Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#1
Archbishop of Canterbury has denounced Cameron`s ``Big Society``as aspirational waffle that was designed to conceal a
deeply damaging withdrawal of the state from it`s responsibilities to the most vulnerable.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#2
sounds about right
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#3
what waffle.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#4
no brian, he has a good point
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#5
The bish is completely bonkers. An old fashioned statist hippy and this is not the first time he utters such rubbish. The Big State does NOT know better, it is NOT the font of all goodness and it IS the cause of all our economic problems whether it is here or in other European countries. It's role in our lives, it's power and influence all need to be slashed dramatically. We individually know how better to run our lives than any interfering politician.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#6
still waffle,and coming from the church as well.big society is waffle along with the goverment.so waffle it is.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#7
I actualy don't think barryw anyone disagree's with you on this govt's top heavy approach(like all govts)
but is the big society the way to change things?
and does this govt truely believe in the big society, which you will note you don't hear the govt mention much these days
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#8
The Big Society Keith is just an expression for us taking responsibility for ourselves and our own without turning to the State all the time.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#9
as i said waffle,all waffle and nothing but waffle.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#10
barryw
you are course partly right this is part of what it is all about
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 756- Registered: 6 Jun 2012
- Posts: 727
#11
Barry, you for one should know having spent many an hour preparing for your Big Weekend (well done), that the thousands of volunteers are already mobalised and do indeed take responsibility for not only themselves but others less fortunate than themselves. The problem with the aspiration for the Big Society is that it does little to support the silent majority, the volunteer. Every act of kindness comes at a cost and many small groups and individuals are struggling to maintain their work with cuts from agencies biting deeply into the funds. This core funding is desperatly needed as leverage to attract other funding. I have always said that without volunteers this country would grind to a halt.
How many playgroups are run from Village Halls maintained by a Managment Committee, how many patients rely on friends, neighbours etc, to take them to appointments, how many clubs and societies provide care for those that need it? I could go on, but I feel that these unpaid workers need some appreciation and support, then maybe more people would volunteer.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#12
Lesley,
in all my years of knowing you i hardly disagreed with you(except maybe that tutor being a tory cllr lol)
i agree with you again
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#13
Lesley - This is not about just voluntary groups and those that get involved now it is much bigger than that. This is right down to individual level, taking responsibility for ourselves and our own as well as 'helping out'. Too many people sit back and think someone else or 'the State' will do it and by 'the State' all level of government and local government are included. It is also about every aspect of our lives.
If someone else is not there to wipe our noses then we will just have to do it ourselves, a much healthier situation. The less 'the state' does and the less it interferes and nannys the better.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#14
I noted that last night's football brought BarryW and Dover together with the trumpeting rendition of the title-notes of a tune from a famous film involving a visit of another team of Englishmen to Italy.
"We're the self-preservation Society..."
What's that Barry, no need to worry about cuts in funding because some local big-wig, who has profited from the bi££ions saved from reductions to housing benefit entitlements, is bound to step-in?
Let us not concern ourselves with the least notion of entitlement, but instead rely - as of old - on the giving nature of the plutocrat? Let's face it, if your toddler can do a days work so can you! Stove-Pipe hat futures is where the smart money is?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 756- Registered: 6 Jun 2012
- Posts: 727
#15
Sorry Barry, we are at odds on this one. We can all site someone who does little to help themselves, my brother-in-law is a Heroin Addict so I have first hand experience. The MAJORITY of people do everything they can to be independant, often slipping through the net of support services which would be avalible to them, pride can be counterproductive. We should stop generalising, very often their is more to the individual and their needs than is evident, something I discovered when working for an agencies providing support to those in financial difficulty. It is very hard to keep a confidence when you hear someone having a uniformed rant about anothers lifestyle or circumstance! Of course their are some people who are constantly kicking the boundries of acceptable moral standards, but please do not make sweeping statments, they are in the minority. It also implies that you absolve those agencies who should be seen to be working to improve society and maybe we should be looking at their success rates and implimenting the same standards and expectaions to their "productivity". Who fails who?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#16
i think dave and company were hoping the "big society" would not be dredged up again, they have kept deliberately quiet mainly for reasons stated in the posts above.
we have stacks of volunteers who give up their time freely(dover especially) but they need back up funds in most cases to carry out their duties.
to use one example we cannot expect people to turn up and clear a moat in their own time then expect them to purchase the necessary tools and hire a company to take the rubbish away.
Guest 756- Registered: 6 Jun 2012
- Posts: 727
#17
Barry, have you read Orwells Animal Farm?
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#18
Brian I must bow to your superior expertise on waffle.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#19
lesley
in the interests of protecting you
you do realise its barryw your posting to lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#20
Lesley, as a child. It is exactly that kind of bossy big state that is wrong today. Your interpretation is far too narrow. Every time some says 'the government should do something' it is part of the problem. Government needs to be small, doing only what must be done with the highest importance placed on the Defence of the nation and providing a framework of law and order. Essentially it would be healthy to regard government with suspicion and in the knowledge that they are useless and basically incompetent and not to be trusted except with those key issues i have identified. The less politicians and their servants do the better, the less they rob off us in tax the better and the less they interfere in our lives the better.