David Cameron is trying to rescue his vision, it seems.
David Cameron is launching a frantic bid to rescue his much-criticised plan for a “big society” as he promises to back the project with public money and new initiatives to help it survive savage government cuts and public scorn.
Well, putting aside the little inconvenient fact that there are no “cuts” savage or otherwise, merely a reduction in the rate of increase in public spending, I suspect that the biggest obstacle is public scorn rather than funds. If the public doesn’t want this Big Society codswallop, then it is dead in the water. Various reasons have been proffered for opposing it; the government is getting the voluntary sector to pick up the slack left behind by the public sector being a favourite in the Guardian. Frankly, I don’t have a problem with private individuals or organisations doing things that are done by the public sector as they might well make a better fist of it. The other, and for me the biggest one, is the desire by government to insist that we take part in something that we have no desire to be a part of and this bloody persistent nudge bollocks.
Already under the guise of “Big Society” we have seen national service being mooted. Sure, not the same thing that my father’s generation endured. And, yes, I acknowledge that many enjoyed their time in the military, but that’s not the point – we are not the government’s belongings that it may use as it sees fit. Equally, the idea that youth should be coerced into volunteering – eventually forced if they decide en masse not to – is an anthema. And, the nanny state lurks in the background with government initiatives about how we should live our lives, that we should be involved in local projects that we should be encouraged to volunteer, be healthy, keep fit and so on.
None of this is any business of government. None of it. And the sooner Cameron gets this into his head, the better.
Then there’s the doublethink:
Cameron says the big society is not a government initiative, but the opposite – one that will see power handed from Whitehall to the people. “It has the power to transform our country,” he declares. “That is why the big society is here to stay.”
Followed by this:
As a result Cameron and his ministers will make a blizzard of big society announcements, including details of a £100m transition fund to help hard-pressed charities and social enterprises compete, for the first time, for government contracts.
So he is taking our money and giving it to charity. Yet in a decentralised society, we would give it to the charities we felt were deserving of it. The best way to ensure his vision – if that is really his vision – is to slash public spending, completely stop all funding of charity and back off. That way those charities that provide value will be supported and those that are no more than hectoring lobby groups will wither and die. People will make their own decisions without being nudged by Whitehall. Leave us alone and let us get on with it. There is no need for a government funded big society at all. Just let us have more of our own money and allow us the freedom to do with it as we see fit.
The Observer can also reveal plans, to be announced within the next few weeks, to set up a big society university, backed by a multimillion-pound endowment, that will train future generations of community workers.
The first stage will be to announce which company or organisation has won a £20m tender to train an army of 5,000 big society workers over the next five years. The successful bidder will then, from 2015, have the contract to establish a permanent institute for community organising, which will hand out formal qualifications in community work.
I’m wasting my breath here, aren’t I?
However, there is an interesting byline to this:
However, he told Henry Porter people were right to continue to be suspicious of central diktat. “You shouldn’t trust any government, actually, including this one. You should not trust government – full stop. The natural inclination is to hoard power and information.”
So stop doing it, then.
The Big Society is just that, BS. You cannot have centrally directed ‘voluntary’ provision. Its either voluntary or its not. And the State NEVER retreats from some area it has colonised, without retaining control in some way. If the Big Society meant anything it would mean the State leaving vast swathes of social policy entirely, and letting the voluntary sector take over, but with no direction whatsoever. Letting local people organise in whatever way they see fit (possibly providing some funding, but with no strings attached).
But that won’t happen. All Big Society organisations will have to be cookie cutter replicas of the local authority bodies they replace. Forms to fill in, boxes to be ticked, CRB checks, racial & sexual quotas, the works. There will be no diversity, no deviation from the local authority PC norm. Its State provision by any other name.
HERE:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/forestry/8320532/Big-Society-wood-hampered-by-bureaucracy-and-red-tape.html
is why the whole thing is bullshit.
There is another problem.
Just suppose, for a moment or two, that the BS isn’t erm BS.
What are you going to get?
Local self-selected, self-reinforcing power groups dispensing largesse and patronage, according to their own rules.
If my local allotment society is anything to go by, this will mean blatant discrimination, spite, petty jealousy, and downright illegal behaviour (denying people access to the law as a recourse, for instance).
Oh, and before you ask, I’m pink, an atheist, and both my wife and I have IQ’s above 130 – which is why (I think) the’re after me …..
Why does Cameron need this stupid “Big Society” vision of his? What’s his problem? Why can’t he just get on with running the country? If people want to volunteer for things, they will. We don’t need some twat in No. 10 telling us to do it.
XX Why does Cameron need this stupid “Big Society” vision of his?
Comment by Michael Fowke XX
To reinforce his communist credentials.
XX And, the nanny state lurks in the background with government initiatives about how we should live our lives, that we should be involved in local projects that we should be encouraged to volunteer, be healthy, keep fit and so on.XX
Any one see the SLIGHTEST difference here, to Maos China?
(yes, I know it is L.R saying this, but….)
Greg Tingey;
Good point about the pettiness of so many small organisations. I’m thinking of volunteering at a local outdoor museum not because of the BS BS but simply because I want to. However I know I will probably have to resist getting dragged into the factions and personality clashes that will inevitably become apparent after a while. I’m really not sure if I can be bothered with it all.