The Big Society

[rabbitstew]

(I think I've found my forum, now - posted this just now in Education...). Does anyone else think that David Cameron's idea of "The Big Society" is just his utterly cack-handed was of trying to say that the emotionally resilient should do a bit more to help the emotionally poor and needy (ie understanding the concept that all people in society are occasionally extremely needy and deserving of support, not just the generally inadequate)? I agree with this idea, I just disagree with the method of trying to carry it out - it takes too much responsibility away from the State. And, of course, the attitude of the City, whose workers are supposed to be among the more emotionally resilient, doesn't help foster the right attitude. Apparently, different rules should apply to them - they don't have the time to volunteer in this way, because City workers are just so self-importantly busy making money, nor do they want to donate money to the State to help it in a worthwhile project. They would rather keep all the money to themselves, or pick and choose their own pet charities, rather than getting involved in any sort of common cause. (Behaving like a group of capitalist cats...).

Which leads me to think that the political parties are not poles apart at all - they just disagree on the numbers in society who genuinely need support and how many of them can actually cope with being told to "pull their socks up." ie at least the "Big Society" rubbish is an attempt to show that the conservatives are not totally autistic (unlike the City).

Big Society is just cover for Big Business. It's just carving up public services and creating a market where big business can come and play. While leaving the donkey work to be done by ordinary people for free.

The govt. has already got fizzy drinks and processed food manufacturers writing public health policy at the Department of Health. All hospitals will be privatised (only they will be called cuddly social enterprises in the hope the public won't notice - some of us might recall what happened to an entire sector of social enterprise called building societies...).

All primary care trusts will be disbanded and their work handed over to the private sector - only it will be the local GP's name over the door so people won't notice the private sector creaming off megabucks from our taxes instead of it going into healthcare.

No doubt one or two of the volunteers actually doing the work will get MBEs. While dozens of fat cats will cream off billions from the taxpayer AND get peerages and the right to make our laws.

Btw, I am a volunteer in two different roles so am not opposed to voluntary work - just to spin and people being exploited.

Us taxpayers are shelling out for the NHS to have an economic regulator, Monitor. Why? When they are cutting quangos that actually do useful things, why do we need to spend good money on an economic regulator for a taxpayer funded public service?

Right again, Edam. Big Society is a cover for Big Business. And Big Business funds the Tory Party. Anyone else need their back scratched?

Big society means sacking lots of women and getting them to do it for free instead. It used to be called the 1950's.

Right edam.

'Big society' also means sacking public sector workers and getting 'volunteers' (possibly forcing criminals and the now unemployed) to do the job for free. Or the job not being done at all - they dont care either way - they are tories!

Its just a fuzzy front for cutting state services and getting their fat cat friends hooked up with some fat profits.

And if you combine the two you get people volunteering (working for free) in an organisation that makes a profit with a fat cat at the top.

Of course the REAL big society is the one we have already, where people are looked after, children educated, etc, by people who are rewarded for their efforts, and we all contribute to it according to our means.

This is what makes our society a pleasant place to live.

I think people are seeing demons even where there are none with this idea. I don't see whats wrong with the Government trying to build a strong civic society and encouraging people to volunteer. The Government cannot do everything for us and I see no issue with them looking to the voluntary sector to administer public services. Its already done by charities such as the Lifeboat and the Mountain Rescue so I don't see why we can't look at other areas of public service provision to see if we can get charities/volunteers involved.

Hi popelle, looking at what the government has actually done; they have cut funding for voluntary organisations (some will have to close), so this doesnt ring true.

Also I would prefer these very kind people who are going to provide all our public services to be able to earn a living and provide for their families.

Does sound like exploitation otherwise.

popelle, I'm afraid 'big society' is spin. For starters, it is based on the assumption that we are all too ignorant to have understood the concept of civil society. Second, what they are actually doing is handing over the taxpayer's money to big business. And what do we get in return? Shrivelled remnants of public services, job losses and disabled stroke survivors left without overnight care and told to wear nappies if they can't struggle to the loo on their own. (And the law courts upheld that case - apparently it's fine.)

Here is a good, illustrated example of what big-society means to the tories.

Lifeinlimbo - Thaks for the link. Abslutely shocking and hateful.

It stands to reason that the more equal a society, the more equal the peoples' access to society's resources, the more willing the members will be to invest in their communities.

But Dave's Big Society is merely: "Let's keep the rich as rich as they've ever been and leave other people to mop up the mess"

Can we hope that current policy will implode so badly that the womenfolk will be able to wade in and impose a kind of martial compassion of some kind?

The women of Sweden* did exactly that when they had a banking/economic crisis. Refused to pick up the pieces without substantial change. Wish we could do the same here.

(*I think, possibly AN Other Scandinavian country)

thanks for linking that article lifeinlimbo

Right then, where do we start?
We get the society we deserve, after all. So let's deserve a better one.

Too right, BoffinMum!

OK, well, the kids have already started with their demos against the cuts. We could folloe their lead by looking at what we've all got to lose by the way in which the Coalition want to reorganise society.

Unless we can stop one section of society blaming another - the young blaming the old and vice-versa; the working poor blaming the benefit 'scroungers'; the middle classes blaming everyone else and the able-bodied blaming the disabled for claiming allowances or not taking inappropriate jobs - whatever - and focus our energy on who is actually responsible and who can be made to do something about this, we won't get anywhere fast.

Thing is, nobody does know who caused the mess. It wasn't just the bankers. It was more complicated than that.

So the only thing we can do is gird our loins and press on with strategies for building the society we actually want, not the one people keep telling us we have to have.

My problem is that a lot of the things I think need putting in place look superficially like the ones the Coalition are doing, but I think the motivation and implementation would be different. I am finding it really hard to conceptualise and articulate exactly how this would manifest itself, though.

edam, please could you find a link to that stuff on the Scandi women?

Maybe we should set up a Truth and Reconciliation Committee. Forgive whoever dunnit and work together to find a way out.

The Tories have stolen a march on the rest of us. They have come up with a plan that is at least coherent in theory, and, if it were allowed to happen, probably would deliver the sort of society that they want. Sadly, the rest of us would have to emigrate.

So what do we want? This is my Christmas list.
Free education paid for by tax payers.
NHS free at the point of delivery. Paid for by tax payers.
Free care for the elderly. Paid for by tax payers.

For starters.

The mess was caused by a combination of greed in the city and incompetance in the Government.

I volunteer and work for a community group that really should be government-funded but relies on donations, small grants and a lot of goodwill.

Fantastic thread OP,and I look forward to reading it properly when I'm less knackered.

But sorry, just had to say 'Autistic'? That makes me cringe tbh - as much as schitzoid/mental/spastic, etc. DS is autistic and he leans more towards anarchism!

Hi, tallwivglasses - if you read the very end of my "Should City Workers Voluntarily Return Their Bonuses to the State?" thread, you'll understand why I put that comment in - I have "ishoos"... (namely a ds going through the diagnostic process at the moment, so autism is much on my mind!!!...).