eleven - Gender and New Labour: after the male breadwinner model?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 January 2022
Summary
Introduction
New Labour's accession marked a shift in government assumptions about gender. Under earlier Labour governments, education and health legislation had given crucial citizenship rights to women and men equally (which women seized in order to participate fully as citizens) while the 1970s brought equal opportunities and sex discrimination legislation. These brought women into employment and public life, but the male breadwinner model of the family lingered through aspects of Thatcher and Major government policy until 1997 – women might join the labour market, become Members of Parliament (MPs) and ministers, but they should not expect government support in challenging gender relations at home, or through any national system of childcare. New Labour had new ideas about gender, with a more liberal attitude to varied family forms, a strong expectation that women's responsibilities lay in employment as well as parenting, that they should be expected to support themselves and their children and pay for their own pensions. New Labour has acknowledged the extent of change in families, and the need for women to sustain more independent employment and incomes. It developed a work–life balance agenda for economic reasons, to avoid social exclusion and support families, although rarely for gender equality (Lewis and Campbell, 2007a, 2007b).
How strongly has New Labour supported gender equality? If the male breadwinner model was an interrelated system of employment, care, time, income and power, how far in practice have women been enabled to support themselves and their children through equality in employment and working time, with social support for care and gender equality in care? How does gender equality in the UK measure against Sweden, where gender equality has been a passion, and supports for dual-earner families have been long-standing? I argue that policy for women's employment has not been matched by policies in other areas. Care has been a second priority, with Sure Start, Childcare Tax Credits and rights for preschool children, but there is a long way to go before we could describe a ‘universal service’. Gender inequality in time is crucial: on average, women are now only half of a one-and-a-half-breadwinner model. Policies for flexible working are aimed mainly at mothers, but policies for more equal time are nowhere on the agenda.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Social Policy Review 20Analysis and Debate in Social Policy, 2008, pp. 215 - 240Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2008