Most people realise that we face huge challenges as a country. It is time to understand that Government has not got all the answers and we all have to work in different ways. I believe we have barely begun to tap the potential of what could be achieved if Government , responsible business and civil society worked together in a more effective partnership.
That is why we are so determined to give power away and encourage communities to take much greater control over their futures. That is why we are reforming public services to open them up to new providers and bring them closer to the people who use them. That’s why we want to encourage and support those people and groups who want to contribute more to making society stronger.
Yes, I accept that in one way that is harder when you have to find financial savings on the scale we have to. I am afraid that the voluntary sector, which annually receives almost £13 billion of taxpayers’ money, cannot be immune from that tough process. At the Office for Civil Society we are working very hard to help the sector manage its way through a painful change, not least with a £100m Transition Fund. However the Big Society agenda is about much more than public funding of charities or ‘just’ volunteering.
This Government has three major roles. First we want to transfer real power to communities. The Localism Bill going through Parliament now will do just that.
Second we want to open up our public services and give greater power to both users and front-line professionals. A White Paper on Public service reform next month will set our plans in more detail. They include encouraging public sector workers to form social enterprises and mutuals. As I have seen with my own eyes in Leicester, the effect can be transformational. Through piloting Community Budgets and Local Integrated services we are encouraging public agencies to break down the silos and focus on real need and better solutions.
Third we want to make it much easier and compelling for people to contribute both time and money to help others. My own department has recently published a Green Paper on Giving which takes a fresh look at how we encourage more giving at a time when money is tight and many people feel time-poor. We are running National Citizen pilots which this year will help 10,000 16 year olds to connect with their own power to make a contribution to their community. In partnership with the largest banks, who are putting up £200m, we are on the brink of delivering the Big Society Bank which will make it easier for social entrepreneurs to access capital.
In this task to strengthen society, we are building on the work of millions of people across the country who are doing amazing things to try and improve lives in their communities. This is the start of a long journey to achieve the kind of culture change we want for Britain; one in which we all feel better connected; part of something bigger and with the power to make a difference to what we care about.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Platform 10 » Blog Archive » Nick Hurd: What we can do you help you help the Big Society -- Topsy.com
I have written this previously on blogs with very little response. I believe this is a case that involves ordinary people ie with little or no access to celebrity big hitters or influential politicians, mainly conservative with a small ‘c’, not wealthy, but with a long track record of volunteering. This may seem a long piece but we are desperate and sick of all the theorising while the reality is so incredibly different.
I want to relate my experience of a Big Society “project” that seems to meet all the criteria but is struggling against Council cuts. This has the potential to be a real embarassment for David Cameron and his avowed political mission.
Barnet Museum is a small local museum, a registered charity, totally volunteer staffed, which has been in existence for over 80 years. (I am a volunteer at the Museum). The Museum receives a small grant (£3.5K) from the Council and has been housed for all its 80 years in a building owned by the Council. The building is Georgian and an exhibit in itself; it is in the centre of the area it covers (Chipping Barnet – a discrete part of the massive London Borough of Barnet).
The Council has said that the total funding for the Museum is £28K which comprises the £3.5K and other charges (utilities and some unclear) that the Council pays in respect of the building. The Council announced in December that all funding for the Museum will cease from April 2011.
We, the Museum, have put forward an alternative operating model: we have requested that the Council transfers the building to the Museum under the Asset Transfer provisions of development trust legislation; we would then take on responsibility for the running costs which, even if the Council continues its direct grant (£3.5K), will save the Council taxpayers over £20K pa. We have quoted the Big Society initiative and pointed out that the Museum would cease to exist if the Council moved it to another location (all the exhibits belong to the Museum not the Council) or if a market rent (some £40K pa) was charged. If the Council sells the building it would mean the end of the Museum but it would not be easy or cheap, there is 80 years worth of custom and practice to unravel.
Our alternative model was based on the premise that the Council wanted to reduce current costs, we met with the relevant council official and the leading Councillor for Community Services, Robert Rams. The council official considered our proposal workable and agreed that, although difficult, we could meet the financial risk involved in running the building. However, Councillor Robert Rams of Barnet Council (yes, the same council that lost £28million in Iceland), faced with our workable alternative, simply stated that the Council will not transfer the building to Barnet Museum unless for a commercial rent or a sale of the building. This “movement of the goalposts” from reducing current costs to increasing income came as a complete surprise and a blow. The Council had at no previous stage considered the building as a saleable asset – it hardly shows up on the Council’s huge portfolio of properties; but to us it is the only acceptable home for 80 years worth of local exhibits and archives, and Cllr Rams’ pronoucement is the death knell for Barnet Museum.
It appears that Asset Stripping trumps Big Society. Does anyone of any standing know or care? Does David Cameron realise how his vision is being mocked? Does PM and his office have any influence?
In summary, Barnet Council is faced with a potential political success, a Big Society volunteer group providing a popular service at minimal cost to the Council taxpayer OR a difficult, expensive, unpopular, and destructive piece of cultural vandalism.
The decision making Cabinet takes place on Monday 14th February; it is incredible that a Conservative Prime Minister’s initiative is being undermined by a Conservative Council.
If a well established and popular volunteer-based community organisation such as Barnet Museum cannot succeed, I am afraid the Prime Minister’s vision is dead in the water.
For more background see the preamble to our petition, no need to sign (unless you want to) but please read some of the petitioners’ comments to gauge the depth of feeling:
http://www.gopetition.com/petition/41281.html
We should appreciate any help, advice or intervention.
Regards,
Mike Noronha
For Barnet Museum
Mike, apologies, I should have said this to you last time you posted.
I will give your comment to Nick. I don’t know what he can do directly – as you may have seen, I was at the Big Society event on Monday morning, where there were many questions to David Cameron on the way councils are making cuts: his answer was, broadly, that central government can exhort, encourage and give examples, but fundamentally it is up to councils to decide. He rightly underlined that a commitment to localism holds in the bad times as well as the good.
As I said, I will make sure that Nick sees your comment.
Fiona, Thank you for your reply. The words “commitment to localism” are interesting in this context. The London Borough of Barnet is a huge construct; it is named after the town of Barnet which is actually quite a small community in the north-west corner of the borough (actually the postal address is Hertfordshire). The Council has for years moved much of the power of the borough towards Hendon where the town hall and other big economic sites such as Brent Cross are situated. The Museum is a museum of the town, locality and community of Barnet and has been so for 80 years. I contend that a real “commitment to localism” is a commitment to Barnet Museum!
However, I do understand where you and David Cameron are coming from; as I understand it, the Prime Minister is looking at something of social. ethical and cultural value when he talks of the Big Society, something bigger than just economics. I also understand the need to make cuts in expenditure, but if Councils (both left-wing and neo-con) realised the importance of the Big Society, they may be less inclined to cut those things that will disappear forever. I fear that the threatened closure of the Museum betrays a lack of commitment both to real localism and to the Big Society.