Please tell me about this "Big Society" thing

[ForMashGetSmash]

I know very little about politics...I recently learned about The Big Society...and feel a bit about it all.

As far as I can see, it's about communities being asked to take more responsibilty for some public services and for people who have "vision" to stand up and organise improvements to their community.

What worries me is that in some areas...those with big problems such as high unemployment and crime, there may be a lack of people who have the time or energy to contibute...and certain things may be allowed to dissapear. I see that it has been suggested that Library's have volunteers instead of staff....that worries me also.

Could this scheme be allowed to go too far? Could certain things which society really relies on... completely dissapear?

I've done a lot of volunteering in my area over the last fifteen years. It's fun and rewarding. The trouble is that in some parts there really is a shortage of people with the skills to do some of the jobs needed. I see the same people again and again.

But I'm not sure I take the point that areas of high unemployment would have problems as a result of not having time. If they're not working they'd probably have more time than those working.

Do we not already use charitys to provide vital frontline services. If you get in trouble out at sea the lifeboat will come and get you. The RNLI is a voluntary organisation, if you get in trouble up a mountain then mountain rescue will come and try and help you, mountain rescue is a voluntary organisation.
So why not look at other things and see if the third sector can provide the service

I'm not saying that everything should be outsourced but I see no harm in looking to see if there are things that the Government currently does that voluntary organisations might be able to do better and cheaper. The current model of public service and spending is unsustainable we are spending far more than we are bringing in taxes so we must look at alternatives to what we are currently doing.

ragged I totally agree with you,

"Get involved in your local community preschool committee if you want a taste of what The Big Society actually means. An arguably essential public service which 50% of the time in England is run by unqualified untrained inexperienced time-strapped amateurs. With hugely mixed results."

Using volunteers to provide essential services in education, healthcare etc is a recipe for disaster. And as another poster said, what about the unpopular causes? The heroin addicts? The very seriously mentally ill? Ex-cons?

'I volunteer to feed Dave and wipe his bum when he is old and frail. And Gideons '

Riven you are a saint.

Why should vulnerable people have to rely on the goodwill on a bunch of volunteers?
Professional care should be guaranteed - that is the hallmark of a decent, progressive society. We shouldn't allow the rich to effectively pick and choose who they think is worthy of their largesse - cos that is what charity is, you know.
And to whoever said the deficit is the result of overspending - read a book about economics, or indeed the newspapers for the past couple of years.
We spent the equivalent of the deficit on bailing out those Tory (w)bankers who think they earn the ridiculous sums they take home just by shunting money around the city. They are the ones who will really benefit from the Big Bloody Society.
If they put as much effort into chasing billionaire tax evaders as we did villifying people who have fallen on hard times, we might make some inroads into the deficit.

It's not just volunteers doing the work of recently redundant trained workers that worries me.

What about the private sector? They won't be slow to seize the opportunities. So I wonder if this isn't also a way to privatise vital services.

So basically we'll have a lot of unemployed people helping each other - but with no money to buy facilities or equipment or anything they need. Well, it could work. It's called communism. Power to the people! Yay.

I'm not a tory voter but the idea of the big society and re-establishing a sense of community does appeal to me. Whats wrong with giving up a few hours a week to help other people in the community or encouraging charitys to help people. Labour threw a lot of money at public services and we saw very little improvement so maybe a fresh approach is needed.

I don't think volunteers in A&E is what the Government is proposing, its just everyone doing a little thing to improve the community in which they live. We can't expect the Government to do everything for us particulary considering the fiscal crisis that we currently have.

Personally think DC was attempting to distance himself from the Thatcher statement of there being no such thing as society and aligning it to 'caring conservatism'

There's nothing wrong with volunteering. I do it. But it shouldn't be instead of properly funded vital services.

Do we not already use volunteers for vital services though. Mountain rescue and the Lifeboat are 2 voluntary organisations that are part of the emergency services. Other things such as the CAB also provide services to people who are often in very desperate situations.

So let me get this straight.

• If you are on JSA you can't do voluntary work anyway.
• They want volunteers to do the work of those being made redundant.
• Those being made redundant will have to go on JSA

..right..

You can do voluntary work whilst on JSA. I think you're allowed to do 16 hours a week

You can't do voluntary work on JSA, as you have to be available for, and actively seeking work.

You can volunteer whilst on JSA provided you are not paid and are still actively seeking work.

Don't know much about the mountain people but the RNLI is one of the best funded charities in the UK.

Although some people are giving their time for free, the entire organisation isn't made up of volunteers and they are very well funded.

Where are all the additional donations going to come from to support all of these extra charities? As with volunteering (something the vast majority of the adult population already do), charitable giving is something that most people already do, if they want to. And most people do give.

Where is all the additional funding going to come from?

This idea has so many massive holes in it.

They say they want social enterprises to pick up some of this work - OK - but who funds social enterprises at the moment? It's all public money, which is going..... Um right then.

My local park has a very active friends organisation. They organise great walks and have a news letter and do some campaigning.

However, I don't think they would be up to the task of running the park. I think they need paid experts to do that, and beyond salaries, the work that the experts do costs money.