Writing this chapter in the week Tony Blair finally announced his resignation as prime minister, it seems appropriate to reflect upon this vital question posed by his immediate successor, not least in respect of the concluding note of humility in Blair's resignation speech, in which he offered his apologies ‘for the times I have fallen short’ (Blair, 2007). It is to one of the key areas where his stewardship arguably ‘fell short’ that this chapter will turn, for Brown's question cannot be answered without looking at the society Britain has become. The imperative to make this assessment is spurred by the recent UNICEF report that revealed the profound malaise permeating the lived experiences of young people in contemporary Britain (UNICEF, 2007). This seems not to be a society in which young people share a sense of inclusion, of well-being, or of social justice. Despite the optimism that pervaded New Labour's election in 1997, and some unquestioned successes of his premiership, Blair's detrimental legacy is a society seemingly less tolerant, more condemnatory and less just than when he entered Downing Street. This chapter, therefore, will examine profound deficiencies in the bequest of ‘respect’ by responding to Blair's own challenge, announced in his speech to accompany the launch of the Respect Action Plan, for a ‘genuine intellectual debate about the nature of liberty’ (Blair, 2006) to which few have yet responded, despite the passage of time.

Notwithstanding, there were some grounds to believe that such political debate might come when the Leader of the Opposition, David Cameron, seemed to promote a greater culture of tolerance towards young people in his ‘hug a hoodie’ speech: