Inside Track Focus
society fills me with horror,” he says. “Te kind of society they will create and direct and control is not a big society. It would be addressing a government agenda, and trying to get people to contribute to specific government objectives.” In any case, he believes nagging people to
do things they wouldn’t have freely chosen to do is doomed to fail. “We’ve had a succession of these campaigns where government has hectored people to try to get them to do more, and of course it doesn’t work,” he says. “People don’t listen to politicians when they do that. Tey turn off. Tey’re not inspired by politicians, they get inspiration from their own lives.” Successful initiatives grow from the ground
up rather than being imposed from above, says Sime. He gives the example of a lunch club in Renfrew which, on top of providing a sociable meal for older people, has started providing keep fit classes, bingo sessions and benefits advice. “Where that club goes and what its ambitions are should be a matter for the people who are in the club, not for government to say, ‘we want healthy living’, or whatever. Unless the people themselves feel they have a sense of ownership over it, it won’t work.” So far, the Big Society has lacked a
Scottish dimension: it is not clear whether Scottish organisations will be able to apply for funding from the proposed Big Society Bank, and no Scottish project has yet been recognised with a Big Society award from Number Ten. Te Scottish response to the Big Society
has been almost uniformly negative, with a strong implication that it “doesn’t apply here”. It’s true that Scotland has a distinct approach to the state and society, says Sime. “Tere is part of our overall culture which is slightly municipal and big state,” he says. “We have a big state in Scotland, and we look to government to do things for us, to us, to sort our problems out. On the other hand, you’ve got a tradition of self-help and mutual help and community which has disappeared in parts of England.” David O’Neill, leader of North Ayrshire Council, agrees that the ethos behind the Big Society is already commonplace in Scotland. “It’s engrained within the Scottish psyche that people do things for their community, so it’s nice to see the Prime Minister catching up with us,” he says. A community centre in one of North
Ayrshire’s most deprived wards has been successfully managed by the community for 30 years. “We were worried at the time it would suffer from vandalism, but because it’s owned and run by the community the centre is well maintained [and] it’s respected
42 Holyrood 28 February 2011
by the community,” says O’Neill. He believes there is scope for some local services, within reason, to be provided by
“You cannot have politicians creating a big society - it’s not theirs to create”
community volunteers. “I don’t think you’re ever going to get the community taking on the management of a swimming pool, or an ice rink, those [involve] very hefty expenditure but there’s loads of things people can be involved in,” he says. Sue Bruce, chief executive of City of
Edinburgh Council, says there is a growing debate about the extent to which people have become used to depending on the state, and whether some of that self-determination should go back to communities. “But the onus is on the state to small itself down
David Cameron
rather than on society to big itself up,” she says. Social enterprise is a great way of working
in partnership while handing power back to local people. “We’ve got quite a buoyant social enterprise sector in Scotland, and that’s an example of how organisations or people can come together to deliver services which in some cases have previously been delivered in the public sector,” she says. On a more philosophical level, Bruce
believes people can produce better results when left to their own devices instead of being directed by the state. One study in the Netherlands showed that the removal of road signs led to improved safety as people were forced to use their own initiative. “We are hugely dominated by rules in this society,” she says. “A relaxation of the rules, by definition, would give back some accountability to individuals.” If nothing else, the Big Society will ignite
a debate over where the line between public and private accountability should lie – a question which, in the current economic climate, has never been more pressing.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96