New Labour swept to power with promises to help the 'socially excluded' and promptly set up the Social Exclusion Unit. Sadly for the country, its methods of doing so have achieved very little. Now there is to be a new Social Exclusion Minister, will there be a new approach?
BBCi analyses changing attitudes to "the politics of exclusion":
"There is a growing mood on all sides of the debate that civil servants and ministers in Whitehall may not have all the answers and that a centralised approach is not the answer. Socially excluded people tend to lead complicated and chaotic lives and are not necessarily the easiest people to help with initiatives and task forces."
Today's Telegraph leader takes this notion further:
"The poor today suffer a poverty of the spirit, no less - a poverty of relationships, of opportunity and of access to the supporting associations that simultaneously soften the blows of life and stiffen the individual to withstand them. "Social exclusion" is the opposite of that old-fashioned term "neighbourliness", the sense of belonging to a moral community that both extends charity and expects self-reliance."
Hopefully, the Conservatives' Social Justice policy group will come up with some innovative policies which will genuinely tackle the root and branch causes of social exclusion.
Deputy Editor
Here's something to reflect upon.
In 1997 there was something called the Dept of the Environment, handling local govmt and environmental protection. Since then it has been merged with Transport, to form DETR (1997), lost environmental protection to Defra and become DTLR (2001), and lost Transport again to become ODPM (2002). The Social Exclusion Unit started out in the Cabinet Office (1997) and then went to ODPM (2002). It sounds actually as if all this change means is that it's going back to the Cabinet Office again.
The net result of all this desk shuffling?
(a)The officials dealing with local government matters have been separated from those dealing with environmental protection.
(b) work which in 1997 required half of one cabinet minister now requires the work of three cabinet ministers (Prescott as Dep PM; Miliband as Local Govmt Minister; plus the new Social Exclusion Minister).
(c) a lot of your money has been spent on websites, printing stationery, hiring consultants etc etc.
I wonder why public sector productivity is so low?
Posted by: William Norton | February 25, 2006 at 11:41
Actually - there's something else even more worthy of consideration.
Presumably, the new Cabinet Minister for Social Exclusion will be receiving one of the new £50,000 Jaguar cars issued to all Cabinet Ministers.
Does that make him/her more or less socially excluded from the rest of us?
Posted by: William Norton | February 25, 2006 at 12:03
Never has so much bureaucracy and waffle been wasted by so many to achieve so little.
Posted by: Derek | February 25, 2006 at 15:18
Williams comments confirm how as the SS Labgov sails on its Captain is more interested in arranging the deckchairs than which direction it's going.
Dealing with social inclusion is about imbedded principles in all departments not an oversight collective of civil servants.
Posted by: Ted | February 25, 2006 at 16:18
The notion of their being a Social Exclusion Unit or a Cabinet Minister for it is a stupid idea, naturally all Government Departments should aim at achieving equality of opportunity as much as is practicable - evening defining what Social Exclusion is is a difficult thing to do, someone can be a Millionaire and yet find it extremley difficult to function socially, equally some people who are poor yet function quite well socially and what really can government do about social opportunities, the answer is absolutely nothing but waste money trying.
Posted by: Yet another Anon | February 25, 2006 at 20:40
Does that make him/her more or less socially excluded from the rest of us?
If the Minister was denied access to the ministerial Jaguar, then said minister would appear to inferior to their ministerial colleagues, and would thus suffer social exclusion.
Obviouly in the interests of social inclusion, either the Deputy Prime Minister should give up one Jaguar, or allow allow the ministers to have two.
Oh yes.
Posted by: James Hellyer | February 25, 2006 at 21:18