Any Tory voters think Cameron's "Big Society" idea was a good one?

[VodkaAndTonic]

From The Guardian here:

Another senior and normally loyal Tory MP complained that Cameron's big idea for the campaign ? "the Big Society", under which armies of volunteers would come together to tackle the country's ills ? was "complete crap".

"We couldn't sell that stuff on the doorstep. It was pathetic. All we needed was a simple message on policy. We could have won a majority if we had not had to try to sell this nonsense."

Do any Tory voters:

a) think Big Society is a good idea
b) think it is a vote winner
c) think it is "complete crap"?

I think curiosity has put her finger on it.

It was communicated as ... just words, a descriptive concept, full of ellipses, to be filled in ... contextually, basically.

So, atlantis, you fill it in positively, and draw on what you see as your experience. And other people fill it in ... differently.

It had no real stuffing. Which is, I think, a disastrous thing to do towards the end of an election campaign. no wonder the funders, and senior Conservatives are looking at the campaign group around DC, Gorge Osbourne in particular, and putting a question marl after the word "competent". If I had put a lot of money into that campaign, I would be seriously cross.

atlantis, the Tories talk a good game. Let's see if they really sort out anti-social behaviour which makes a misery of life on rough estates for millions of people. Widdecombe would have done it, I'm not sure the Big Society champions care as much as she did. I am not saying cut these programmes, all I am saying is don't trumpet a policy called Big Society as being a panacea for the nation's problems, when a large part of the population, including many Tories, don't believe it.

Don't get me wrong, I am defending the principle of the idea and not defending it as a 'flagship' policy, that was stupid.

In my area we campaigned on what people were interested in, crime, immigration, NHS, jobs tax and europe.

We started the campaign in the top ten of marginal seats and ended as one of the safest seats in the country.

I agree animula, it was a badly run campaign by the Tories. It should have been easy to defeat Broon, instead the Tories ran a campaign as if Norman Wisdom was leading it.

'Look at the borough's who had to sell off their housing stock because they could not maintain them because the government were taking 40% of the rents and there was no money for maintenance, some set up tenant led housing associations to run the housing stock instead of selling them to housing associations, tenants came forward in droves to get involved, and it worked there are some very successful tenant led housing associations around.'

This is self-serving volunteerism born of compulsion, duress and threat. Do it or else suffer the potential loss of a human essential (some might call it a right) to the shelter you inhabit.

This is very different from a group of people setting up and steadily running a food bank or kitchen because they and their church members thought of it as a way to honour Jesus.

Or hosting a huge BBQ open to the public, with people having gone about soliciting all the necessary donations and marketing and manning the thing, and giving every penny earned to a local women's refuge a la The Jewish Community Center or Knights of Columbus.

This is the initiative form of volunteerism that is different from that born of compulsion or force from loss of services.

So when you remove or cut back on, say, elderly care services, yes, it's entirely possible the overstressed working poor relative or middle earner sandwich generation mum will step in, but he/she will also have none of the back up that is present in places were an ingrained infrastructure of charity is already present and where many have the source of an active church or religious community. If he/she doesn't do it, then it's easy to pillory him/her for not 'doing their bit' and leaving their relative on the scrapheap rather than seeing it as the inconsiderate failure of the government to slap a role model from another country onto their own with no real thought.

The former leads to isolation and resentment the latter to a sense of community.

The put the former before the latter is putting the cart before the horse and penalising those who can least afford or deserve it.

atlantis, I agree it was the 'flagship' aspect that was worrying. Either, Norman Wisdom and Mickey Mouse have the ear of Cameron, or there is more to Big Society than they are telling us.

I was very glad that the English people, in so many regions of the country, voted Labour out, in spite of a Laurel and Hardy campaign.

"a descriptive concept, full of ellipses, to be filled in ... contextually"

"no real stuffing"

Remind anyone of someone? Cameron? Yes? No?

I think Cameron has gone to extremes to portray this. I think he is as right wing toff as his next Tory (George Osborne). The fact he chose Osborne as shadow chancellor speaks to this old boys network politics is what Cameron is trying to cover up but he couldn't risk going too far so gave the world something vague.

sorry *and is what cameron is trying to cover up

"If he/she doesn't do it, then it's easy to pillory him/her for not 'doing their bit' and leaving their relative on the scrapheap rather than seeing it as the inconsiderate failure of the government "

Like now you mean? How many services have been cut already by labour? I can certainly give you a list for my area if you like.

Firstly you are assuming that these front line services are going to be cut under the conservatives, there is no evidence of this.

Secondly you are forgetting that right now groups like age concern are picking up the slack of a badly mismanaged system that allows the elderly to rely on third rate 'private' care services instead of council services.

How many frontline staff were cut in favour of handing out gold encrusted payments to undertrained, understaff and uncaring privately run companies under labour?

When we had snow at christmas how many of our elderly residents did not recieve a visit from these 'care' givers for days on end?

So let's just blame Labour for everything. A big one, considering a) I'm not a Labour voter b) this is the first time I've ever voted in a UK generalelection, having not been eligible to do so in the last election.

That's neither here nor there now, they're no longer going to be in power.

And Tories are going to cut. They've already said that.

'Secondly you are forgetting that right now groups like age concern are picking up the slack of a badly mismanaged system that allows the elderly to rely on third rate 'private' care services instead of council services.'

Forgetting? I didn't bring them up at all. Omitted.

But since you have, Age Concern needs money to do what they do. Money from somewhere.

If VAT goes up, and interest rates, too, who's going to be putting their hands in their pockets when middle earners and working poor are struggling even more?

The posts here, though, are highly indicative of why the British system has so far failed to come to a quick solution of power sharing. The amount of petty squabbling and casting up the past as a way to make one's point is counter-productive.

Makes it all look extremely foolish and silly to the rest of the world, too. That can have a negative effect on the UK's currency and market with, even short term, aren't good for its already precarious economy.

P.S., Labour supporters do the same thing.

The "Big Society" idea suddenly takes on a more sinister view when looked at in the context of a Plutocratic, aristocratic nepotistic and cronyistic party and is what has actually happened in Cameron's 'flagship' council in Hammersmith

Yes, agree with expat... Not a labour supporter. I want to see a rainbow coalition cabinet with members from all parties involved and true power sharing. GB as PM, Cable as Chancellor, Clegg as Home secretary, Caroline Lucas as minister for the environment, some tories for fairness...

I suspect it's a Bigwig Society.

lol
Maybe there was a secret drinking society at Eton called the Bygge Society (named after an 18th century school bully) and the whole thing is a massive jape on us proles.

So annoying trying to take part in a political discussion while having a family Sunday.

Humphrey, you said ages down the thread something like "so nobody should have the right to set up their own school because most people cant afford to?"
The point is, that schools should be set up and run by experts, ie teachers. Not yummy mummies who think that little Sebastian wont do well enough at the local school. (and realistically, pensioneers and younger people arent going to get involved, unless they're teachers).

Somebody asked why Michael Gove is mentioned in the press as being in the smarmy set. Well, its probably because at Oxford, he was Cliquemeister General of Cliquemeisters, along with his crony Duncan Gray! They ran the most effective slate in teh Union that I ever witnessed.

erm, some parents are teachers too?

and the public sector doesn't require all its teachers to have QTS anyway...

yo could equally raise hat objection agains Home Ed.

So then Edgar, let it be restricted to teachers....

Home Edders only affect their own children not others, and they dont get state funding.

I am pmsl at the Bygge Society, especially in the light of the big willy thread here www.mumsnet.com/Talk/politics/961285-Let-39-s-face-it-MUMSNET-BROKE-THE-ELECTION

curiosity I am shaking just reading that. I used to live and work in Hammersmith so know the area well.
What it comes down to is of course money: the only measure of success for Cameron and his party is financial: reducing council tax, in this case, but reducing tax across the board in due course once in power, which of course benefits the rich, who already pay the smallest amount in percentage terms of incolme than the poor or those on middle incomes.

Please, can we have a Tory come in and defend Hammersmith borough council? Expalin to me the thinking, the implementation and the results. And expain why it's a good idea. Because I just can't see the point of cuting council tax in this way.

"BigWig Society"
excellent, Jux

The jokes are already starting, another one could be
"Prig Society"
this will be open season on the Tories, a complete disaster waiting to happen, a bit like Iain Drunken Smith thinking it was clever to describe himself as "the quiet man", he should have done us a favour and kept quiet.

it will probably turn into the "Bigot Society", with advisors like Cameron's got, who needs enemies?