Published well into the first year of the Conservative-led Coalition Government, Hugh Bochel has edited a highly commendable and timely collection of essays which examine a wide range of social policies, and how these have developed since the Conservatives’ crushing election defeat in 1997. The fifteen chapters are lucidly written by leading academic experts in their respective fields, and cover such policies as community care, criminal justice, education, family, health, housing, social security and welfare-to work.

The authors examine not just the content of contemporary Conservative policy in their particular sphere, but skilfully contextualise it by delineating its development since 1997, both in response to intra-Party debates about the meaning and orientation of post-Thatcherite Conservatism, and as a reaction to the modernisation of public services and the welfare state enacted by New Labour.

Until David Cameron became Conservative leader in December 2005, it had been widely assumed that the Party could pursue one of two ideological paths; either a return to a mode of One Nation Toryism (as had prevailed from 1945 to 1964) or a perpetuation of Thatcherism. Certainly, this was how the debates within the Conservative Party itself were often presented or perceived, as if it was a simple either/or choice of ideology and strategy. Initially, Cameron himself seemed to veer towards the One Nation tradition, but what gradually became evident was that he, and other ‘modernisers’, seemed to be devising a Conservative ‘third way’ to tackling social problems.

This new, more nuanced, approach seemingly eschewed both Thatcherite thralldom to the unfettered free market, and the top-down reliance on government and the State previously associated with One Nation Tory paternalism and – much more so – Labour (Old and New). Against these two seemingly stark alternatives, Cameron's Conservatives increasingly urged a revival of localism and a form of communitarianism, whereby social problems and poverty would be tackled by a combination of altruistic individuals (as active citizens), charities, social entrepreneurs and voluntary organisations. At the same time, public services would be modernised to allow for alternative forms of ownership and delivery, so that, for example, hospitals and schools might be run by their staff as ‘co-operatives’, albeit with the proviso that if they failed to attract enough ‘customers’, they would go out of business. Perhaps the most notable example of this new approach, as highlighted in the chapter by Sonia Exley and Stephen J. Ball, is that of ‘free’ schools, established by teachers and parents, and ostensibly free from local authority and central government control.

It is this development in Conservative thinking on social issues and welfarism since 1997, but more particularly since Cameron became leader, that is examined in many of the chapters, and which elucidate the evolution of what has become known as the ‘Big Society’ to mend ‘broken Britain’. Yet although Cameron has become personally identified with the ‘Big Society’ approach to tackling social problems, many of the contributors in this book rightly acknowledge other individuals and think tanks which have significantly contributed towards this apparent Conservative ‘third way’. Two of the most notable proponents include the ‘Red Tory’, Phillip Blond, whose influence is acknowledged in Peter Somerville's chapter on Conservative housing policy, and the Centre for Social Justice (created by former Conservative leader, Iain Duncan Smith), which has played a key role in shaping the Party's policies both on the family and social security.

Indeed, these two spheres of social policy have proved central to the Conservative Party's professed concern about poverty in contemporary Britain, for instead of attributing socio-economic deprivation and social exclusion to the widening gap between the super-rich and the poorest (who have evidently not benefitted from neo-liberalism's much-vaunted ‘trickle down’ of wealth – as Phillip Blond himself has variously acknowledged), Smith and the Centre for Social Justice have identified family break-down and unemployment as the main underlying causes of poverty. Not surprisingly, therefore, the resultant policy solutions are to urge a strengthening of marriage, and reform the welfare state by tightening eligibility for social security benefits pertaining to joblessness. Of course, this obviates any need to tackle ‘excessive’ pay at the top, and also keeps wealth redistribution off the policy agenda, for this approach heralds merely a more subtle Conservative means of blaming the poor themselves for their poverty, while exempting the rich from any culpability or responsibility.

Yet while it is doubtless true that living on social security benefits is a major cause of poverty (thereby rather undermining the perennial Conservative and Tory tabloid claims that benefits are ‘too generous’), this ostensibly new Conservative approach does not seem to acknowledge or understand that forcing people off benefits into work will not itself tackle poverty if the jobs – assuming they exist in a recession – are low paid, and food and domestic fuel prices are increasing as sharply as they have been recently. It is also noteworthy that in spite of the professed commitment to supporting and strengthening the family – both as a laudable objective in itself, and as a means of tackling poverty – George Osborne's first Budget heralded a three-year freeze of child benefit.

In addition to examining the origins, objectives and details of Conservative social policies since 1997, this excellent collection of essays also discusses the early impact of coalition with the Liberal Democrats in several policy areas. To some extent, the initial working relationship was relatively cordial on many issues, doubtless reflecting the increased prominence of ‘Orange Book’ Liberal Democrats in recent years, for these were more sceptical of the State, and evinced more faith in ‘the market’, than those in the Party who were more sympathetic to social democracy. Certainly, there are a number of senior or influential Liberal Democrats who broadly share the Conservative commitment to ‘shrinking’ the State, allowing the private and/or voluntary sectors to share in the delivery of public services, and promoting ‘localism. These sources of broad agreement and shared objectives have, thus far, out-weighed the defeats which the Liberal Democrats have suffered on a few specific, high-profile, social policies – most notably student top-up fees.

Nonetheless, as several of the contributors make clear in their respective chapters, it has been the Conservative approach to social policy and welfare reform which has prevailed in the coalition government, with the Liberal Democrats often seeking to tame or tone down more radical proposals – much to the chagrin of the Conservative Right. Yet given that the Conservatives are by far the larger of the two parties, not least in terms of parliamentary seats, it is hardly surprising that their preferences should prevail; it is not a coalition of genuine equals, and could hardly be so, given the size of the Conservatives in relation to the Liberal Democrats. The later are evidently very much the junior partners; how could it be otherwise?

Hugh Bochel has edited an excellent text; comprehensive and contemporary in its coverage, and with chapters clearly and engagingly written by relevant social policy experts. This should be essential reading for all students and lecturers on social policy degrees or modules, but will also appeal to those with an interest in contemporary politics and debates about the future of the welfare state. It is to be hoped that Bochel edits a second edition in a few years time, to evaluate the actual record of the coalition government during the next three to four years – assuming that it lasts that long.