Since its launch CentreForum has had a particular interest in tackling inequality in childhood.  Our pamphlets have sought answers to the growing inequality in the UK and most often we have concluded that taking measures in early childhood is the most effective way to do this.  (see pamphlets including 'Tackling Educational Inequality', 'The surest route: early years education and life chances' and 'Climbing the ladder: how can Britain become more socially mobile?' )

Indeed, a leader in The Independent last year stated:

"The Prime Minister and his education ministers would do well to study this week's report from the liberal think tank CentreForum... Some of the measure recommended by CentreForum would make the kind of radiocal package Mr Brown needs to strengthen his credibility as the prime minister who sough to end child poverty."

We continue our interest in this topic, so it was the two comment pieces that addressed this issue that caught our eye today.

"Yes! Parenting classes for kids" by Alice Miles in The Times outlines some well-worn, but still valid reasons to prepare children for the stresses and strains of parenting from an early age.

"Proof that we fail too many children" by Deborah Orr in The Independent reminds us of the vicious circle that is our youth justice system.

If you share our interest in this area you might be interested in attending the talk Michael Gove MP on "Making opportunity more equal: the moral urgency of closing the achievement gap in our schools" next week - details from the CentreForum website.

A new survey reveals that the pay gap between men and women increased for the first time in a decade this year ("Pay gap is growing between men and women", The Telegraph). Such inequality is depressing, and reveals how deep-rooted discrimination is in the workplace, with simple anti-discrimination legislation failing to tackle tacit patriarchal attitudes. The problem is two-fold: not only are women being paid less for the same job, but they are aspiring to lesser jobs, often due to the responsibilities of family life. With affirmative action (rightly or wrongly) off the political agenda, it seems that the only way to tackle this is to extend policies encouraging women into work and designed to tackle the assumption that women ought to, in whole or in part, stay at home. This, in turn, requires questioning the model of the family that the Tories have been so keen to propagate in recent weeks.

Not that you would know it from Jan Moir's opinion piece in the Telegraph ("Career mums: stop talking about yourselves!"). Moir seems to be arguing that for a woman to express frustration with juggling home and work life is self-indulgent. What her piece misses, of course, is that when society expects 'home life' to fall disproportionately on women, it is not a simple grievance or complaint but an issue of equity: it is harder for women to work than men. Equally, if family life is a privilege, not a burden, as Moir argues, why shouldn't men share in that privilege and restrict their careers to a similar degree in order to do so? In fact, despite her praise for working women who "put up and shut up", Moir's argument is ultimately little more than a rationalisation of gender inequality. Just because previous generations of women have "put up" with this situation does not mean that it isn't unfair.

Emotionally charged cheers and applause filled parliament square yesterday morning as the statue of Nelson ‘Madiba’ Mandela was unveiled by the man himself, together with Prime Minister Gordon Brown, the Mayor of London and Lord Richard Attenborough.

Seven years on from the inception of the idea for a sculpture, a very British, low-key ceremony celebrated the incredible life and moral upstanding of Mr. Mandela. A hero of our time, Mr. Mandela fought for the fall of apartheid in South Africa throughout his life, and now ceaselessly campaigns for the eradication of world poverty at the age of 89. The PM said: "Nelson Mandela is one of the most courageous and best-loved men of all time. You will be here with us always.” (Independent:  Mandela statue 'a beacon of hope').

The previous evening, Mr. Mandela was reported to have passionately urged successful black men and women to become role models for British youths in an effort to tackle the increasing levels of violent crime and falling academic achievements in schools.  Yet, as Jonathan Brown reports for the Independent (Role models are hard to come by in Peckham) the opinions of black youths are mixed with regards to the great man, and there is a distinct lack of role models to challenge the downward levelling norms which permeate some youth sub-cultures.

Very much in-keeping with Mr. Mandela’s celebratory ceremony was the theme for last weekend’s Notting Hill Carnival was ‘Set All Free’, marking the 200th anniversary of the abolition of slavery. Ironic, as freedom from fear was not 100 per cent guaranteed for there were still incidents of violence, including two non-fatal shootings, although many said that the carnival had been safe.

At a time when freedom, equality and independence are being celebrated in London, it appears that particular minorities continue to be incapacitated, be it through affiliation with gangs, poor academic performance or lack of parental support or role models. Let’s hope that Gordon Brown’s declaration that Mr. Mandela’s statue will be a ‘beacon of hope’ carries some weight.

Yet again the colossal scale of city bonuses is back in the news, with the Guardian reporting that this year they have reached a mind-boggling £14 billion ("City bonuses hit record high with £14bn payout"). Immediately George Monbiot is on the case ("How the neoliberals stiched up the wealth of nations for themselves"), claiming that such inequality is part of a broader capitalist agenda blamed for everything from mass homelessness to the breakup of the welfare state.

In fact these issues may not be as related as Monbiot suggests. While huge bonuses do seem somewhat obscene, the media furore surrounding them obscures two more important points. The first is that in terms of social breakdown, the gap between the super-rich and the average is far less important than the gap between the average and the super-poor. The second is that, while huge bonuses do not in themselves take money away from the less well-off, the failure to tax them does.

Thus the more important issues may be those of tax evasion and, particularly topically, corporation tax. This is brought into sharp relief by today's FT's leader, "A third of UK's biggest businesses pay no tax ". Not only is corporation tax ineffectively enforced - it is spread out inequitably between companies, failing to incentivise or reward socially beneficial practise. Moreover, an oft-overlooked area in which greater international co-operation is needed is the fight against tax evasion, with tax havens draining money away from the countries in which the wealth is created. Admist all of this, the true obscenity looks like the Conservatives' recent plans to actually lessen corporation tax.

Thus social evils cannot all be put down to the simple existence of the capitalist system. To decry the high-earners from the sidelines for their moral depravity won't help anyone on the ground. We must accept that of course business and its high-earners will be self-seeking and profit-driven, but find more efficient ways to harness that profit for the public good by taxing it more effectively.

Also in today's news:

• Nick Clegg has been previewing the Lib Dems immigration debate to be held in Brighton this autumn. ("Call for selective amnesty for illegal migrants')
• Lembit Opik has been arguing that his appointment Shadow Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Secretary does not mean that the Lib Dems don't take the subject seriously. ("Opik says UK Lib Dems serious about business")