Building a big society is at the heart of the Conservative Party’s vision for change.
A Big Society is one in which everyone plays a part in their community life and there is a far wider sense of collective responsibility for what happens around us; so if a local library is run down, local people get involved to fix it, or if a local school is not meeting people’s needs, a new one can be set up by the community.
But we recognise that it is not enough just to create opportunities for people to get involved in building the Big Society; it will require an active role for the state. As David Cameron explained in his Hugo Young lecture in November 2009, the state must take action to agitate for, catalyse and galvanise social renewal: “We must use the state to remake society.”
Today we have set out plans for how we would like to do just that – empower local groups, but also provide the push from the state to get the process started. We have an ambition that everyone, from the high flying business executive to the teenager who has just left school, should be part of a neighbourhood group. We will allow these groups to take over the running of community amenities such as parks and libraries, give them first right of refusal to buy state owned community assets and give then a far greater say in the local planning system and where local budgets are being spent.
To catalyse the process of setting up and growing these neighbourhood groups we will establish National Centres for Community Organising and provide neighbourhood grants for the UK’s poorest areas. To help provide finance for the sector we will create an independent Big Society Bank, funded from unclaimed bank assets, which will leverage private sector investment to provide hundreds of millions of pounds of new finance for neighbourhood groups, charities, social enterprises and other non-governmental bodies.
These proposals, we hope, will provide the change we need so that in the years of challenge and promise that lie ahead, we really can call into being a new Big Society to redress the failures of the old failed big state.
( 8 comments ) Tags: Big Society, Hugo Young, National Centres for Community Organising
Comment by Roy Bradley on March 31, 2010 at 4:22 pm
As part of these controls I would suggest we introduce a lump sum payment paid by all accepted applicants to cover the services ie nhs, welfare, that they will be entitled to and which the citizens of Britain have paid for throughout their working life. The amount would be dependent on the applicants age and yes it would mean that some would not be able to afford this, quite. This money could then go towards the care for the elderly.
Comment by Andy Lamb on March 31, 2010 at 8:49 pm
Interesting to hear about this announcement. We set up http://www.neighboursunited.co.uk a couple of years ago in Harrogate with a similar objective. Brining people together for mutual benefit.
We are really making an impact and are now expanding the site into other areas of the UK..It will be helpful to have another 5,000 helpers…
Comment by Jeremy Stanford on March 31, 2010 at 11:32 pm
I work in fundraising in the charity sector. When I’m asked how I can be a Conservative AND a charity worker I usually reply that a Conservative government would be far more positive towards charities. Unlike Labour’s covert control over charity agendas to fulfil their social engineering objectives, Conservatives would fully recognise the important role of the third sector and encourage charities to meet the real needs they experience.
I’m pleased to see Cameron has addressed this issue, but a little disturbed by how government- directed it seems to be. I don’t think we want blue-Tshirted Cameroonians directing all our social affairs. Give help – but allow charities the freedom to know what they need to do.
Comment by Steve Willis on April 1, 2010 at 2:06 pm
I like the idea of an independent Big Society Bank.
Have you considered making QUANGO’s apply for the funding of their budgets via the Big Society Bank? This would raise the transparency of scrutiny and approval for their planned expenditures, putting Society back in control of the QUANGO kings and queens.
Comment by Jack Hughes on April 1, 2010 at 4:38 pm
It’s not going to work – forcing people to spontaneously club together to do what you want.
It looks, well, totalitarian.
Comment by Ray Cope on April 4, 2010 at 1:18 pm
I am glad someone has touched on the funding of Quango’s. A careful look at Ofgem should be the first priority. With their army of senior staff they can never put forward a spokesman for TV interviews. WHY? Surely they are not all on the golf course.
Comment by Gordon Prestoungrange on April 6, 2010 at 9:18 am
We’ve been running a voluntary organisation to give our old collapased industrial community of Prestonpans back its self esteem for more than a decade now. Importantly we’ve worked on sense of place by honouring history.
Yes we have needed and still need help with small grants but please please please don’t believe any of us need a central bureaucracy delivering the Big Society construct.
We need understanding facilitators who can ‘fan the flames’ that are already there with modest grants in aid for specific actions NOT overheads. Worse still would be central bureaucracy telling us ‘how’ to do it giving us Best Practiice Handbooks. We need share and compare gatherings where those on the ground network with one another but where outputs are the only name of the game.
Comment by MM on April 20, 2010 at 8:53 am
One. Would the conservative part remove the current charity commission right, to examine complaints against charities in secret ? and to put in its place elected grass root users of services as a panel instead, who would be allowed to publish findings for public scrutiny, and identify charities that are being complained about ? The secrecy is undermining confidence in a fair system.
Two: Would the conservative party consider removing the specialist minister for charities and replace them with a panel of users and carers instead, to determine if a charity, is adhering to or abusing its remit, given a number are undermining private endeavour, via charitable tax concessions whilst still hiring corporate professionals ? Should not grass root services be given the same tax exemptions ?
To be part of everything we ALL need the same rights and power, users of charitable services do not have ANY rights at present to challenge the way funding is given, or, how it is used. Consultation is at an all time low, and the power to challenge non-extant.
Mervyn James (Wales)