人们在伦敦西菲尔德购物中心举办的伦敦招聘会上,2026年5月15日。摄影:Susannah Ireland/《卫报》Polly Toynbee Alan Milburn正准备实施他的报告,让年轻人重返职场。但愿政府能坚持到底。
People at the London Job Show in Westfield shopping centre, London, 15 May 2026.
月亮牵引潮汐般必然,工党政府改善最贫困儿童的生活。同样必然,保守党政府收回成果、扭转善政。历史重演:尽管George Osborne上一次削减开支造成社会性毁灭,Kemi Badenoch却宣称,若有机会,她要对最贫困人群的普遍福利实施削减。
Photograph: Susannah Ireland/The Guardian Polly Toynbee Alan Milburn is preparing to implement his report to bring young people back into work. Let’s hope the government will see it through s certainly as the moon pulls on the tides, Labour governments improve the lives of the poorest children. Just as surely, Conservative governments pull back and reverse the good done. Here we go again: despite the social devastation caused by George Osborne’s cuts last time, Kemi Badenoch announces that she wants to impose cuts to universal credit for the poorest if she gets the chance.
她不搞隐晦手段,没有Iain Duncan Smith那套“严厉以示关爱”的把戏,而是直奔民粹煽动,煽动毫无事实依据的鄙视,针对所有领取福利者,提议禁止用福利金购买香烟、酒类或赌博。她说,福利“不能成为那些懒得干活的人的生活方式选择”。正如所有粗鄙的右翼民粹主义,她制造的伤害散播对弱者的仇恨。在这个最不平等的国家,这鼓励欺凌者踩低一等,扼杀更宽厚的人性本能。
She doesn’t do subtle, none of Iain Duncan Smith’s cruel-to-be-kind routine, but goes straight for populist rabble-rousing, stirring up fact-free contempt for anyone on benefits, with a proposed ban on buying cigarettes and alcohol, or gambling, with benefit money. Welfare, she says, must not be “a lifestyle choice for those who can’t be bothered”. As with all crude rightwing populism, the harm she does spreads hatred of the weak. In this most unequal country, it encourages bullies to kick downwards, stifling more generous human instincts.
摆动的钟摆是这样运作的:新工党让近百万儿童摆脱贫困,建立了3500家Sure Start中心,从出生起就支持家庭。David Cameron和Osborne以数十亿英镑的福利削减瞄准家庭,将这一切扫地出门,把更多儿童推入食物银行式的贫困。
Here’s how the pendulum swings: New Labour lifted nearly a million children out of poverty and set up 3,500 Sure Start centres, which supported families from birth. David Cameron and Osborne swept all that away with billions of pounds in benefit cuts directed at families, tipping more children into food-bank poverty.
这一工党政府自然将摆钟拨回了另一端,通过取消保守党的“两个孩子福利上限”政策,让45万儿童摆脱了赤贫——尽管这拖延了太久。通用津贴标准额度将首次永久性地以高于通胀的幅度上涨;英格兰所有小学生将享受免费早餐俱乐部;英格兰将有50万更多儿童符合免费校餐资格;校服费用将降低;“最佳开端”家庭中心也将陆续开放。
Naturally, this Labour government has swung the pendulum back, taking 450,000 children from destitution by removing the Tory two-child benefit cap – albeit with too much delay. For the first time ever, the universal credit standard allowance will permanently rise above inflation with free breakfast clubs for all primary schoolchildren in England, half a million more children eligible for free school meals in England, cheaper school uniforms and Best Start family hubs opening.
但工党继承了保守党执政14年留下的最烂摊子。近100万“尼特族”——既不在上学、就业也不接受培训的年轻人——是保守党统治的遗留问题。工党已将扭转18至24岁青年这一局面确立为其旗舰目标,希望在下次大选前大幅降低相关数字。这能做到吗?
But Labour has been bequeathed the worst fallout from 14 Tory years. The nearly 1 million Neets – young people not in education, employment or training – are a legacy of Tory rule. Labour has made turning the tide on those aged 18 to 24 its flagship goal, hoping that numbers fall fast by the next election. Can it be done?
下周工党年会上,最抢手的发言人正是那个说“能做到”的人。艾伦·米尔本关于该问题的百科全书式报告,揭示了导致如此多年轻人陷入困境的种种原因。
The man who says it can is most in demand at meetings around the Labour conference next week. Alan Milburn’s encyclopaedic report on the problem revealed the myriad reasons why so many of the young get left in limbo.
下个月预算案公布前,他将发布解决方案。我听说紧张的谈判正在进行中,且已进入白热化阶段,因为这实际上是一份白皮书,而非一份束之高阁的报告,而是一份准备立即付诸实施、且成本核算已与首相、财相及相关大臣预先达成一致的方案。米尔本熟悉体制运作,他决心绕过任何阻碍。
Next month, before the budget, he will publish the plan for what’s to be done. I hear intense negotiations are in progress, down to the wire because this is in effect a white paper, not a report to gather dust but one ready to be implemented at once, with costings pre-agreed with PM, chancellor and relevant ministers. Milburn knows the system, and he is determined to short-circuit any blockers.
问题在于:他的诊断指向的问题涵盖不平等、深度剥夺、精神疾病、教育体制失灵、雇主拒绝提供首次机会、学徒制减少、问题家庭聚集地区缺乏早期支持、青年服务衰退等方方面面。“尼特族”是深层社会机能障碍的后果,而削减开支加速了这一进程。
Here’s the problem. His diagnosis points to everything from inequality and profound deprivation to mental illness, failures of the education system, refusal of employers to offer first breaks, falling apprenticeships, lack of early support in areas where many families are in trouble, and declining youth services. Neets are the fallout from deep social dysfunction, accelerated by the cuts.
首要任务是什么?令人欣慰的是,教育大臣露西·鲍威尔上任即着手推行新的职业类普通中等教育证书(GCSE),米尔本认为这将让学生保持投入,避免辍学。借鉴荷兰的密集一对一个人支持体系,能让“尼特族”(NEETs,即不在就业、教育或培训中的人群)进入培训或工作。这需要新任财政大臣约翰·希利的前期投资,据称他表示同意,尽管他清楚成果需要时间。对“尼特族”的要求是“参与义务”,即他们必须参与提供的帮助,因为所有福利都有附加条件,并以惩罚措施作为后盾。米尔本的研究驳斥了巴德诺克的本能恶毒,他发现84%的“尼特族”渴望紧急获得就业帮助。
Which will be the first priorities? It has been good to see Lucy Powell, the education secretary, start right away on new vocational GCSEs, which Milburn thinks will keep pupils engaged instead of dropping out. Copying the Dutch system of intensive one-to-one personal support will get Neets into training or work That needs upfront investment from the new chancellor, John Healey, who is said to agree, even though he knows the results take time. The quid pro quo expected from Neets is a “duty to engage”, so they must take part in the help offered, as all benefits are always conditional, with penalties as a backstop. Milburn’s research defies Badenoch’s kneejerk nastiness, as he finds 84% of Neets want urgent help into work.
成功将以“尼特族”人数下降来衡量,但存在“存量与增量”问题:防止更多人加入明天的名单,必须从最早的幼年抓起。米尔本在报告中指出,4至5岁未达到入学准备水平的儿童,在16至17岁成为“尼特族”的可能性几乎是其他儿童的三倍。这并非注定命运,但风险极高。
Success will be judged by falling numbers of Neets, but there is the “stock and flow” question: preventing more from joining tomorrow’s list starts at the very earliest years. Children who are not school-ready at ages four to five are nearly three times as likely to be Neet at ages 16 to 17, as Milburn said in the report. That’s not certain destiny, but it is a high risk.
好消息是,米尔本将重置目前歧视最贫困群体的幼儿园体系。他告诉我,他震惊地发现,即使在小学接受了一年的学前班教育后,只有68%的儿童达到入学准备水平。他告诉我,他将宣布一个新目标:到5岁时让90%的儿童达到该水平:所有研究都表明,在最早年龄阶段的投资回报最高。
The good news is that Milburn will reset the nursery system that currently discriminates against the poorest. He tells me he is shocked that only 68% of children are school-ready, even after they have had a year in reception at primary school. He tells me he will be announcing a new target of 90% to reach that level by five years old: all research shows how investment at the earliest age yields most.
这需要什么?从保守党继承来的幼儿园体系,通过拒绝向大多数非在职父母的孩子提供英格兰的资助幼儿园学时,故意阻碍最贫困儿童的发展。这是保守党的思维:父母双方都必须工作,以防止懒惰的母亲在美甲店闲逛,而国家充当保姆。但非在职父母的贫困儿童需要幼儿教育,以缩小他们与其他儿童日益扩大的差距。跳过通讯推广,一个接一个的通讯推广运作方式如下:有工作的父母的孩子,从九个月大到上小学前,可获得30小时免费托儿服务。只有部分处于劣势的两岁儿童才有资格享受每周15小时的免费照护,但据财政研究所(IFS)称,这一权利现在仅覆盖“不到30%的两岁儿童”。新经济基金会指出,这意味着最富裕家庭的孩子比最弱势家庭的孩子更有可能获得国家资助的托儿服务,比例高达八倍。正如财政研究所所言,该制度“几乎在定义上就排除了最贫困的家庭”。难怪我采访过的小学校长们说,他们能立刻分辨出哪些孩子接受过完整的幼儿园教育,哪些只接受过一点,哪些则完全没有接受过。
What would that take? The nursery system inherited from the Tories deliberately holds back the most deprived children by denying funded nursery hours in England to most children with a non-working parent. Here was Tory thinking: both parents must work to stop lazy mothers idling in nail bars while the state acts as childminder. But deprived children with non-working parents need nursery education to close the growing gap between them and the rest. skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Here’s how it works: a child with working parents can get 30 hours of free nursery care from the age of nine months up to primary school. Only some disadvantaged two-year-olds can qualify for 15 hours a week, but that entitlement now reaches“fewer than 30% of two-year-olds”, says the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) This means that children of the best-off are eight times more likely to benefit from state-funded nursery than the most disadvantaged children, says the New Economics Foundation As the IFS says, the system “almost by definition excludes the poorest families”. No wonder primary headteachers I have spoken to say they can immediately tell which children have had full nursery education, which have had a little, and which have had none.
早期教育和托儿联盟总监莎拉·罗南一针见血地告诉我:“想象一下剥夺最贫困儿童接受小学教育的机会。我们绝不会容忍这种事。然而我们却允许这种情况发生在学前教育阶段,同时却为入学准备度发愁,为‘尼特族’(NEETs,指不在就业、教育或培训中的青年)挠头。” 当米尔本的报告出炉时,这种挠头的局面可能就会结束。与此同时,巴德诺克对“尼特族”问题鲜有表态,但她针对失业者的更广泛计划中,并未包含对培训或就业支持的额外投资。英国改革党甚至敢说她做得还不够远。这就是由来已久的分歧,既是心理和情感上的,也是政治上的:左派主张通过务实的社会政策帮人站起来,右派则倾向于惩罚性地给每个弱势群体一脚。波莉·托因比是《卫报》专栏作家
Sarah Ronan, the director of the Early Education and Childcare Coalition, tells me pithily: “Imagine denying the poorest children access to primary education. We just wouldn’t stand for it. Yet we allow that to happen in the early years while we wring our hands about school-readiness and scratch our heads about Neets.” The head-scratching may be over when Milburn’s report lands. Meanwhile, Badenoch has little to say about Neets, but her wider plans for the jobless see no investment in training or extra support into work. Reform UK dared to say she didn’t go far enough There it is: the age-old divide, psychological and emotional as well as political, between the left’s practical social policy to lift people up and the right’s punitive desire to give every underdog a kick. Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist