The post you are reporting:
To paraphrase Barry - "Govt should provide a legislative framework conducive to community action on its own behalf and otherwise butt-out, except for Defence, Justice, Health and Education." Although just possibly Barry would leave it at Defence and Justice.
Unfortunately, we are not all model citizens with a yen to provide additional service to our communities without prioritising personal desires. So the withdrawal of Government from large swathes of what is currently the public domain when there are a very limited number of service oriented private individuals who have the respect of their peers and community and can lead, source sufficient private funding (or start/run businesses where the profits are reserved for community benefit) and successfully challenge the entrenched positions of 'the mighty', will inevitably leave many vulnerable people, well, more vulnerable and less well looked after.
As you all know, I'm very much in favour of communities being able to form mutuals with business and workers to democratise capital flows through the acquisition of assets that have a major impact on quality of life, jobs, training and regeneration potential in their community. However, even such a project as we have started here in Dover that is so 'in-keeping' (when I first heard about this 'Big Society' policy and then compared it with the models of ownership and governance that I was describing as an alternative to DHB's scheme, I was greatly encouraged) with what the Prime Minister maintains is the policy closest to his own heart, is a major up-hill struggle through the mires of multiple pieces of unhelpful or outdated legislation and other problems, including an understanding gap, cynicism and apathy. So it is little wonder that the Arch Bish and many like him have started to take such a jaundiced view.