Respect Agenda Research Articles

An unstable Union? The Conservative Party, the British Political Tradition, and devolution in Scotland and Wales 2010–23

Abstract While devolution in Scotland and Wales is often established as the settled will, it has been built on unsettled ground, lacking a robust system of intergovernmental relations, and sitting increasingly at odds with the central principle of parliamentary sovereignty. Examining successive UK Conservative-led governments, we evaluate devolution in Scotland and Wales through the lens of the Asymmetric Power Model and the British Political Tradition, documenting changes in the position of successive Conservative governments, from the more plurinationally sensitive respect agenda of David Cameron to the more assertive and intrusive Unionism advanced under those in post after 2016, notably Theresa May and Boris Johnson.

From Interdependency to Co‐dependency: Changing Relations in UK and Devolved Governments Post‐Brexit

AbstractThe Scottish and European Questions have become intertwined over time. A European turn in Scottish politics became evident from the late 1980s when public opinion moved in favour of the European Communities/Union. The Scottish National Party (SNP) became a leading advocate of EC/EU membership with Europe's four freedoms allowing it to dismiss accusations of separatism. Scotland voted in favour of Remain in the Brexit referendum, adding to existing tensions in UK‐Scottish government relations. The institutions and procedures of intergovernmental relations which were designed to cope with tensions are being tested as never before under devolution. The assertion of UK power in these relations has undermined claims made by David Cameron to pursue a ‘respect agenda’ and commitments made immediately after the independence referendum. But while this evidence of divergent views on such a significant matter creates potential challenges for the UK union, it also creates new challenges for the SNP. The prospect of a hard Brexit raises the issue of separatism once more, with a choice of either remaining in the EU but separate from the rest of the UK (rUK), or remain in a separatist UK.

What Kind of Trouble? Meeting the Health Needs of ‘Troubled Families’ through Intensive Family Support

The policy rhetoric of the UK Coalition government's ‘Troubled Families’ initiative, and that of New Labour's earlier Respect Agenda, share an emphasis on families’ responsibilities, or rather their irresponsibility, and their financial costs to society. Giving children a chance of a better life coincides, in this framing, with reducing costs for the taxpayer. The research reported here was based on a national study of Family Intervention Projects (FIPs), funded by the UK government between 2009 and 2012, beginning under New Labour, continuing over a period when the FIP programme was discontinued, and ending after the Troubled Families programme had begun. The research involved over 100 in-depth interviews with stakeholders, including service managers, family key workers, and caregivers and children in twenty families, to consider critical questions about the kinds of trouble that families experience in their lives, and how they are recognised in the policy and practice of intensive family intervention.

Leadership and management challenges in addressing the dignity and respect agenda

Leadership and management challenges in addressing the dignity and respect agenda

Struggles for value: value practices, injustice, judgment, affect and the idea of class

This paper is about the struggle for value by those who live intensified devaluation in the new conditions of legitimation and self-formation, by which the self is required to repeatedly reveal its value through its accrual and investment in economic, symbolic, social and cultural capitals. It explores how this value struggle is experienced: felt affectively, known and spoken through discourses of injustice. Drawing on a small research project, which uses the British New Labour government's Respect Agenda as an evocative device to provoke discussion, the paper details how those positioned as already marginal to the dominant symbolic, presented as 'useless' subjects rather than 'subjects of value' of the nation, generate alternative ways for making value. It examines how the experience of injustice generates affective responses expressed as 'ugly-feelings'. The conversion of these 'ugly feelings' into articulations of 'just-talk' reveals how different understandings of value, of what matters and what counts, come into effect and circulate alongside the dominant symbolic. The issue that most angered working-class respondents is how they are positioned, judged, blamed and held responsible for an inheritance over which they have no control, 'an accident of birth'. They were acutely aware of how they were constantly judged and de-legitimated and how practices such as selfishness and greed were legitimate for others. Showing how they refuse to authorize those they consider lacking in value but with authority and in a position to judge, the paper demonstrates how class relations are lived through a struggle, not only against economic limitation but a struggle against unjustifiable judgment and authority and for dignified relationality. The paper reveals a struggle at the very core of ontology, demonstrating how the denigrated defend and make their lives liveable; an issue at the heart of current austerity politics which may have increased significance for the future.

English Social Work at the Crossroads: A Critical View

At the present time, social work in England finds itself at the crossroads. Against a backdrop of economic globalisation, it has been caught up in New Labour's modernising policy discourse that has recast social justice in terms of opportunity, inclusion, and “choice”. More recently, this has been extended by the introduction of a “respect agenda”, a reaction to the loss of community cohesion and the rise in antisocial behaviour. In the present article, two alternative paradigmatic responses are explored reflecting a debate between evidence-based practice (EBP) and critical practice (CP). These may be juxtaposed because they offer different visions of what social work could become in the future while providing two important reference points against which current practice may be judged. Whereas the former has been depicted as a “search for certainty” that largely complements the modernising discourse, CP works with both certainty and uncertainty in the quest for more emancipatory change. In practice, English social workers may manage such contradictions by looking down both roads and incorporating elements of both in their practice: adopting elements of EBP to justify their interventions and become more research minded while embracing aspects of CP to engage with structural issues that lie at the root of injustice.

‘But They Just Don't Respect Us’: young people's experiences of (dis)respected citizenship and the New Labour Respect Agenda

The New Labour Respect Agenda fuses anti-social behaviour policies, Third Way active citizenship, and a theory of community-based support and regulation. The Respect Agenda itself has a specific focus on, and direct implications for, children and young people, as well as for children living in vulnerable families. This paper argues that the theoretical basis for New Labour's ‘Respect’ is limited and ultimately flawed. Whilst New Labour policy demands respect from young people, young people's lived citizenship is too often experienced in terms of disrespect and even shame of the self. Young people respond to these feelings of disrespect by seeking out other ways through which respect can be acted out and negotiated. Respect, as conceptualised through the New Labour lens will criminalise vulnerable young people, thereby further stripping them of self-respect, inter-personal respect and societal respect. The paper concludes that respect should be an outcome of policy and a philosophy of a social justice led politics, rather than a conditionally led policy.