The Big Society

Apologies for all the lists, I seem to be in listy mode today.

I guess my post above begs the question, would you rather pay more taxes and pay someone else to do these activities, do them yourself, or not see them done.

Personally, I would rather pay more taxes, because I feel that I'm already doing as much volunteering as I feel able to do whilst running a business and having a family.

Also I don't feel that I would be that good at providing respite care and support for autistic children & their families - just for example - given that I am a vegetable grower, and know nothing about child development etc.

And I am well aware that at some point in my life I'm very likely to need social care services, and I would rather they were delivered effectively by someone who knew what they were doing.

I just look at the current situation where the Government is spending fortunes (far more than we raise in tax) into public services. Tax rates are already quite high so do we really want them higher, do you want to see VAT at higher than 20% or a raise in the rates of income tax or national insurance on people in order to pay for even more state provision of services.

The other thing to bear in mind is that if you want an activity to happen, then

a) someone has to use their time do it, and
b) the concrete 'stuff' needed to make it happen has to be bought or otherwise provided.

There are three options -

option 1 - we all work at our own jobs, generating goods and services, pay taxes on the money that we earn, and then pay someone to do the work for us (and then they can buy the goods and services that they need). Our elected representatives decide what services are the most important, and therefore what will receive tax money.

option 2 - we all either spend less time working on our own jobs generating other goods and services, or have less leisure time, and spend some part of our working hours doing social care activities. Individuals decide what services they consider valuable, and providing they can get together enough others to make a viable service, they give their time / resources to make it happen

option 3 - said social care activities do not occur.

Sorry about the two 'third's

byrel, I would definitely be happy to pay more taxes in order to fund better services.

"Is it not about people just putting in a couple of hours a week"

There are all sorts of problems with that. The first, as MsLucy pointed out is that a lot of social care work & other things provided by taxes need skilled workers to be done well.

The second - as I'm sure you will have experienced yourself if you have done lots of voluntary work or community organising - is that it really is the same old faces time & again.

The third, is that a substantial proportion of those same old faces will definitely have their own agenda, and it won't necessarily be about providing what people want.

The third is that in a lot of places people are really struggling to provide for their families already, working very long hours for low wages, and they really don't have the time or energy to then go out & do another job when they get off work. (Hence the same old faces problem.)

Plenty of others - which is not in any way to say that volunteer run activities are not fantastically valuable & important - but I just don't see them replacing lots of social spending right now.

I do a fair bit of voluntary work and so does DH - I was commenting to him this mornings that what we do in our 'spare' time is starting to sound more and more like what people are forced to do on community service. I am not sure what that says about us.

The problem with leaning on volunteers is that provision becomes whimsical and more about people feeling good they are volunteering than the actual service provided. Nobody wants to do the really difficult, filthy, unrewarding stuff, and we don't have religious orders on every street corner prepared to step in any more. So it needs more than this.

Is it not about people just putting in a couple of hours a week to help improve the community in which they live. I think most people do have that time to be honest.

We'd also pay more taxes for a fairer society; within a few years we expect to be HR taxpayers and we still would.

That would be the ultimate Big Society but completely opposite of New Right ideology of course.

mslucy In order to fund the amount and level of public services that we currently have we'll have to raise taxes in order to pay for it. Would you be happy to pay more taxes?

Mslucy I am not aware of the play service you used so cannot comment on that, and good on you for fighting for what you need (if it comes to the boy's SNU schools I will be first to chain myself to the railings). But it doesn't have to be all 'yummy mummy' provided (and I know exactly who you mean LOL). There's mid road already out there organsing similar things in the third sector and they could fill a gap- but probably couldn't afford to without funding.

Big Society = steaming bucket of horse sh*t .

We pay tax (both nationally and locally) and should get something back in the form of services.

I feel especially strongly about this as I have heard that Camden Council (my LA) is planning to axe its entire play service because of govt cuts.

The service is brilliant and run by a dedicated team of professionals who know what they are doing. It is a lifeline for working parents and the kids love it.

I will fight tooth and nail to save it.
It is a frontline service not some mimsy thing that should be run in a half arsed way by a few yummy mummies.

Don't even get me started.....

That I am not guilty of PMSL- been a member of Lib dems, Greens, Labour.......

Yes buit it's one that seems to be abandoning teh very people that don;t have a choice.

I think it ahs legs, I think it should be limited to the nice to haves (possibly surestart, sports etc) and the state should have an absolute commitment to life basics and necessities for the more vulnerable people and that isn;t happening (didn;t really under last lot either).

The assessment system for EMA is a disgrace and is leaving many people abandoned- my field is ASD but a test asking 'can you pick up a coin'? for ASD? ridiculous! Social Services depts that refuse to help people with ASD's fulls top (unless they ahve additionals such as severe LD).

Big Society should provide the icing on the cake but if you have needs that keep you housed, fed, alive because of SN or the many related things (redundancy, illness, old age) you should be able to get that from the state because it has to be someone legally accountable (how many pleas for care apckages / school provision / benefits are won on appeal? I know it to be very many). And because for most people that is what they ahve been paying NI for aall the many years they worked before (and usually after) their claim- only the most severe cases are lifelong claimants, and they are the ones who cannot fight back if their provision is taken away.

HomeStart did a bloody great job, far better to support struggling famillies that way than via the stigma-inducing costly SSD system. OTOH when i go I want ds3 in a residential system run by an accountable state organisation that has longevity and not a tiny charity that could close after two eyars, when I am no longer there to get him settled again.

The other issue of course is monoey- first thing I ahd to do when the recession started to bite was cut the charity payments out. Bet I am very far from alone on that one!

I think that the big society idea does have legs, the idea that the state can solve each and every problem with have in a society is deeply flawed. Voluntary organisations and charities can be brought in to run and administer some services and will probably do it much better than the Government does as they won't be strangled by bureaucracy and red tape.
The previous Government thought the state could be used to solve everything and so threw money at things and put us in the sorry situation that we're in so I think a fresh approach is needed and the coalition are making one.

I think that you are absolutely right, Santa.

I think also though that this is very much backed up by the media, who like to portray people claiming benefits as 'scroungers', which suits their political low-tax low-benefit agenda.

You can see also the real problems with relying on voluntary help / charitable giving by comparing the amounts given to, for example, cancer research charities, compared to mental health charities.

I was asked to apply for a Phd in Social Policy but cannot afford it. Maybe one day.

I think part of the problem as well lies in how society generally operates; for all sorts of reasons we no longer have much contact with people very different to us- certainly when many of us grew up anyone with an SN was sent to a specialist unit or if they were in MS they didn;t ahve enough help (still the case) so could not perform at optimum levels and became amrked out as 'trouble'.

Few famillies have elderly relations living with them, many have moved away. Society values people on economic status so redundancy etc is seen as a scary bogeyman and people do tend to like the ostrich approach. Schools have a habit of becoming class ghettos, as well.

So it become fairly impossible to have an understanding of what it is to be someone who has ahd a different deal in life. People learn instead from stereotypes and tabloids.

So you get people on MN stating that being a carer is the same as any other form of parenting; Benefit claims staff staring at my dad and telling him it's his own fault he never paid into apension and he should be ashamed by satte reliance (in fact, hsi pension plans went under as theyw ere sold to an American firm who asset stripped htem, dad always worked, and indeed still does pushing seventy and was just asking for info as his health is failing).

And by heaping on blame etc we differentiate ourselves from the less fortunate in our own minds, making us somehow feel safer, and find excuses not to help.

I think one of my biggest blessings is that before the genetic issue sn/ bad luck were ever existent, I worked in the Sn community and didnt have to make so much of a jump into a different world as many; served me well. I still ahd huge identity issues going from employed to state claimant though, ones that still simmer belwoe the surface and would bond me to (working) Dh for life if there was nothing else there I think.

"A wealthier country does not automatically become a fairer country."

Absolutely, nor a happier country. Of course, up to a point it helps a lot, but we are far beyond that point now.

My other problem with it all (and particularly with the Big Society) is very much to do with where we are starting.

I do think that overall as a society it would be better if we were able to have a far greater degree of mutual support within the local area, and not be relying on top down provision.

I suspect, for example, that in terms of providing genuine education that people wanted, the Workers Educational Association back in its early days was far more effective than any government 'basic education' initiative.

But, the problem of course is that we are starting from such an unequal position in terms of access to resources.

Say we were to have a sudden bolt of lightning, that redistributed land, assets and social capital equally amongst the population - then I can see that it would be much, much better to rely on social solidarity to keep things running and support those with greater needs.