Whatever happened to Cameron's flagship policy, the "Big Society"
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTVN
(Post 5160742)
I don't get why people always criticise governments for doing u-turns, it's a lot better that they listen to people, recognise they made a mistake and change their minds then to just stick to the guns and force through a policy just for the sake of their pride
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...ust?intcmp=239
Quote:
David Cameron's flagship "big society" project is at risk of being derailed by savage cuts to grassroots voluntary groups and a collapse in trust among the very people the government expected to deliver its vision, according to an independent audit of the first two years of the initiative.
The report concludes that the big society lacks a clear vision and strategy and is in danger of becoming "an initiative for the leafy suburbs", despite the prime minister's championing of a policy he described at its Downing street launch in 2010 as something he hoped would be "one of the great legacies" of his government.
Quote:
It says grassroots community groups expected to deliver the big society have been dealt a "body blow" by the first tranche of expected £3.3bn cuts in government funding to the voluntary sector over the next three years, while a support programme, introduced by ministers for charities at risk of going bust, was "too little, too late".
As a result of the cuts and the government's failure to communicate or deliver its big society aspirations, much of the goodwill civil society groups initially felt towards the project has now evaporated, says the report, published by the thinktank Civil Exchange.
|
The report's author, Caroline Slocock, said "There are real question marks over the vision and delivery of big society."
The report draws on more than 40 data sources to test progress on the government's "three pillars" of the big society: enabling people to shape their local area, opening up public services provision to charities, and levels of "social action" such as volunteering. It finds:
• There is a widening "big society gap" in which volunteering and other forms of social capital are strongest in wealthy areas. Cuts have hit charities based in deprived areas the hardest, creating the danger that the project becomes "an initiative for the leafy suburbs".
• Despite ministerial promises, charities and social enterprises have been sidelined in the market for government contracts, such as the Work Programme, which the report says has "an implicit bias towards large, private sector businesses".
• The government lacks a common vision and strategy for the big society, while smaller voluntary groups vital to delivering the project have found it hard to make their voices heard in Whitehall. It cites figures showing 70% of charity leaders believed the government did not value or respect the voluntary sector as a partner.
The sense that big society policy is foundering is underlined by a separate Guardian survey of the 16 specially invited guests present at the big society launch meeting held in Downing Street in May 2010, hosted by Cameron and the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg.
Most of those invited were the kind of grassroots community activists and social entrepreneurs identified by the government as central to its project.
The survey reveals that while most of the participants still subscribe to big society aims in principle, many key supporters have become disheartened by the scale of cuts to charities and the failure of the government to put its weight behind the policy, which sought to give local people and charities a bigger say in running their communities and services.
|
It's not just about u-turns on an unpopular tax, it's about not having a clue about running a country - the current Tory government is always ready to "talk the talk", but finds itself singularly unable to "walk the walk", unless, of course, it benefits party patrons and supporters. The government should never have found itself involved in a "pasty tax furore" in the first place, but, of course, this is the government that gives tax-breaks to millionaires while robbing pensioners millions of pounds of benefits ..... :idc: |
