Can political parties deliver the big society?
Last July, here at the RSA, I spoke at a conference to discuss Conservative Social Action. This is an initiative to encourage Tory MPs and parliamentary candidates to establish social action projects – charities or social enterprises – in their constituencies.
At the conference and in various written pieces I applauded the initiative. For years I tried without success to get Labour leaders and officials to see that the change model of political parties was bust. Young people in particular weren’t interested in the idea that change came only from electing people to make decisions on their behalf. Instead, I argued, local political parties needed to be change agents themselves, making things happen in their own communities which symbolised the kind of progress they wanted to make in the council or at Westminster. It was a poignant for me to see an idea I had failed to get established in my own party being taken up by the Tories.
So it was sobering to read this piece in the Times on Saturday. It’s not for me to comment on the individuals named in the article, but the fact that Conservative Central Office could apparently only cite five projects out of the 150 claimed doesn’t sound good.
If it is true that the Conservatives’ hopes for a different type of political activism haven’t been fulfilled, what does this tell us? Perhaps the Conservatives have just been guilty of over-selling what can be achieved in a couple of years. With a General Election in the offing the social action projects may have been relegated in importance. The question then is whether the Tories will continue to push the idea after May 6th.
A more depressing conclusion would be that the ethos and image of political parties is simply not reconcilable with that of grassroots charitable endeavour. Maybe my colleagues in the Labour Party were right to ignore my call for a new model. Against this pessimism, I know several MPs of various parties who have played an important role in establishing and developing local third sector activities.
As long as our democracy relies on political parties it is in all our interests that they are reasonably strong organisations which attract talented and energetic people. This will only happen if they are organisations that make change happen, not simply ones that tell us to vote for other people to make decisions.
Perhaps after the election we can invite the Conservative social action team back and ask them what lessons they have learnt from the faltering attempt to make their party symbolise David Cameron’s big society.
Comments
13 Comments on Can political parties deliver the big society?
-
David Wilcox on
Mon, 19th Apr 2010 1:42 pm
-
Matthew Kalman on
Mon, 19th Apr 2010 2:43 pm
-
Hilary Sutcliffe on
Mon, 19th Apr 2010 3:33 pm
-
Hilary Sutcliffe on
Mon, 19th Apr 2010 3:42 pm
-
Daniel Snell on
Tue, 20th Apr 2010 9:31 am
-
Peter Kyle on
Tue, 20th Apr 2010 12:01 pm
-
David Wilcox on
Tue, 20th Apr 2010 12:33 pm
-
Margaret Bowker on
Fri, 23rd Apr 2010 3:19 pm
-
Big Society(1) : Connected Communities on
Wed, 28th Apr 2010 2:54 pm
-
Big Society(1) : RSA Projects on
Wed, 28th Apr 2010 5:20 pm
-
Robin on
Mon, 3rd May 2010 11:42 am
-
Frances Zammit on
Tue, 8th Jun 2010 8:55 am
-
Lorraine Maddams on
Tue, 12th Oct 2010 6:21 pm
Agreed – but can we make the most of the opportunity? Just blogged this (with embedded links to refs) http://socialreporter.com/?p=814
But let’s be positive. It is amazing to have community development, social enterprise, social action at the heart of an election campaign. What’s needed to make the best of the opportunity? It depends where you are coming from, of course.
A. From the Tory pespective, they need more endorsement from practitioners and activists. But that’s difficult to achieve at present, because most outside the volunteer-philanthropy traditions aren’t natural Tories, so they’ll make just-about-polite noises until there is a Conservative government. Not looking so certain at present, so caution prevails.
B. From the Big Society Network perspective, they need to show they are relevant, as I argued previously – adding detail, connecting with others in the field. But if they are seen merely to be providing support for item A. they’ll lose credibility and any pretence of independence.
C. From the citizen/voter perspective, we need some non-partisan space in which to aggregate and discuss the debate now emerging – not least because most organisations are keeping their heads down. We need more than a Twitter stream.
D. And for those trying to develop innovative ideas on the field, we could do with a place to pull together good examples of what’s happening, and to evolve together some ways to blend the best of the old and the new … for example community development plus co-design events, plus online.
Hi David,
It would be great if some kind of “non-partisan space” grew, for people across the political spectrum who are interested in these community-based change activities.
But, then again, I can’t exactly see left communitarians (like ‘Transition Town’ folks?) ever sitting down with conservative communitarians (like Melanie Phillips?).
But maybe there are more fruitful trans-partisan currents out there, that are less dogmatic…?
Matthew K
We at MATTER are successfully developing a non-partisan space to look specifically at how new and emerging technologies can be made to work for us all. To provide benefits to society, not just companies, to be developed in a responsible way and involving the citizen at the heart of how these transformative technologies can be used. Check us and our multi-stakeholder steering group out on http://www.matterforall.org. There are a few organisations doing interesting crowdsourcing activities in this area, but no-one looking to bring all the stakeholders together to consider the big issues and help develop practical solutions.
It can be done as we have seen in lots of areas, it needs political will and of course cash. We could do with some of that, we have support and interest from a diverse group of organisations, but without funding the will to change simply can’t happen.
This Big Society thing for me (though a really rubbish name) is not just about community based activities in grass roots areas on local issues, but is also about some of the big issues, like our use of science and technology, corporate responsibility and others.
I was particularly interested in Cameron citing Esmee Fairbairn and Young Foundations in terms of directing funding to them to support such initiatives. That is an excellent idea, Esmee I know best (as funders of the Nano Forum which MATTER evolved from), they specialise in core funding of innovative areas. They know how to do it, they are totally independent and rigorous in their methods and not afraid to make brave choices. It’s worth a look on their past funding streams to see the great stuff they have supported.
Maybe we need non-partisan spaces like MATTER to coordinate the thinking on what is needed and places like Esmee to fund?
Oops, I meant non-partisan spaces like MATTER and of course the RSA!!
Matthew,
I was there at the Conservative’s Social Action launch too, in fact like some, had been involved in the process of shaping the ‘Big Society’ piece.
I think, like you, i believe in theory it’s an excellent idea. we do need a united vision for community that brings us all together, around key notions like ‘togetherness, ownership, meaning, community, belonging’.
And i don’t believe that a political party needs to hold on or own those ‘generous’ notions. furthermore, like you i quietly sighed, *sigh* at what i saw.
in principle, excellent, you can’t argue with its intentions. i wish they had been braver, more visionary, more courageous, and gone for it.
I might be wrong, but i sensed that the resources behind it (not the talent) were very thin.
Perhaps, the RSA could be bolder in it’s position as the nationwide, maker of this agenda, and stride out into the space?
As usual your friend and admirer
Daniel Snell
A characteristically thought provoking post. My concern with this agenda is that the Conservatives talk about ‘big society’ and the state in mutually exclusive terms, whereas evidence of the past thirty years points to anything but.
I too was at the social action conference last year, and was impressed with their intentions and some aspects of their achievements. I still feel that there will be much to learn from this, despite the apparent failure to implement it as described.
Peter – picking up your point (I think) a lot of successes over the past 30 years have come from collaborations, alliances, partnerships, across sectors.
Jim Diers was in London recently, talking about the way that neighbourhoods in Seattle have succeeded in developing just the sort of smaller scale citizen-led initiatives that I believe we would all like to see.
The key to success was matching municipal cash with volunteer effort, and having a paid official brokering collaborations with city government (not the same as an Alinsky community organiser). Interview here http://socialreporter.com/?p=763
There are lots of UK examples too from neighbourhood management.
What needed in civic space is a rich mix of volunteering, campaigning, social enterprise, partnerships and local state services. We have that in some places, less so in others. The grassroots ecology is pretty complex, and needs sensitive gardening not just support for a couple of species. Oh dear, stretching the metaphor a bit.
Anyway, I’m agreeing that it isn’t helped to talk of Big Society versus the state.
As a community activist – some of the comments referred to them – I found your blog ‘Can political parties deliver the big society’ and its accompanying comments extremely interesting. They made me focus on whether political parties could deliver social action projects, something I had not fully considered before. I have worked for a long time pro bono as community lobbyist for a number of large, successful life-enhancing social action projects, working with and lobbying parties, councils, government agencies, and departments at a high level. Many areas of the country have voluntary groups, set up by the community, or agencies. These are variously and more simply funded, but major projects are more difficult to fund and facilitate, although they will affect and support large areas. Most social enterprise comes to the local authority for planning permission, funding, policy, confirmation etc. Perhaps parties should create the ethos in which community action flourishes and is respected; for example councillors attending group committees to show solidarity and anticipate potential problems; in addition, the latest party proposals to enhance the powers of the electorate should help considerably and adjust the balance of society.
[...] Mathew Taylor has already indicated, walking the talk of this idea is not straightforward, and thus far the [...]
[...] Mathew Taylor has already indicated, walking the talk of this idea is not straightforward, and thus far the [...]
I worked in education for over 30 years. The (secondary) schools I worked in benefited from voluntary help by parents and others. Regrettably, the numbers were small, and declining.
Most of the voluntary work done in schools is done by teachers, followed by support staff offering to help (examples: school trips, clubs, mentoring). By most I mean 98% or so, with very little done by outside volunteers.. Since retirement I voluntarily run a club in a primary school and am willing to become a governor.
However, I do worry that my pension will be reduced under a Conservative government. If that happens, I will stop doing any voluntary work (and take a part-time job). Obviously my protest would, on its own, have no effect except for the 80 or so children I help. However, I will (via the internet) join with others in encouraging other workers whose pensions may be hit to withdraw their work too. Since I feel sure that teachers would withdraw from voluntary clubs en masse if their pay is affected, the Big Society would then not work in schools.
Perhaps I should explain that I do not in any way accept that my pension is unfairly high. All, and I really do mean all, my Cambridge University science comtempories earned more than I did, and I became a seconday headteacher.
The Big Society idea is valuable, but it needs to include and encourage those people who have volunteered for decades.
I recall hearing that when one of the countries in Asia was in financial trouble, many people turned up, out of their own initiative bringing their gold and jewellery to give to the government to help pay the national debt. Whether it is true or not I do not know, but what a Big Society that would be! Perhaps in our society, where many people are more than wealthy, and many are wealthy in relative terms, the government ought to give the opportunity to display this healthy type of love of country. I suspect it would be too much to ask the English, or Anglo-saxon psyche to use their own initiative to voluntarily offer part of their wealth to contribute to paying towards the national debt (perhaps I am wrong and some already have?), but to encourage initiative, why not set up an account and advertise it, where those who wish to can, voluntarily, contribute – who knows what response it might bring!
I think that the notion of ‘the big society’ is more about ‘values’ than anything else – enterprise, voluntary or otherwise, being encouraged from the bottom up and not instituted from the top down. Top down efforts (however well intentioned) usually lead to power in the hands of the few and disempowerment of the many. So ‘the big society’ is (I think?) the government at the ‘top’ saying we want you – the people of this country- to generate the ideas, energy and enterprises with as little interference and as much help as we the government can give. The Taoists believed that as soon as you had to have a law or regulation about something,in essence the values of society had already failed. Perhaps the present government is trying to inspire a sense of self responsibility rather than regulation, encourage energy rather than dependence and maybe generate some pride in our own skills and abilities?
Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
RSA Animate
RSA Mobile
RSA Comment- RSA Projects Blogs
RSA Bookshop
The RSA Bookshop, in partnership with Blackwell's the UK's leading academic bookseller, offers Fellows and friends an opportunity to purchase books and to explore our speakers’ ideas in greater detail. Visit the RSA Bookshop.