Big society is better society
The coalition’s vision for Britain encompasses social action, reform of public services and more com
By Francis Maude Published 04 October 2010The "big government" zeitgeist has failed and is over. Top-down micromanagement of public services has made morale plummet and widened inequalities in many areas. Failure to open up the delivery of public services to charities, social enterprises and business has stifled innovation and wasted money. Failure to put power in the hands of communities has meant that people across the country feel excluded from the decision-making process, which in turn undermines social responsibility.
The coalition government wants Britain to head in a new direction. Britain has a strong heritage of civil society and social action. But we can go much further. We can give power back to people and make it easier for charities, community groups and individuals to help others. We can support independent community action, not stifle it by insisting that we call the shots. We can invest money targeted at people having the most impact on the ground, not those with the loudest voices in the media.
A strong "big society" is about people joining together to exercise power to control their own environments and to control the way in which they live. Even if we were not dealing with a legacy where government has to borrow £1 in every £4 spent just to keep the lights on, we would be supporting it. This is the essence of what both Liberal Democrats and Conservatives are about. It's good to have a society where people do things for each other. And work is under way to make it happen, based around the three strands of social action, public service reform and community empowerment.
Social action is at the heart of the "big society" and we want a stronger culture of volunteerism and philanthropy. This will start with young people who are too often alienated from society and from each other. Next summer we will pilot a new kind of non-military national service, in which all 16-year-olds will eventually get the chance to go on a summer volunteer programme. The National Citizen Service will include a residential element where young people will mix with others from all walks of life. They will also lead social-action projects in communities as a rite of passage into a society that values them and celebrates their achievements.
There is so much already happening. Earlier this year, I visited Create, a Yorkshire social enterprise that provides training for people who have been homeless or left behind by society.
It gives people the skills and self-confidence to open new chapters in their lives. This is not about public services on the cheap. It's about services that are better at tackling deprivation and enabling people to live full productive lives. We plan to inject capital into the social enterprise sector through the "big society bank" that will use money from dormant bank accounts. "Big society" makes social sense first and economic and financial sense a close second.
This new direction can transform public services, too. We're supporting a dozen projects where staff are combining to form mutuals and co-ops to deliver public services. I think this can become a real mass movement. It'll be untidy, but we know that thousands of front-line public-sector staff who can see how things can be done better would love the chance to get on and do it. There are hundreds of public-sector entrepreneurs who, if unleashed, can generate a whole new wave of enterprise.
Order of services
In Swindon, public servants plan to integrate community health and adult social services into a co-operative. Joining services together in different ways can break down organisational barriers so that services are no longer provided in isolation. This means better early intervention and more hope for people suffering multiple disadvantages. Better services. Yes, cheaper, too. But when the money's run out, as it has, we need services to be delivered more cheaply.
This goes hand in hand with our obsession with localism. We want to make it possible for people to take over local facilities that are run down or threatened with closure, and give communities the right to call referendums on local issues. Apathy grows when people don't think they can make a difference.
Our "big society vanguard" areas - Liverpool, Windsor and Maidenhead, Eden Valley (Cumbria) and the London Borough of Sutton - are pioneering local approaches. They have come forward with projects that embrace the principles of "big society". Their example is showing us where the barriers are so that we can act to break them down.
We don't believe we can just sit in Whitehall and pull levers on a dashboard marked "big society" and watch it spring into existence. And of course there are many areas where there is lots of social capital; there, all the government needs to do is remove barriers and let people get on with it. But then there are other areas where there has been generational deprivation and worklessness. We will recruit and train community organisers to stimulate and support the development of groups where they don't exist.
The state has to retrench. The fiscal crisis has seen to that. But there's a hunger today for people to seize their own destinies, assert the power of the community and forge the strongly bonded "big society" that at its best Britain has always been. There's a new zeitgeist that together we just may be able to crystallise. The prize is huge for everyone if we do.
Francis Maude is minister for the Cabinet Office, paymaster general and MP for Horsham
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists


6 comments
What worries me about all this is that there is still so little publicity about what is happening in the Vanguard areas. I know some people in Eden valley, and I've visited them a couple of times, so I have a little grasp of what is happening there, but I know nothing at all about what is happening in the other areas.
I've said this lots of times in other fora, but I'll say it again here,,,,, in an era of austerity in public finances, we cannot afford not to use the internet to build platforms for collaboration and share best practice. There will be so many lost opportunities if we fail to get this right.
Even though two of the four could not in any way be described as being in "the North", I'd like to extend an invitation to all those involved in the Big Society Vanguards to join us on the Big Society in the North Forum at http://grou.ps/bigsocietynorth to share what they are doing and, perhaps, get some advice from others experienced in this sort of activitiy.
I would be interested to hear what Maude and his colleagues have done themselves in the Big Society or volunteering. Have they ever actually tried to engage local people in the delivery of local services? Do they have an understanding of how disengaged people are and that just good intentions alone are not enough to overcome this?
agree with John, we need to use the internet more, but until connectivity is ubiquitous we are going to struggle to engage the rural communities. Big society is too big a chance to mess up, it is a great thing that needs all our support, and online is the easiest and most cost effective way to do it. That is why we should all support the Eden plan to bring a connection to everyone, no matter where they live. It is now a utility.
chris
Such a brief article, yet so much empty rhetoric. I'm not sure which of Mr Maude's lackeys actually penned this drivel, but I'd lay money on them never having engaged in any 'community action' over and above their Duke of Edinburgh's Award.
The really worrying aspect of the 'big society' is that it's an attempt to drive reform and cost cutting with a combination of quasi-anarchistic decentralisation with central government retaining a vice-like grip on the purse strings. Don't make the mistake of conflating the claimed demise of the 'big government zietgeist' with any move away from central control - made all the easier by shifting responsibility to a patchwork of local organisations. There is no space here for local democracy in the mix. Presumably because it has the potential for organised dissent from the new zietgeist of localism that is supposedly crystalising all around us.
The model being pushed isn't about putting power in the hands of communities, it's about giving control to an ad hoc mix of tin-pot little groups, often dominated by individuals with their own agenda, then trying to control them with a financial whip. These groups can be benign but this isn't always the case, and they often reflect the politics (small p), prejudices and predelictions of whoever is in charge. This is no way to run public services.
http://tinyurl.com/33r9m7n
Would the author care to explain why it is that spending and grants the voluntary sector needs to exist has been slashed with in-year, unexpected and completely fatal cuts? I'm hearing of quite a few 100% in-year budget cuts for charities that provide voluntary services. Apparently it's called streamlining. Interesting, because surely this would involve putting that money back in, in a more efficient way (I've never noticed anybody ever saying there's too much money in the voluntary sector). But instead it's just ...gone.
(Incidentally, I like that word. I feel I will be using it a lot. Imagine it, turning up at the streamlined police station because it will be the only place I might potentially find a police officer to tell you've just been streamlined by a man because his welfare was streamlined after his employment opportunities were streamlined by a national economy that has been streamlined directly even further into the pockets of Big Business by Big Bullingdon Boys)
Perhaps I'm being simplistic but this Big Society rhetoric that I hear spun out without any kind of plan, while the money is taken away from what would make it work at the same time as all the money is taken from the public services it supposedly replaces, makes me re-evaluate how I look at the Tories. I thought they were just a product of their generally wealthier circumstances - part selfishness but part innocent and forgivable ignorance (or forgetfulness once their money has been made) of the real world. Now they look like 'baddies' in cheap films. Leave just a little for us to stop the complete decline of the UK outside of London, please? Dave, how about you leave at least a semblance of infrastructure in the UK and we promise we won't ever vote Lib Dem again, deal?