RECONCILING SOCIAL JUSTICE WITH ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS: THE COHERENCE OF NEW LABOUR’S DISCOURSE ON EDUCATION BY CAROLINE KENNY A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham For the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Political Science and International Studies School of Social Sciences The University of Birmingham November 2009 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT According to key figures within New Labour, the advent of the knowledge-based economy has ended the ―sterile‖ battle between social justice and economic competitiveness; this now means that it is only through the provision of opportunities for all, achieved through high quality education, that the demands of the two goals can be fulfilled. I investigate the claims made by Blair, Brown and the Education Ministers that social objectives are being reconciled with economic considerations in the Party‘s approach to education and, in doing so, explore the existence and content of a putative ‗New Labour‘ discourse on education. I highlight the limitations of the existing literature in dealing with issues of discourse, agency and time. I contend that in overlooking questions of discourse and ignoring the potential for differences over time and between actors, the current literature fails to capture the dynamism and complexity of the Government‘s discourse leading it to reach two inaccurate conclusions about New Labour as well as prohibiting us from gaining a proper sense of whether the Party has been coherent in its discussions of education. Conversely, I set out an alternative view of coherence, proposing discourse as an equivalent unit of analysis to policy and demonstrating sensitivity to differences both over time and between agents. I show that there is not one coherent ‗New Labour‘ discourse on education, but a shared conception that is underpinned by three discourses that appeal to arguments about the knowledge-based economy, opportunity and responsibility. Within this however, are eighteen different arguments the use, meaning and significance of which varies between Blair, Brown and the Education Ministers and, over the three terms between 1997 and 2007. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not have been possible without the help and support of my supervisors Colin Hay, Dan Wincott and David Bailey as well as the additional and invaluable help provided to me by Dave Marsh. I would also like to thank Mark and Ben for their proof reading skills. I would also like to thank the Economic and Social Research Council for the funding given to me to complete this project. Finally, I would also like to thank Ben and my family, particularly my sister, for all their help and support in keeping my spirits going and spotting the inevitable grammatical mistakes. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES INTRODUCTION 1 THE IMPORTANCE OF LANGUAGE 4 DISCOURSE AND IDEAS IN THE EXISTING LITERATURE 5 MY THEORETICAL POSITION 6 THE IMPORTANCE OF LANGUAGE TO NEW LABOUR 8 THE EXISTING LITERATURE ON NEW LABOUR 10 METHODOLOGY 13 STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS 16 CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW 20 SECTION ONE: THE COHERENCE OF NEW LABOUR 21 1.1 THE THIRD WAY 22 1.2 OVER TIME 24 1.3 ACROSS POLICY 27 1.4 ACROSS DIFFERENT LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT 30 1.5 ACROSS ACTORS WITHIN NEW LABOUR 31 1.6 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC OBJECTIVES 33 1.6.2 NEW LABOUR IS NOT RECONCILING SOCIAL JUSTICE WITH ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS BECAUSE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO RECONCILE THEM IN EITHER THEORY OR PRACTICE 36 SECTION TWO: THE PRESUPPOSITIONS UNDERPINNING THE LITERATURE ON NEW LABOUR 41 2.1 TREATING NEW LABOUR AS A SINGLE ACTOR 42 2.2 EDUCATION SUBORDINATED TO THE ECONOMY 45 SECTION THREE: AN ALTERNATIVE UNDERSTANDING OF COHERENCE 47 CONCLUSION 48 4.1 EXPECTATIONS FROM THE LITERATURE 49 CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY 51 SECTION ONE: JUSTIFICATION OF METHODOLOGY 52 1.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF LANGUAGE AND DISCOURSE 52 1.2 NEW LABOUR, NEW LANGUAGE? 55 1.3 THE LIMITATIONS OF THE CURRENT LITERATURE 56 1.4 THE NEED FOR A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF NEW LABOUR‘S DISCOURSE 60 1.5 THE NECESSITY FOR QUANTITY AND QUALITY 69 1.5.1 FURTHER DISCUSSION OF METHODS: CONTENT ANALYSIS 72 1.5.2 FURTHER DISCUSSION OF METHODS: QSR NVIVO 73 SECTION TWO: MY METHOD IN FULL 74 2.1 THE EVOLUTION OF MY PROJECT 75 2.2 ANALYTIC PROCESS 77 CONCLUSION 103 CHAPTER III: ‗THE SOCIAL‘: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE LANGUAGE OF BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS ON EDUCATION IN RELATION TO ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE ‗SOCIAL‘ 104 SECTION ONE: ROLE OF ACTORS 107 1.1 HOW DO BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS CONCEPTUALISE THE ARGUMENTS WITHIN THE ‗SOCIAL‘ IN RELATION TO EDUCATION? 109 1.2 HOW ARE THE ARGUMENTS WITHIN THE ‗SOCIAL‘ USED BY BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS IN RELATION TO EDUCATION? 110 1.2.1 THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF BLAIR‘S LANGUAGE 110 1.2.2 THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF BROWN‘S LANGUAGE 111 1.2.3 THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF THE EDUCATION MINISTERS‘ LANGUAGE 120 1.2.4 ARGUMENTS UPON WHICH ALL THREE ACTORS DIFFER 121 1.2.5 CONSISTENCY ACROSS ALL THREE ACTORS 124 1.2.6 CONSISTENCY BETWEEN ONE OR MORE ACTORS 131 1.2.6.2BLAIR AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS 131 1.2.6.3BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS 136 1.2.7 THE COHERENCE OF BLAIR‘S, BROWN‘S AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS‘ CONCEPTION OF THE ‗SOCIAL‘ 137 1.3 WHAT SIGNIFICANCE DOES BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS GIVE TO THE ARGUMENTS OF THE ‗SOCIAL‘ IN RELATION TO EDUCATION? 142 1.3.1 CONSISTENCY ACROSS ALL THREE ACTORS 150 1.3.2 CONSISTENCY ACROSS ONE OR MORE ACTORS 150 1.3.3 DISTINCTIVENESS OF EACH ACTOR 150 SECTION TWO: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF TIME 152 2.1 GENERAL TRENDS 155 2.2 SPECIFIC FINDINGS 160 SECTION THREE: THE STATUS OF ‗SOCIAL‘ AND ‗ECONOMIC‘ OBJECTIVES IN THE LANGUAGE OF BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS 165 CONCLUSION 172 4.1 A ‗NEW LABOUR‘ DISCOURSE OF THE ‗SOCIAL‘ IN EDUCATION? 173 4.2 PERIODS OF RELATIVE STASIS AND HEIGHTENED ACTIVITY 175 4.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE LITERATURE(S) 177 CHAPTER IV: ‗THE ECONOMIC‘: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE LANGUAGE OF BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS ON EDUCATION IN RELATION TO ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE ‗ECONOMIC‘ 180 SECTION ONE: ROLE OF ACTORS 182 1.1 HOW ARE THE ARGUMENTS WITHIN THE ‗ECONOMIC‘ USED BY BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS IN RELATION TO EDUCATION? 183 1.1.1 THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF BLAIR‘S LANGUAGE 183 1.1.2 THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF BROWN‘S LANGUAGE 184 1.1.3 THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF THE EDUCATION MINISTERS‘ LANGUAGE 189 1.1.4 CONSISTENCY ACROSS ALL THREE ACTORS 198 1.1.5 CONSISTENCY BETWEEN ONE OR MORE ACTORS 205 1.1.5.1BLAIR AND BROWN 206 1.1.5.2BLAIR AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS 208 1.1.5.3BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS 209 1.2 THE COHERENCE OF BLAIR‘S, BROWN‘S AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS‘ CONCEPTION OF THE ‗ECONOMIC‘ 209 1.3 WHAT SIGNIFICANCE DOES BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS GIVE TO THE ARGUMENTS OF THE ‗ECONOMIC‘ IN RELATION TO EDUCATION? 212 1.2.1 CONSISTENCY ACROSS ALL THREE ACTORS 218 1.2.2 CONSISTENCY ACROSS ONE OR MORE ACTORS 218 1.2.3 DISTINCTIVENESS OF EACH ACTOR 218 SECTION TWO: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF TIME 219 2.1 GENERAL TRENDS 222 2.2 SPECIFIC FINDINGS 226 SECTION THREE: THE STATUS OF ‗SOCIAL‘ AND ‗ECONOMIC‘ OBJECTIVES IN THE LANGUAGE OF BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS 232 CONCLUSION 238 4.1 A ‗NEW LABOUR‘ DISCOURSE OF THE ‗ECONOMIC‘ IN EDUCATION? 239 4.2 PERIODS OF RELATIVE STASIS AND HEIGHTENED ACTIVITY 240 4.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE LITERATURE(S) 242 CHAPTER V: A COHERENT NEW LABOUR DISCOURSE OF EDUCATION? THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ‗SOCIAL‘ AND THE ‗ECONOMIC‘ IN THE LANGUAGE OF BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EXISTING LITERATURES 244 SECTION ONE:THE COHERENCE OF NEW LABOUR 246 1.1 INVESTIGATING THE PRESUPPOSITION OF NEW LABOUR AS A SINGLE ACTOR 247 1.2 INVESTIGATING THE PRESUPPOSITION THAT EDUCATION IS SUBORDINATED TO THE ECONOMY 255 1.3 THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE LITERATURE(S) 262 SECTION TWO:ADDRESSING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS 266 2.1 IS THERE A NEW LABOUR DISCOURSE ON EDUCATION AND IF SO, WHAT IS IT? 266 2.2 WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC OBJECTIVES IN NEW LABOUR‘S DISCOURSE? 270 2.3 IS NEW LABOUR‘S APPROACH TO EDUCATION COHERENT? 271 CONCLUSION 273 CONCLUSION 275 SECTION ONE: MY CONTRIBUTION TO THE LITERATURE 276 1.1 EMPIRICAL CONTRIBUTION 276 1.2 METHODOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTION 281 SECTION TWO: FORWARD THINKING 283 2.1 REFLECTING ON THE LIMITATIONS OF MY ANALYSIS 284 2.1.1 WHY ARE THERE PERIODS OF HEIGHTENED ACTIVITY AND RELATIVE STASIS IN NEW LABOUR‘S LANGUAGE ON EDUCATION? 286 2.1.2 WHAT EFFECT DOES POLICY HAVE ON DISCOURSE? 296 FINAL CONCLUSION 297 APPENDIX I 299 SECTION ONE: HOW DO BLAIR, BROWN AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS UNDERSTAND THE ‗SOCIAL‘? 301 SECTION TWO: WHEN DOES THE CONCEPT OF THE ‗SOCIAL‘ FIRST APPEAR AND WHO USES IT? 334 SECTION THREE: WHAT SIGNIFICANCE IS GIVEN TO EACH ARGUMENT OF THE ‗SOCIAL‘ BY EACH ACTOR? 338 SECTION FOUR: HOW IS THE ‗SOCIAL‘ USED WITHIN BLAIR‘S, BROWN‘S AND THE EDUCATION MINISTERS‘ SPEECHES? 343 APPENDIX II 402 SECTION