Big Society relaunch: the risks

23 May 11
John Tizard

As the prime minister re-launches his big idea – the Big Society – it seems an appropriate time to ask 'what is the Big Society and what it could it be?'

To the government it would seem to have several key elements ranging from individuals and families taking more responsibility for their lives to opening the public service provision up to social enterprise and the community and voluntary sector.  To some ministers and others the term 'Big Society' seems to be a useful badge for a new policy or initiative.  For some it does appear to be a camouflage for a deliberate pursuit of a 'smaller state', less regulation, fewer public sector employees and public expenditure cuts.

This country has a long history of volunteering and voluntary effort.  In this the Big Society offers little that is new.  Evidence suggests that the level of volunteering has remained at about the same level for many years.  The Big Society concept has not seemingly increased the numbers of people volunteering or the amount of time collectively volunteered to community and public projects.  People volunteer for a variety of reasons and to do many different things.  It is not apparent though that many of us are ready or willing to volunteer to undertake tasks and duties that would previously have been undertaken by employed staff funded either directly or indirectly by the state.  However, it often seems that this is the expectation of some government advocates of the Big Society.

Many third sector organisations already deliver public services either through contracts with the public sector or through the use of grant or fund raising monies.  One result of the public expenditure cuts is that a significant proportion of these cuts have fallen on community, voluntary and other third sector organisations and the services which they provide.  Without adequate transitional arrangements there has been little opportunity for some organisations to find alternative means of funding or new ways of working to mitigate the impact of the cuts. Valuable services have been or are being lost.

If the Big Society policy was to give the impression that the only role for third sector bodies should be to deliver public services, either on contract to or as a substitute for the state, this would be damaging and wrong. Many third sector organisations do not wish to provide traditional public services and many do not wish to contract with the state.  They offer other benefits for their beneficiaries – for example information and advocacy services; community development and capacity building; informal befriending; or campaigning.  The reality is that the sector is not homogeneous and this is one of its strengths.

Of course the third sector can have a major role in public service provision and how this can be best achieved is a critical contemporary consideration. Given the need for more innovation, greater choice, enhanced personalisation and the need to secure better outcomes by doing things differently the government, local government and the wider public sector are interested in a greater plurality of public service provision. This includes new forms of third sector provisions employee co-ops 'spinning out' of the public sector, private sector provision and different forms of publicly managed provision; and partnerships across and between the sectors.

Above all there is a growing consensus around the value of third sector organisations managing some public services. To ensure that this is achieved on a sustainable basis it will be essential for these same bodies to ensure that revenue funding meets all costs plus a reasonable margin for re-investment and development, these providers can access affordable capital from the public, private and social investors.  Such capital investment should be in the form of repayable and interest bearing loans but the terms will have to be such that undercapitalised and new start-up organisations can access them.  The Big Society Bank and other social investment funds have a vital role to play. The government should require the banks, especially those in which it has major shareholdings, to go beyond their commitments in the Merlin Report on banking.

However, for those organisations that are not engaged in major public service contracting there is every reason for the public sector – especially local authorities and the NHS – to continue to use grant funding. In February this year, writing on the PF Blog , I proposed local partnership agreements between local public bodies led by their local authorities and the community and voluntary sector.  The relevance of such agreements is even greater today as the impact of recent budget cuts become ever more apparent.

Third sector organisations, the public sector and the private sector are going to have to be more adept at collaborative, partnership and network working.  Genuinely effective civil society will be based on such collaboration, and community and citizen empowerment.  This is very much the basis for inclusive and productive societies.

Across the country and across the political divide I detect enthusiasm for aspects of what is often claimed for the Big Society but because of a growing cynicism about the term many excellent opportunities and initiatives could be undermined.

In many places, local authorities, the third sector, faith groups,  businesses, and citizens share a commitment to enhance civil society; to support and nurture the growth of a strong but diverse third sector;  to build community capacity; for individuals and families to take on more responsibility for themselves and their neighbours; and for more volunteering.  However, this commitment is usually aimed at complementing state activity not replacing it.

There is recognition of a need for collectivism and not simply individualism. Therefore, there is a real risk that the government’s confusion about what it means by Big Society and its conflation with other policies such as cutting public expenditure and reducing the size of the state will stifle what could be a great liberating initiative.   It would be tragic and ironic if big government undermined Big Society by trying to be too small government! What is needed is enabling government at a local and national level.

John Tizard is director of the Centre for Public Service Partnerships

 

Did you enjoy this article?

AddToAny

Top