Member News
By Tony Grew - 28th February 2011
Conservative MPs have mounted a robust defence of their party's Big Society agenda.
During a backbench business debate on the coalition policy, Charlie Elphicke (Con, Dover) said that while the Big Society has been widely discussed in the media, it has not been properly debated in the Commons.
He said grand statements about the beginning of a "post-bureaucratic age" mean little to his constituents, while "annoyance and frustration" at Whitehall-made rules is endemic across the country.
Elphicke said the government's plans for schools and the NHS are an even more significant part of the Big Society agenda than plans to give power back to communities.
He argued that local groups should take charge of how their communities will develop, and that freedom will encourage economic growth as well as social cohesion.
Elphicke said it is clear from evidence of other countries that less-centralised public services work more efficiently, but the Big Society is about more than "reining in" the public sector.
He cited the example of the local campaign to purchase the Port of Dover, bringing together talent and knowledge of local people.
He summed the Big Society agenda up as "getting the state to back off a bit" and giving communities room to breathe and innovate.
Rehman Chisti (Con, Gillingham and Rainham) said while the Port of Dover is a good example of a large project, the Big Society is "big in so many small ways".
He said it is about empowering people and allowing local residents to "decide their own destiny".
Jon Cruddas (Lab, Dagenham and Rainham) said the Big Society, the prime minister's "absolute passion", is in danger of becoming a national joke.
He said he "quite likes the notion", but the Tories have no monopoly on these issues and questioned if the Big Society agenda is "a veneer for ideologically-driven cuts".
However, Cruddas acknowledged that David Cameron was talking about the concept before the economic crisis.
He said while it could lead to a more responsible society, the government's stance is uncertain about the role of the state, not critical enough of the private sector and "silent on social justice".
Cruddas said the reforms to welfare will only benefit big private sector companies who have the amount of cashflow and organisation in place, while good local providers will "go to the wall".
If the Big Society is to be anything more than just "informal acts of generosity" then it needs infrastructure, meanwhile councils are cutting grants to the third sector, which expects to lose £1bn next year.
Cruddas said some of the benefit cuts will leave people such as the disabled with less and not more control over their lives, while others are disempowered by the private sector.
Sam Gyimah (Con, East Surrey) said the concept that the state knows best has been "tested to destruction" and it is time to harness the potential of communities.
Rory Stewart (Con, Penrith and the Border) said the Big Society is not about the state or individuals but communities.
He said it really matters that people care about their local areas and communities, which will drive them to make it better.
Paul Flynn (Lab, Newport West) said the Big Society is the latest in a long line of prime ministerial "gimmicks", like the 'cones hotline', 'back to basics' and 'the third way'.
He called them "candy floss" and "vacuous policy" and claimed Labour had backed volunteering while in government.
Flynn while the aims of the Big Society are "desirable", working for nothing is a millionaire's view of society and the whole concept is "very little except a big cop out".
At the end of the debate Nick Hurd, minister for civil society, said the Big Society is an attempt to build on the "fantastic work" undertaken by volunteers across the country.
He said the third sector already receives £13bn of public money annually, and the sector "cannot be immune" from the cuts.
However, the government, while not in control of local authorities, has made it clead that they should not cut the voluntary sector disproportionately.
Hurd said the new Big Society bank would help grow social investment.
He told the House that the Big Society is "not ultimately a government project" and depends on the grassroots response.
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.