Introduction

In the early years of the New Labour government after 1997, modernisation through the extension of market and managerial principles was the central theme of policy in relation to social services as in other areas of the public sector (Clarke et al, 2000; Harris, 2003). However, looking back after more than a decade, we can identify a more fundamental transformation in welfare policy in Tony Blair's third term (2005–07), continuing under Gordon Brown's premiership after the summer of 2007.

The distinctive feature of New Labour's social policy is a shift away from the collectivist, redistributive approach of the post-war welfare state to a more individualistic, therapeutic ethos. While the ideological groundwork for this shift was central to the emerging New Labour project in the mid-1990s, it came to dominate government policy a decade later. By contrast, the marketisation agenda, directly inherited from the Thatcher–Major era, appeared to lack any entrepreneurial impetus and rapidly became mired in bureaucracy.

In its shift away from material redistribution towards a concern with the moral and spiritual welfare of the individual, New Labour social policy came to focus on the section of society that appeared to be both most vulnerable to the threats of the post-modern world and most susceptible to state intervention: children. Transforming children's social care into an effective means of tackling social exclusion and improving well-being has become a central policy commitment over the past decade. Key innovations, including Sure Start programmes and children's trusts, have sought to cut across established modes of governance and professional boundaries, at national and local levels. Inspired by theories of ‘positive psychology’ and US practice models, these initiatives are forging a new pattern of relationships between the state and the family. Yet, although promoters of these methods claim the legitimacy afforded by scientific evaluations, the evidence remains contentious and the question of ‘what works?’ in the long term remains uncertain.

Positive welfare