Blair's scars

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Recent policy reforms have brought the Prime Minister into conflict with groups among welfare state policy-makers and professionals whom he dubs ‘conservative’ and, by implication, reactionary. An alternative explanation of resistance is that some members of these groups understand contemporary welfare need in a fundamentally different way from that implicit in the reforms. They adhere to an understanding of the role and operation of state welfare that identifies problems as the outcome of structural inequalities and not simply as the failure to grasp opportunities, and reject the emphasis on enhancing equality of opportunity promoted so enthusiastically by the government. This article examines the pattern of attitudes among state and private sector salariat and the working class and shows that, in contrast to the individualist models which underlie the New Labour approach, many welfare state professionals and managers see structural divisions such as social class as highly important. Contrariness, conservative sloth and self-interest certainly play a part in resistance to change in traditional approaches to welfare. However, disagreement on the balance between individual equal opportunity and the mitigation of structural inequality in reform is also significant, and an important defence of some of the achievements of state welfare. Over-emphasis on opportunity may distract attention from policies (such as redistribution) designed to reduce the advantages of privileged groups in an increasingly unequal society.

This publication has 4 references indexed in Scilit: