Life Changes
Updated on 24 April 2005
Research shows the British now have less mobility in income and educational opportunity than our key European neighbours -- and it's getting worse...
Backwards not forwards - exclusive evidence shows how the class divide's widened under New Labour.
Opportunity for all. That's been New Labour's mantra - repeated at every opportunity in this campaign. But today New Labour stands accused of denying the least privileged in society exactly that.
A new report out tomorrow - but seen exclusively by Channel 4 news - reveals those from underprivileged backgrounds are less likely to "better themselves" than they were thirty years ago.
And while social mobility is improving in most developed countries, in Britain it is getting worse, with more and more advantages going to those from already wealthy backgrounds.
Our business correspondent Faisal Islam reports on why Britain is going backwards, not forward:
A new generation: These are 'Blair's children' - born well into an era where all politicians seem to be committed to a new, merito-cratic recipe.
"If we're in politics for one thing, it is to make sure all children are given the best chance in life." - Tony Blair, Labour leader
"The British dream which enables anyone whatever their background to go as far as their talents will take them." - Michael Howard, Conservative leader
"Children well cared for, well taught in their early years have a far better chance of long term success" - Charles Kennedy, Liberal Democrat leader
But is it just talk? New research seen by Channel 4 News says that chances for Britain's least privileged children to progress are actually diminishing. The trend in Britain is now the worst in the industrialised world.
"There is a sort of a veneer that we're moving to a meritocracy, but the bottom line is that we're really very much a class driven society. And we've got worse actually, if you look at the data." - Sir Peter Lampl, Chairman, the Sutton Trust.
The data shows how well people from different backgrounds had done financially by the age of 30.
- Of those born in 1958, 30 per cent from the poorest backgrounds remained poor.
- The rest moved into higher income groups with about 17 per cent making into the richest group.
- Of those from the wealthiest backgrounds, just under 20 per cent ended up poor - about a third remained top earners.
- Compare that with those born in 1970. The proportion staying poor has shot up, while those moving to the top group has fallen back. Many more of the rich are staying rich.
- When that's compared with other countries Britain is second from bottom. And while things are now improving in the United States, Britain is the only country where its getting worse.
Pate's is a flagship beacon school in the state sector. It's hugely popular and families from all over Gloucestershire try to get in. The school chooses by ability - but like other successful state schools, it's now dominated by children from middle class and fairly wealthy backgrounds.
Which is one illustration of the report's finding that most reforms to education policy, even those aimed at the bottom of the social scale, tend to be captured by more affluent families.
Case study: Read about Pate's Grammar School next.
Research shows the British now have less mobility in income and educational opportunity than our key European neighbours -- and it's getting worse...
Pates is the third best state school in the country and what's more it's situated in one of the most deprived council estates in the area. Yet hardly any of the local kids on the doorstep get to come to the school, it's a striking metaphor for how in Britain more than any other western nation the wealthy stay wealthy and the poor stay poor. The roots of that issue is in the education system.
"Parents from a more advantaged part of society are better at working the system to ensure that their children gain places that are more successful and this becomes a more self perpetuating process. I think we need to be more radical in the way we think to try to break this cycle." - Richard Kemp, Head Teacher, Pate's Grammar School
To correct the balance the headmaster has launched special classes for some pupils from the 12 local primary schools.
Again, the evidence shows a child's background dramatically affects their development at a very early age.
At 22 months the brightest kids come from mixed backgrounds, but the scores of the poorest decline far more sharply. Of those with a low score at 22 months, the richer kids do far better - actually overtaking the bright but poor children.
The Scandinavian experience has shown that investment in toddlers is key. The government's pilot Sure Start scheme has made some inroads.
"We're quite proud of their achievements and their parents are proud of their achievements. If that can go on through infants and juniors and secondary school, they're much more likely to achieve well when they do their GCSE and go on to do other things in later life - Bernice Thomson, Hester's Way Neighbourhood Project
When asked how many of her children she thought would go on to university, Bernice Thomas replied, "probably less than 2 per cent the way things are now."
Back at Pate's, there are sixth formers who say their own university ambitions have been restricted by another government policy
"I wanted to do medicine, and for that it's a six year course. So I'd be looking at a lot of money to pay back and with the top up fees I just don't think I'll be able to afford it. "- Rachel Wong, Sixth Former, Pate's Grammar School
So for all these kids from cradle, to school, university - and even when or if they buy a first home, life chances are still dominated by who their parents are.
The real problem - genuine social mobility requires some of the more affluent doing less well in the next generation as well as the other way round. And whatever the rhetoric of politicians, that's not an easy sell at election time.
