Opinion: Keeping them (equally) honest?

Oliver Patel, Research Assistant, UCL Grand Challenges

The first article in a series assessing the Tory leadership campaign from the perspective of inequality. Part one analyses the stances of the previous frontrunners, comparing and contrasting their commitments to addressing inequality.

Let’s take a moment to examine the main Tory Leadership candidates. Out of the 12 that put themselves forward, 6 made it to the later rounds. Of these, all were male, 5 were white, 5 went to Oxbridge, and 2 went to Eton. Maybe these characteristics are not surprising given the make-up of the Tory party membership, which is 71% male, 97% white, and 38% aged over 65. But in a society with a massive educational attainment gap and life expectancy gap between the richest and poorest, huge regional disparities, and up to 14 million people living in poverty, why are the candidates not focusing more on matters of inequality?

The campaign has been dominated by Brexit and tax cuts. Although reference has been made to combating the housing crisis, improving social care, and boosting funding for education, such issues have not been spoken of in terms of inequalities to be addressed.

Inequality is one of the defining issues of our time, yet the word has barely been mentioned in the campaign. The word 'inequality' was not mentioned once in either flagship debate on Channel 4 and BBC One. The only time the word 'equality' was mentioned was when Dominic Raab defended his previous comments that feminists are 'obnoxious bigots', and reassured viewers that he does care about equality.

Amidst such views, a focus on structural inequalities embedded in UK society deserve attention now more than ever. It is pertinent to ask what it may mean for inequality and associated policies if each of the remaining candidates takes office or a crucial ministeral post in future. Although Theresa May began her premiership promising to tackle the ‘burning injustices’ that plague our society, and took positive steps such as setting up the Race Disparity Unit at the Cabinet Office, her time in office has been dominated by Brexit, and very little has been done to reduce inequalities.

Where did the frontrunners stand?

Michael Gove
Gove emphasised giving children the best start in life as his main priority. He highlighted the importance of early years intervention and funding and seemed to understand the need for a life course approach to public policy. He also claimed that ‘overlooked families and undervalued communities will be at the heart of my premiership’.

Gove has managed to drive forward policy change in each of his Ministerial positions, so it is likely that he would seek to be a reforming Prime Minister. However, it is not guaranteed that future reforms would be good for social equality. As Education Minister (2010-2014), Gove oversaw the increase in tuition fees to £9,000, major cuts to per-pupil funding, and the scrapping of the Educational Maintenance Allowance in England. Furthermore, very little was done to reduce the educational attainment gap, and reforms to the school system exacerbated inequality.

> Read more in our Opinion: Health Matters - Looking ahead to the health of future generations

Jeremy Hunt
Hunt has focused on young people, intergenerational justice and education, outlining ‘ youth pledges’ such as making it easier for young people to buy homes and ending post-primary school illiteracy. These objectives have not been accompanied by concrete policy proposals.

As Foreign Secretary and former Health Secretary, it is unsurprising that Hunt has voted with the government over the past decade, and has been in favour of welfare cuts and cuts to local authority funding. His views on abortion stand out: he believes that the abortion limit should be cut from 24 to 12 weeks, but has ruled out changing the law if Prime Minister. Furthermore, Hunt is the UK’s longest-serving health secretary (2012-2018), but health inequalities such as the difference in life expectancy between the richest and poorest have increased in that time. Also, there has been an unprecedented fall in life expectancy for some low-income population groups.

Sajid Javid
Javid’s campaign alluded to addressing social inequalities. He spoke about taking on the ‘elites and cartels’ in the private sector, and that the acid test for his social justice policy agenda is whether it promotes equality of opportunity and builds a fairer country. Finally, he argued that there should be more welcoming and inclusive language in public discourse, and that diverse elite representation is important.

This rhetoric was promising, and he certainly went further than the other candidates in areas such as racism, diversity and inclusion. However, it is not backed up by specific policies, aside from an investment programme in schools (which all candidates advocated!) Also, Javid’s rhetoric on social justice does not necessarily align with his voting record and actions as Home Secretary. He has refused to ban anti-abortion protests outside abortion clinics and claimed it was appropriate to highlight the ethnicity of paedophiles.

Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson is somewhat of an enigma, being notorious for flipping on areas of public policy. He has argued that ‘no town, community or person should feel left behind’, and has advocated for improving transport infrastructure and rail connectivity in the North and Midlands, as well as strengthening broadband coverage, and increasing funding for further education colleges.

However, throughout his career her has regularly made racist, sexist and homophobic comments. These include referring to Muslim women in burkas as ‘letterboxes’, calling gay men ‘bumboys’, and referencing Barack Obama’s ‘part Kenyan’ ancestry. On these comments alone, it is doubtful that Johnson will become a champion of equality and social justice as Prime Minister, although he implemented some socially liberal initiatives as London Mayor.

Dominic Raab
Like Johnson, Raab has made several comments which cast doubt as to whether he would take seriously social justice causes. For example, he has argued that the Government Equalities Office should be abolished, and is against affirmative action policies, arguing that women now have ‘unfair advantage in the workplace’. During the campaign, he refused to call himself a feminist, which was unique among the candidates.

His political track record is not much better, as Raab has been a vocal critic of human rights and associated legislation. However, in the campaign, he spoke of the need for a fairer economy and society, and argued that creating more ‘opportunities for young people’ was his biggest priority. This includes more alternatives in education, such as degree apprenticeships and more non-graduate routes into professions like law and accountancy.

Rory Stewart
Rory Stewart proved popular with the liberal wing of the Tory Party. However, as has been highlighted, his voting record is no different to most other candidates, and he has fully supported the austerity agenda and cuts to public services.

Although did not put forward a detailed policy programme, his approach and rhetoric was more inclusive than the others. For example, he highlighted the need for politicians to ‘feel ashamed’ for societal ills. He also focused on fixing the crisis in adult social care, calling this the ‘unfinished revolution of our society’.

***

Most candidates were in government together and thus have similar voting records. They all supported austerity policies, overseeing drastic cuts to welfare and education. However, some have more liberal credentials than others, and they hold divergent views on issues like gender equality and abortion. Hunt and Raab’s views on women, for example, are of particular concern. Sajid Javid, on the other hand, has spoken passionately about fighting racism and Islamophobia, and Rory Stewart has emphasised the importance of channeling the energy of ‘shame’. Nonetheless, it is difficult to see a drastic departure from the politics and policies of the past decade, regardless of who wins. The fight for equality must therefore remain on the political agenda, if sadly not during the Tory leadership election.

Image credit: Andrew Parsons - Flickr (CC BY-ND 2.0)

> Read Opinion: Keeping them (equally) honest? Part two
> Read more on Exploring Inequalities