Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#1
Yesterday we were briefed beforehand that David Cameron was making a big speech later in the day on the Big Society. It was also reported earlier the same day that it was the third, yes third, re-launch of the notion. Seemed interesting...I tuned in to the news programmes later in the day to catch up but it just wasnt covered , no item on it anywhere.
We had the super-injuncted footballer
We had O'Bama in Ireland (!)
We had the Ash Cloud
But Camerons speech seemed to sink without trace. I am now wondering if it happened at all.
I had this through from the Public Sector Executive newsletter yesterday, just prior to the scheduled speech...worth a peruse
* *
The Big Society is not a "fluffy add-on" to the Government's agenda but runs right through the heart of it, Prime Minister David Cameron will say today.
This will mark the third time the concept has been re-launched, commentators noted, as ministers have struggled to make the idea resonate with the public. It was originally conceived years before the recession, but many people tell opinion pollsters they see it as a cynical cover for public sector cuts as organisations seek to fill formerly-paid roles with volunteers.
But Cameron will say: "This is about as gritty and important as it gets: giving everyone the chance to get on and making our country a better place to live."
Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude, who has the biggest role in promoting and managing the Big Society agenda, told Radio 4's The World This Weekend: "We may have failed to articulate it clearly and we'll carry on explaining as best as we can. I think people understand what is meant when we explain it and think that it is all a good idea."
The Government is setting out new policies to encourage charitable giving and volunteering, while also linking the Big Society agenda to public services reform.
Cameron will say: "We're not introducing free schools and expanding academies because it's a way of saving money from the schools budget. We're doing it because it's the best way to improve education. More choice for parents. More freedom for professionals to innovate. A greater ability for new providers to come forward. It is the big society way to improve education.
"In our health service, we're not giving patients more control and doctors more professional freedom because we want to save money. We're doing it because it's the best way to improve the NHS."
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#2
All it is about is getting away from reliance on the State. The State does not know best, it is expensive and intefering and the less power it has over our lives the better while acknowedging (as anarchists do not) that a minimalist State is necessary. The alternative to this Big State is the Big Society - people controlling their own lives and not looking to the state for everything. So yes it is a natural thread throughout everything the government is or should be doing to free us from it and to give up much of its power over our lives.
For so long people have got used to saying things like 'the government should do something' - no longer is this acceptable. The left are addicted to the whole concept of state control, patronage, power and interferance and we must get away from that unhealthy attitude.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#3
the fact of the matter is that less and less people are convinced, a recent opinion poll showed that even more people did not understand the concept than in previous ones.
everyone knows that retired people make up a large proportion of the voluntary sector, yet people are working longer.
the other issue is that people will not volunteer to carry out tasks that would mean someone losing a job.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#4
You could not be more wrong Howard - many people do indeed do voluntary work that might otherwise be done at massive expense by the state.
The fact is that the State must withdraw from so much of our lives and we should take responsibility for ourselves and ours.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#5
Following on from that I have a link here to some recommendations that have been made to make things easier to volunteer. This will help lots of local organisations like the Community Radio, Hellfire Corner etc.... this is all Big Society stuff and is very relevant.
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/red-tape-task-force-calls-for-clearer-legal-protection-for-volunteers.pdf
Quote by Lord Hodgson from the report:
""""But over recent years we've seen a real devaluation of common sense and
trust through a tangle of rules and guidance which aims to eliminate risk
from our lives but instead creates a risk of a society where people are afraid to
help each other. As long as volunteers behave reasonably they should not be
liable if something goes wrong - the legal framework must make this clear.
‚It is clear that there is a huge level of interest in the issue of deregulation in
the voluntary sector since over 600 organisations and individuals have
provided us with evidence. We are extremely grateful to them for the trouble
they have taken and, wherever possible, we have used these 'real life'
examples to underpin our recommendations.‛""""
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#6
the trouble is that we know that certain people are always up for some voluntary work, the majority are not.
seems to me that a lot of things previously paid for by our various taxes will not be done but there will be no reduction in our taxes.
dave would do better to drop the subject as people are not going along with it.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#7
It is not just about taxes Howard - it is about people doing for themselves things the government should really not do without leaving a total vacuum.
This subject is not going to be dropped simply because it is important for a healthy society.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#8
the important thing to pick out of that bit from lord hodgson above is "as long as volunteers behave reasonably they should not be held liable if something goes wrong".
classic gobbledook, this comes up every time over snow clearing outside one's house.
this government and the last one will not answer the straight question that everybody asks i.e. "if i clear the snow outside my house and someone slips over i am i liable?". the lengthy answers alwys include the words "should" and reasonable.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#9
The problem with 'The Big Society' is that we have a climate in which people no longer think, "oh dear I fell over, I should look where I am going," but rather think, "oh dear, I fell over, who can I sue."
The River volunteers are a good example of the inherent difficulties. Where once a group of volunteers would gather and use their common sense to get it clear of rubbish, they now have to do it mid-week in order to have the qualified H & S people there (obviously they cannot be asked to work at weekends).
Unless the 'Health and Safety' regulations are stripped right back how many more jobs will have to be created for 'qualified' people to manage the hoped for volunteers? Conversely, how many jobs would be lost in the Health and Safety industry if the laws were stripped away?
Another question would be, how many of the imagined 'Big Society' projects would fit in with what the volunteers would like to achieve against how many would be derailed to fit in with perceived targets? It would be hard enough convincing people to volunteer to do things under the "guidance" of paid supervisors, it would be harder still to keep them if the targets the volunteers wish to achieve do not match those the 'supervisors' require to meet their targets.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#10
Localism and volunteering should be freed from those giving 'paid guidance'. It is beaurocratic nonsense and a total waste of time and money.
So what if unnecessary H&S jobs are lost - I certainly hope lots are, we need to get rid of a lot of public sector jobs like this along with the equally useless indviduals with 'diversity' or 'equality' in their job titles..... Naturally there should remain what we used to have, a system that protects people in the workplace from abuses but not beyond that.
Whatever Howard says they are trying to make things easy for volunteers. It would help to get rid of that Human Rights Act along with no win no pay ambulance chasing lawyers.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#11
going off at a tangent slightly the human right acts gets a mention again.
a question was raised about the banning of wild animals in circuses, a blue minister stated that it would contravene the said act.
not true, the last government took legal advice on the matter and it was made clear that banning the use of wild animals was all o.k.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#12
in short selective hearring.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#13
I suspect it is not as simplistic as the media and other would like to portray
a) people are disinterested rather than losing interest
b) people see nothing in it for them which suggests that the message is being badly put across
c) people distrust government when it says it wants to remove itself from aspects of our lives when the past 30 odd years shows the exact opposite experience
d) people need access to community funding for many of the activities, projects and schemes they wish to take on, whilst the sums required are generally tiny, there is no clear and easy source to raise these short of people digging in their own pockets.
e) too many activities will not be taken on because of the lack of clarity around liability etc. if despite best endeavours things go wrong.
Regarding H&S - there is nothing wrong with the legislation, which has slashed industrial accidents and deaths since its introduction; it is the authorities, particularly local, who have pushed the act into areas of our lives where it was never intended to go. This extension has been engineered by a whole self aggrandising profession who needed to keep generating paying work.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
#14
Agree with you on H&S, Ross.
I worked in laboratories all my working life, I was daily handling things that would have the man on the street running in the opposite direction and give health and safety advisers the screaming abdabs, but I had the training, knowledge and facilities to handle them safely. However, if I had followed the regulations produced by the advisors I would have spent all my time filling in paperwork and doing nothing productive.
I have a relative who works for the Health and Safety Executive. They have done great work enforcing legislation that has stopped the industrial accidents, but they hate the jobsworth type of advisers who are afraid to let people do things just because there is some risk attached. The best way to approach this type is to challenge them and turn the tables on them - keep asking why, keep asking for justification for decisions, keep asking for the relevant legislation relating to a decision until they have to give in to common sense.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#15
The term "big society" could mean just about everything and nothing.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#16
Lord Wei , David Cameron's Big Society 'Tsar' has relinquished his unpaid post just days after the PM relaunched the project.
The timing of his resignation is a bit of a kick in the crackers for Cameron who can't seem to da anything right at the moment just as todays figures will show that public borrowing, excluding financial interventions such as bank bail-outs, hit £10 billion,(the highest ever recorded) compared with £7.3 billion the previous year. Figures courtesy of the Office for National Statistics
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#17
Did he resign or was he pushed.
I think the whole idea has been badly marketed or is it that there just too many people out there ready to rubbish any new or re-hashed idea from the present government.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
#18
People are having difficulty paying bills inflation is high , after coping with all that and the threat of un employment , the tories want us to do some volonteering as well , i carnt imagine why people are dis interested .
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#19
Mark, I suspect the government want those long term professional, lazy, unemployed ba....ds who are sitting on their backsides watching TV all day to do some of the volunteering.
Trouble is they get, get, get and never give unless they can get some perk at the end.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#20
i note that we did not get a big speech from dave applauding the tsar on his achievements, that in itself suggests he was sacked.