Listening to James Caan over the last few days on the Radio has been something of a revelation for people who know him for his appearances on dragons den. Firstly he suggested that society is being damaged by easy chances being given to people related to us, so we must stop helping our children with jobs and stuff. Then a few hours later as the Father of two daughters he was quizzed on why he had employed both the girls in his company. These conversations took place in the context of his role as the Governments Social Mobility Tsar rather than as a dragon, although one wonders if the only end result will be  a bit more political mobility for Mr Caan himself! That said David Cameron has shown his true colours by indicating ‘he was out’ when the debate appeared to be getting difficult so perhaps Mr Caan won’t get as much political gain as he might have wished.

The real issue is that very few people who the Tsar is attempting to reach out to, will ever be in a position to do as he has and offer their children a job. Sadly very few are likely to be able or willing to even give advice on the best strategy for a job interview. There are many examples of symbolic nepotism which we know take place throughout certain industries and at the heart of this is the Political elite in Westminster. However the corruption in our political system and even the appointment of two girls in Mr Caan’s empire does not touch on the problems of social mobility across our nation in any tangible way. In any case the best way of influencing Whitehall power brokers is probably not in such as subtle way as through public interviews. Social mobility appears to be much easier to measure than it is to address, but one hopes that he has taken on this job with a few more ideas up his sleeve. It appears that he will only be Tsar for six months so let us hope we hear more from him before the end of the year.

Social mobility is surely one of those things that happens partly as a result of an open and free market, if there is no bias then merit will primarily determine who gets where. There are plenty of places however where the market for social advancement is not free. Education services which enable one wealthy family to buy a better education for their children is one area where the market is biased. Some families can counteract this advantage by spending more time with their own children to help provide support for  them at home. Those whose parents lack the finances or skills or indeed the will are denied the chance to compete, unless of course the state is big enough to give the other children the help that motivated and educated parents can achieve for their children. If however those leaving private schools get jobs in places where they can then argue for a small state, we end up with one very obvious area of inequality. This is compounded if those leaving private schools are disproportionately able to secure selection by local political parties for relatively safe seats to further increase their access to power, or the corridors of Westminster, or some of our other public services. We need to ensure that all of our children get a good education and we must challenge the lack of diversity amongst our legislators and Civil Servants, in the Forces and the Church. Perhaps Mr Caan could focus on these sorts of issues (he is certainly not an old Etonian!). This may be more effective than attempting to discourage builders and plumbers from employing their sons or daughters!