One of the government’s most annoying features is the ability to take a good idea and ruin it. Ideas members of the left have supported for years, like the wellbeing index, are doomed to failure by a lack of funding and an inconsistent approach. Worse still, they end up tainted by association with the Tories.
Up and down the country local authorities are running seminars to brief councillors on the government’s upcoming Localism Bill, putting the Big Society at the heart of local government. I was at one yesterday. I was not impressed.
Like many other Labour supporters I think the Big Society is actually a good idea. In fact, the sheer growth of the third sector over the last 13 years suggests we were well on the way to building it. The problem is the government’s approach hasn’t really been thought out [shock].
Much of the third sector growth has been financed by the tax-payer, the government is looking for a massive expansion of the sector while removing one of its chief sources of funding (take a look at charity job websites some time, about half seem to be for fundraisers). Many small charities appear to be more efficient than the state at providing services (I suspect in part due to less paperwork) but they can’t make money out of thin air.
Tory MPs look to the US and claim that reducing taxes will bring in a new age of philanthropy. Maybe, I doubt it would outstrip what the taxes raise but even if it did taxes aren’t going to go down for a while. In the mean time charities are starving.
That’s all before we even get on to the huge base of social psychological research which indicates that, if anything, this austerity drive is going to make people less inclined to volunteer.
There are many more points which should be raised and I could go on for hours. The point is it would be nice if Cameron actually committed to the Big Society.
Discover more from Peter Lamb for Crawley
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Peter Lamb for Crawley 
What is the “third sector” Peter ?
Not public or private, it covers voluntary organisations, charities and (I think) social entrepreneurs.
OK thanks – what about Gove’s “Free School” in Crawley (Broadfield House)(Crawley Observer, Feb 2 – Page 15) – third sector ?
“Many small charities appear to be more efficient than the state at providing services (I suspect in part due to less paperwork) but they can’t make money out of thin air.”
You’re right that smaller charities are more efficient in delivering services. But not only are they ‘cheaper’ – they also have a far better understanding of local needs, are more able to engage with the hardest to reach persons, and are more accountable to communities as they are usually run by their own users.
The problem, therefore, is a commissioning system that favours larger (or private sector) organisations who possess none of these advantages. Not only is funding to the third sector being cut, undermining big society rhetoric, but the system is rigged to exclude most smaller charities from delivering public services and accessing statutory funding at all.
“The problem is the government’s approach hasn’t really been thought out” – indeed, a familiar pattern is emerging.