David cameron - big society

[Mecky]

The top and bottom of it is that the Conservatives want your vote, they are not going to get that by pushing people around and alienating them. Start that game and you're never going to win.

[cressida]

Examples like thi: s Villagers in England will be able to build homes without seeking council planning permission under David Cameron’s “Big Society” plans.

?

 

Well I hope that this starts soon as I want to have a conservatory without having to have planning permission, I was refused a two-storey extension because one house overlooked half of my drive - maybe it could go-ahead then - but I doubt it

[RJRB]

Does this Big Society exist anywhere in the world,or has it ever existed?

In my experience the UK compares with any country in terms of voluntary work,charity contributions,but I am sure that it is the same people who do the contributing or volunteering.

We all move amongst circles of people and can identify those who are always ready to lend a hand and those who don't.

The willing volunteers,are to the benefit of many.Some are purely motivated by an innate sense of duty and public spirit,and others may be involved partly due to self interest inasmuch as they are drawn into fundraising,or voluntary work having experienced the lack of service provided by the authorities.

Perhaps the Big Society idea was more active in pre war/ early post war days when there was a greater sense of community.People knew and looked out for each other.Sheffield had plenty of examples of local societies and mutual help groups.

teachers used to give up some of their time to encourage sports,and every area had youth clubs, boy scouts,girl guides etc.which were totally run by volunteers and existed on affordable subscriptions and perhaps the occasional benefactor.

I am glad to say that with with increasing national wealth the state was able to provide basic services to improve the lot of the community.

We can still afford to provide these services,whatever the current party in power says,and I am sure that the threatened cuts will be relaxed to some extent in time to sweeten the voters before the next general election.

In the meantime,I do not see a radical move towards the sort of society that Cameron has dreamt up.

All it seems to boil down to is that people will lose their lowly paid jobs,and volunteers will pick up on thecareas which affect them most.Other desirable and essential services will be lost to the detriment of all of society.

[Hots on]

Does this Big Society exist anywhere in the world,or has it ever existed?

 

 

Yes, this country has long standing tradition of people doing it for themselves as it were, it hasn't got a long standing tradition of big state/government with a huge monolithic public sector, which Labour built up when it was in.

[wednesday1]

Does this Big Society exist anywhere in the world,or has it ever existed?

In my experience the UK compares with any country in terms of voluntary work,charity contributions,but I am sure that it is the same people who do the contributing or volunteering.

We all move amongst circles of people and can identify those who are always ready to lend a hand and those who don't.

The willing volunteers,are to the benefit of many.Some are purely motivated by an innate sense of duty and public spirit,and others may be involved partly due to self interest inasmuch as they are drawn into fundraising,or voluntary work having experienced the lack of service provided by the authorities.

Perhaps the Big Society idea was more active in pre war/ early post war days when there was a greater sense of community.People knew and looked out for each other.Sheffield had plenty of examples of local societies and mutual help groups.

teachers used to give up some of their time to encourage sports,and every area had youth clubs, boy scouts,girl guides etc.which were totally run by volunteers and existed on affordable subscriptions and perhaps the occasional benefactor.

I am glad to say that with with increasing national wealth the state was able to provide basic services to improve the lot of the community.

We can still afford to provide these services,whatever the current party in power says,and I am sure that the threatened cuts will be relaxed to some extent in time to sweeten the voters before the next general election.

In the meantime,I do not see a radical move towards the sort of society that Cameron has dreamt up.

All it seems to boil down to is that people will lose their lowly paid jobs,and volunteers will pick up on thecareas which affect them most.Other desirable and essential services will be lost to the detriment of all of society.

 

Excellent post. Sums up the situation perfectly.

[RJRB]

Yes, this country has long standing tradition of people doing it for themselves as it were, it hasn't got a long standing tradition of big state/government with a huge monolithic public sector, which Labour built up when it was in.

 

You are right.We have a much longer tradition of the ruling classes and the rest.

That didn't work very well for the disadvantaged.

The National Health service may be a monolith,but I would back it to the hilt.

I also believe in the principle that it is worthwhile for every business to employ as many as it can afford,rather than to maximize profits for the owners and shareholders.

Radical eh?

[retrogo]

You are right.We have a much longer tradition of the ruling classes and the rest.

That didn't work very well for the disadvantaged.

The National Health service may be a monolith,but I would back it to the hilt.

I also believe in the principle that it is worthwhile for every business to employ as many as it can afford,rather than to maximize profits for the owners and shareholders.

Radical eh?

 

But that would more people able to spend on the economy, rather than a few stinking rich people squandering their money in tax free, offshore accounts. Wash your mouth out, we can't have those kinds of bolchey thoughts here.

(I agree with you dude).

[Mister M]

Yes, this country has long standing tradition of people doing it for themselves as it were, it hasn't got a long standing tradition of big state/government with a huge monolithic public sector, which Labour built up when it was in.

 

But having public services run by Governments doesn't necessarily crowd out voluntary activity.

[mystery man]

I've just been watching this on The Big Question. There was a woman (and I do feel for her) which kept going on about her severely disabled son who requires 24 hour support from a professional and expects the state to pay for it.

 

How? You'd need someone else to earn enough to pay for them-self and another professional. What if this professional carer also had a child in this situation, e.g. they earn X but need to pay out X. How do these equations add up?

 

People don't want the libraries to shut (neither do I), but if there being used proportionately less then they "deserve" proportionately less budget.

 

The country as a whole has a budget, in simple terms, the taxes we pay, there is only so much money, it will only stretch so far, how can we expect it to pay for everything we want?

 

The was a socialist who kept ranting (most of what he said were over grand clichés and he messed up virtually every time to make it sound worse!) about all their doing is cuts, cuts, cuts, we want this, this and that... Well pal, pay more taxes and you can have it, otherwise tell us where the money is going to to come from!

 

Big Society is about us doing it instead of us paying more taxes. To be part of our community!

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Society

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/news/building-big-society

 

calm down cameron!!!

[spooky3]

calm down cameron!!!

 

I'm not even Tory, it just makes sense!