterly the vote for Brexit in the 2016 EU referendum.[15] In this context, the SMC has been seen to be part of a trend among governmental agencies towards portraying social mobility simplistically (and conveniently, in this view) as a set of "component pieces which can be tackled with specific ameliorant policies", and shying away from acknowledging (more accurately, in this view) how "the class system" creates a fundamental structure of inequality.[16] This trend in governmental outlook has been critiqued as "the New Mobility discourse".[17][18]

In December 2017 Milburn and his three fellow Commissioners resigned. Milburn's letter of resignation, dated 2 December, explained to Prime Minister Theresa May the reasons for their decision, including roles on the Commission being vacant for almost two years and his belief that the Government was "unable to devote the necessary energy and focus to the social mobility agenda".[19] The letter was published in The Guardian.[20]

In March 2018 the Commons Education Committee published The Future of the Social Mobility Commission. The report recommended that the commission should be renamed as the Social Justice Commission, and that there should be a minister for social justice/social mobility. It also recommended that the commission should always have at least seven members in addition to the chair, and have an extended remit to:

• publish social justice impact assessments on government policies and proposals
• actively advise Ministers on how to improve social justice in England, rather than advising only at their request

Robert Halfon as the committee's Chair argued that the extended remit would give the Commission "real teeth" as "a new social justice body in the heart of Downing Street with the levers and powers to coordinate action to drive forward initiatives and implement solutions". He argued that renaming the SMC as the Social Justice Commission would "ensure [that the Commission is] not just focusing on those already on the ladder but bringing them to the ladder and making sure we are there if they fall".[21]

In May 2018 the Government published its response, which rejected the committee's recommendations.

The Government's response was criticised by Halfon: "We called for a beefed-up Commission with the resources, direction and teeth needed to tackle society’s burning injustices but, in its response, the Government has sadly failed to seize this opportunity."[22][23]

Alongside its response, the Government announced via Hinds that Martina Milburn (not a family relation of Alan Milburn) was its preferred candidate to succeed Alan Milburn as the Chair of the commission.[24] She was confirmed as chair in July, having been questioned by the Education Committee that month.[25][26] Twelve fellow commissioners were appointed in October.[27]

In December 2018 the SMC was relaunched, with an announcement that the commission had been awarded an additional £2m of funding by the DfE.[28][29]

Upon the announcement of Martina Milburn as the Government's preferred candidate in May 2018 the role of chair was announced as unremunerated, as had been the case under Alan Milburn.[30] However, upon the relaunch of the SMC in December 2018 it was announced that, in accordance with the greater responsibilities arising from the commission's new budget, the Education Secretary had decided to remunerate the role.[31]

In June 2019 the SMC was criticised by the Education Committee.[32] Alleged failings included a lack of diversity in its commissioners, an over-emphasis on research rather than action, and a lack of contact with the Education Secretary.[33]

The commission has been praised for identifying "the social closure at the upper echelons of society and the isolation of those at the bottom" as key issues, thereby "recognising where the real 'problem of mobility' lies".[34] However, it has been criticised for apparent naivety in its individualistic belief in "the possibility of [personal] exertion generating social mobility" and consequent reliance on "individualistic explanations [of how to improve social mobility] based on personal qualities and aspirations".[35][36]

It has also been criticised for viewing education as a silver bullet for social mobility, and therefore focusing excessively on school effectiveness and the behaviour-management of pupils, teachers and parents.[37][38] A critical discourse analysis of Commission's report Cracking the Code published in the Journal of Education Policy in 2018 found that its recommendations relied heavily on the 'marginal gains' philosophy associated with Dave Brailsford, and questioned the implementation of such a philosophy in everyday school life.[39]

It had earlier been noted that the New Mobility discourse was concerned with upward mobility among the deserving poor without properly considering the accompanying need for downward mobility among the undeserving rich.[40] This lack was addressed by the commission's report Downward Mobility, Opportunity Hoarding and the Glass Floor, which acknowledged and discussed the issue (pp. i-ii).

In January 2016 the Commission produced a Social Mobility Index of children's life chances in different local authority areas, including data published as a MS Excel spreadsheet, with an update to the data published in a similar spreadsheet in November 2017.[41][42] The data was translated by Parliament into a "Social Mobility Index by Constituency" in October 2018.[43]

The commission's Index was also used by the DfE to designate "opportunity areas" that would receive extra government funding "to address the biggest challenges they face". Six opportunity areas were announced in October 2016 (West Somerset, Norwich, Blackpool, Scarborough/North Yorkshire Coast), Derby and Oldham) and a further six in January 2017 (Bradford, Doncaster, Fenland & East Cambridgeshire, Hastings, Ipswich and Stoke-on-Trent).[44][45]

In October 2017 the DfE published a "delivery plan" for each opportunity area:[46]

• Blackpool
• Bradford
• Derby
• Doncaster
• Fenland and East Cambridgeshire
• Hastings
• Ipswich
• North Yorkshire Coast
• Norwich
• Oldham
• Stoke-on-Trent
• West Somerset

An Evaluation of the "set-up phase" of the opportunity areas programme was published alongside a Selection of Case Studies in October 2018.

Although only indirectly responsible for the scheme, the SMC maintained an active interest, visiting Blackpool and Oldham as part of a "north west tour" in October 2019.[47][48]

The commission has produced "State of the Nation" reports for 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018–19.

• Mapping the Occupational Destinations of New Graduates (October 2013)
• Lessons from London Schools for Attainment Gaps and Social Mobility (June 2014)
• Elitist Britain? (August 2014)
• Cracking the Code: How Schools Can Improve Social Mobility (October 2014)
• Escape Plan: Understanding Who Progresses from Low Pay and Who Gets Stuck (November 2014, Resolution Foundation report in association with the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission)
• Downward Mobility, Opportunity Hoarding and the Glass Floor (June 2015)
• Elitist Scotland? (December 2015, with David Hume Institute)
• Apprenticeships, Young People, and Social Mobility (March 2016)

• The Childhood Origins of Social Mobility: Socio-Economic Inequalities and Changing Opportunities (June 2016)
• Socio-Economic Diversity in Life Sciences and Investment Banking (July 2016)
• Social and Ethnic Inequalities in Choice Available and Choices Made at Age 16 (December 2016)
• Ethnicity, Gender and Social Mobility (December 2016)
• Social Mobility, the Class Pay Gap and Intergenerational Worklessness: New Insights from the Labour Force Survey (January 2017)
• Helping Parents to Parent (February 2017)
• The Impacts of Family Support on Access to Homeownership for Young People in the UK (March 2017)
• Time for Change: An Assessment of Government Policies on Social Mobility 1997 to 2017 (June 2017)
• The Great Escape? Low Pay and Progression in the UK's Labour Market (October 2017)

• Social Mobility Barometer: Public Attitudes to Social Mobility in the UK (December 2018)
• The Adult Skills Gap: Is Falling Investment in UK Adults Stalling Social Mobility? (January 2019)
• Elitist Britain 2019 (June 2019, with Sutton Trust)
• An Unequal Playing Field: Extra-Curricular Activities, Soft Skills and Social Mobility (July 2019)

Atherton, Graeme (2016). The Success Paradox: Why We Need a Holistic Theory of Social Mobility. Bristol: Policy Press. ISBN 978-1-447-31633-6.

Bamfield, Louise (2012). "Child Poverty and Social Mobility: Taking the Measure of the Coalition's 'New Approach'". Political Quarterly. 83 (4): 830–837. doi:10.1111/j.1467-923x.2012.02418.x.

Bukodi, Erzsébet; Goldthorpe, John H. (2018). Social Mobility and Education in Britain: Research, Politics and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-46821-3.

Maslen, Joseph (2019). "Cracking the Code: The Social Mobility Commission and Education Policy Discourse". Journal of Education Policy. 34 (5): 599–612. doi:10.1080/02680939.2018.1449891. S2CID 149726651. "Accepted manuscript". Institutional open access repository. Retrieved 21 October 2019.

Payne, Geoff (2012). "A New Social Mobility? The Political Redefinition of a Sociological Problem". Contemporary Social Science. 7 (1): 55–71. doi:10.1080/21582041.2011.652360. S2CID 144041004.

Payne, Geoff (2017). The New Social Mobility: How the Politicians Got It Wrong. Bristol: Policy Press. ISBN 978-1-447-31065-5.