Progress is not just about reform – it’s about social justice

12th August, 2009 1:08 pm

Osborne DemosThe Labour movement column

By Anthony Painter / @anthonypainter

“The torch of progressive politics has been passed to a new generation of politicians – and those politicians are Conservatives.”

Yes, you read that right. It was the opening salvo in George Osborne’s speech on progressive conservatism to Demos yesterday. It’s a matter of personal taste but the word ‘progressive’ – ill-defined and often value neutral – was always a hostage to fortune. Well, now the Conservatives have taken it hostage.

Who on earth would have believed that a frontline Conservative would ever extol the virtues of progressivism? Not only that, who would have predicted that the Conservatives would not only go toe-to-toe with Labour on progress but would actually make an audacious bid to wrench it from its grasp. But are these Conservatives really ‘progressive’?

The striking aspect to the George Osborne speech was that he placed Cameron-esque progressivism in a Conservative historical tradition. I’ll give him Baldwin, Butler, Shaftesbury and even Disraeli. Strangely, he omitted Peel who would have been first on my list and the inclusion of Margaret Thatcher in the list stretched credulity beyond breaking point.

He also outlined a global context to his brand of progressivism. Pointing to Sweden’s independent schools, America’s charter schools, and education reform in Australia and New Zealand, he placed Conservative proposals firmly in the reformist camp. But ultimately, that’s what it seems that he is arguing for: reformism rather than progressivism.

For Osborne’s concerns seem very much focused on finding different ways to improve public sector efficiency rather than drive an agenda built on values: equality, capability, and opportunity. Some of the ideas may well be interesting in an era of tight public spending growth or even cuts. But if ‘progressive’ is to mean anything, it is not just reform. It has to be about social justice too. Of that, we heard almost nothing from George Osborne.

And herein lies one of the difficulties for conservative progressivism. When David Cameron uses the construction ‘progressive ends, conservative means’ he is suffocating ‘progress’ at birth. For once you start to pre-judge the means, the ends become further from reach.

If we say that it is right to prioritise the improvement of education for all then that poses a question. There has to be pragmatic search for the best way of achieving that. It could constitute a whole variety of reforms and approaches. But once you say the means have to be one approach or another then you lose sight of the ends. That is why conservative progressivism – if it is to be more than the reformism proposed by George Osborne – will inevitably fail. You will have the conservative means but not the progressive ends.

But the left is just as guilty of this. Earlier this week, John Harris, in a breathtakingly divisive article where those he agrees with were celebrated while the motives of those he did not were impugned, stated:

“Labour is either the party of equality and the restriction of the market or there is no point in existence.”

Really? The left exists almost solely to restrict the market? Again, we are going back to old bad habits where we confuse means and ends – just as the Conservatives are doing. And some of us thought that had been ditched along with the old Clause IV. New Labour’s shortcomings are palpable and it is not the right solution for these times. But the notion that there are no market-based solutions that can advance progressive or social democratic ends is crazy.

Sticking with education, surely the aim is to create a system where there is equality of access to very best education that can offered? This may sound idealistic but why not?

Now let’s take what is happening in some of the poorest schooling districts in the United States under the charter school initiative. Schools in Watts district of Los Angeles – site of the famous race riots in 1965 – have been taken over by an organisation called Green Dot. Its agenda is simple:

“First, we create and operate high-achieving public schools where nearly all students graduate and go on to college. Second, we help parents throughout the city organize to strengthen their neighborhood schools. Finally, we push the Los Angeles Unified School District to move boldly to improve the city’s public schools.”

The results? 81% graduation rates compared with an LA average of 47%. California Department of Education calculates an Academic Performance Indicator for schools and school districts. Green Dot schools get 704. LA as a whole gets 593. All this has been achieved in partnership with trade unions and local communities. Access to the schools is via a lottery.

Geoffrey Canada’s Harlem Children’s Zone is more sceptical of partnerships with trade unions. Nonetheless, its success has been just as astounding in a very poor part of New York. The market, non-public sector is delivering for the least advantaged children in America. Are we meant to ignore that fact just because the left is meant to be about ‘restricting the market’? What’s worse is that anyone proposing anything resembling the market or non-public means is instantly de-legitimised as being a New Labour throwback. It’s stultifying and energy sapping.

The Conservatives are blind to the benefits and importance of high quality, committed public sector delivery. Elements of the left are blinding themselves to the major benefits that the private and voluntary sectors can offer. To secure the ends of social justice, there needs to be pragmatic open-mindedness towards the means.

The post-credit crunch Labour party will face a formidable challenge in a Conservative party that is willing to steal its language and clothes. It would be easy to react to this by vacating the contested terrain. That would also be a disaster: politically and practically but they are not the most important considerations. It would be a disaster for the party’s ability to fulfil its mission. It could hinder the creation of a Britain that is more equal, with more opportunity and achievement, and so more socially just. If we fail in that then what is the Labour party for?

Photo: bowbrick, Flickr

Comments are closed

Latest

  • Comment Featured Roosh V: the government’s hands-off approach reflects their weak effort to tackle gender violence

    Roosh V: the government’s hands-off approach reflects their weak effort to tackle gender violence

    This weekend Roosh V and his misogynist and vicious ‘Return of Kings’ groups were scheduled to meet across the UK as part of a so-called ‘world tour’. This is the man who suggested that rape on private property should be legalised. Let’s be clear from the outset. There is never, ever, under any circumstances, any justification for rape. It is a crime of the utmost seriousness, one which, despite a recent increase in the number of rapes reported, still too […]

    Read more →
  • News Former Head of the Civil Service criticises government plan to cut party funding

    Former Head of the Civil Service criticises government plan to cut party funding

    Lord Kerslake, former Head of the Civil Service (2012-2014), has criticised the Government’s plans to cut Short money and change trade union funding. Lord Kerslake is a crossbencher. Appearing on BBC Sunday Politics he said the Government’s plans signalled “a worryingly authoritarian streak in government” that finds it difficult to accept challenge. He said everyone, regardless of party affiliation, should be concerned about the changes. He voiced similar concerns at the start of the year. The Government are planning to […]

    Read more →
  • News Corbyn calls on Cameron to reveal British military plan against Isis in Libya

    Corbyn calls on Cameron to reveal British military plan against Isis in Libya

    Jeremy Corbyn has called on David Cameron to give assurance that no decision has been made to use drones in Libya, as there are concerns drones might be operating in the country. The Independent has reported that the Labour leader has asked the Prime Minister to give “unequivocal assurance that no decision has been taken to use drones in support of military operations in Libya”. Corbyn has said Cameron needs to give a “clear commitment” to ask Parliament before he pursues […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Tories’ turmoil should ring snap election alarm bells

    Tories’ turmoil should ring snap election alarm bells

    As most party members know all too well, Labour will face its first major electoral test under Jeremy Corbyn this May. Crucial as these polls are for all of us, particularly our candidates, we cannot blithely assume that they will be the only contest that we will face this year. We need to be on a general election war footing. In June, decades of Tory infighting are set to reach a crescendo with the referendum on membership of the European […]

    Read more →
  • News “We need answers which are both radical and credible” – full text of Jon Ashworth’s Future of the Centre Left speech

    “We need answers which are both radical and credible” – full text of Jon Ashworth’s Future of the Centre Left speech

    This is the full text of the speech given by Shadow Cabinet member Jon Ashworth to Progress’ The Future of Labour’s Centre Left event on Tuesday. Thank you for inviting me to speak – my first time at a Progress event. We meet tonight after two general election defeats. So tonight’s discussion about the future of the centre left is timely. Beyond the confines of our party or the borders of our country, there are forces driving huge waves of change […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit