Cameron’s Big Society
An 18th Century Idea for a 21st Century Solution
Britain is suffering from a lack of self confidence similar to that experienced by the Americans after Vietnam and again after George Bush. It may not be so apparent today while there is a whiff of euphoria in the air, fuelled by the banter and bonhomie of their two new young, idealistic and confident political leaders that look more like TV stars than regular politicians. Who could help from feeling good after watching the first press conference on the lawns of 10 Downing St?
 |
After the dour headmaster-ish Gordon Brown and the spin toting egomaniac Tony Blair the new political atmosphere in England is more akin to the winds of change rather than a breath of fresh air.
But it will take more than a gust of optimism to blow away Britain’s problems and the general mood of frustration with the failures of government, the anxiety about the future and the general sense of hopelessness will soon return.
|
As Barack Obama found, the honeymoon won’t last long; the cabinet has already met and appointed a razor gang to recommend the first cost costing measures which will need to be implemented as soon as possible.
A Big Idea to Galvanise the New Coalition.
However good-willed the two leaders are towards each other, they have not so much welded as glued the two parties together but they are like metal and plastic and the join will soon have severe pressure put upon it, probably before it has time to set.
 |
In times like this it is not party discipline that keeps the disparate together – it is a big idea.
In this case it needs to be an idea that not only grabs the imagination but one that is not so completely defined that it can’t be embraced by all parties because they can all work on it, develop it and ultimately, own it.
Cameron’s “new” political philosophy that he outlined at a Conservative Party conference in November 2009 and again in March 2010 called, The Big Society, is, perhaps, such an idea.
|
The Big Society
As mentioned in my earlier article about David Cameron the idea is not new and not totally untried. Labour has been quietly experimenting with civic resuscitation as well. In the last few years a number of Labour councils have started experimenting with involving the local community and professionals in the running of local services. 115 Labour Councils have signed a charter which offers an alternative vision to the Tories’ EasyCouncil model. The basic idea is very similar to that proposed by Cameron, that by involving local communities in the delivery of services they will free up resources to protect the needy.
Already, co-operative delivery of services including Sure Start, housing, education, and social care have been experimented with in a number of areas and connecting local action with political change in Birmingham, Liam Byrne MP, has launched the Local Action Network.
However David Cameron’s policy raises the bar, for example, his idea to train 5,000 community organisers in the Alinsky art of empowering individuals and communities to take action for themselves. (Saul Alinsky was a philosopher and Champion of the nonsocialist left)
The danger, as he may be aware, is that because this new nucleus of community organisers will be trained by the state, it will be tempting or perhaps even accidental, that they will become a fancy sort of community liaison officer. If they do, they will fail.
Communities are empowered by power. What they need is not merely consultation but local ownership, organisation, leadership, and real participation.
Neither side has yet determined the right balance between the state and civil society in their vision going forward. Labour is wedded to the use of state action and too willing to see in it the answer to every single identified problem.
The Conservatives have taken ownership of the language: ‘big society’ and ‘post-bureaucratic age’ but they have a less convincing understanding of the risks to equality, opportunity and poverty in getting it wrong.
Click in this picture to get a PDF file
Cameron told the conservatives in his speech last year that “..the size, scope and role of government in Britain has reached a point where it is now inhibiting, not advancing the progressive aims of reducing poverty, fighting inequality, and increasing general well-being. Indeed there is a worrying paradox that because of its effect on personal and social responsibility, the recent growth of the state has promoted not social solidarity, but selfishness and individualism”.
Edmund Burke’s Little Platoons
To understand the Big Society concept you have to go back to Edmund Burke (1729-1797) who postulated on the importance of the spontaneous social groups that arise naturally in society as bulwarks, initially, defending civil society against despots and revolutionaries.
But Burke's little platoons as he called them (“To love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were of public affections”.
Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790) are regarded by some political philosophers as more than a defense against revolution; they are the glue that holds society together and make it tolerable.
Cameron believes that the charity and philanthropic groups that have traditionally provided a wide range of services to the needy are breaking down because of the omnipotence of the modern welfare state. Many would point to the reduction in volunteerism by individuals and the dearth of experienced people who are prepared to act as mentors as another symptom of this creeping problem in society.
Proponents of the Big Society ideology say that as the state takes on more of the volunteer tasks that would have been performed by the little platoons and turns them into paid jobs, that in turn, leads to a decrease in people’s willingness to help out, for free.
Unfortunately for the recipients, Big Society proponents say, state welfare doesn’t do the jobs nearly as well. One supporter in England said “It replaces private and charitable institutions with politically correct social workers, an education system that can't or won't teach the three R's, and a crumbling monolithic NHS (National Health System) run largely for the convenience of its own staff”.
