Big Society in the North

I think there is an extremely important element that is missing from this debate. One of the policy initiatives which is currently being implemented, and which I believe has profound implications for the Big Society, is the conversion of large parts of the current national and local state infrastructure into "social enterprises". Now, this is already happening in many areas, with parts of the NHS, local government services, and other public agencies being transformed into social enterprises, and many public assets being considered for floating off into trusts. There are some real concerns about this process, not least of which is that it appears that most of the staff of these agencies are being presented with their futures as employees of "social enterprises" as faits accomplis, with little consultation. There must be a question as to how genuine these "social enterprises" will be, as, surely, one of the key aspects of a true social enterprise is that it has the support and commitment of its workforce for its objectives.

Putting aside this concern (which I realise is not an easy task), these are interesting developments for the Big Society, It means that communities all over the country will be populated with big new organisations calling themselves "social enterprises". I am interested in what this will mean for local community development. Will these organisations just carry on delivering the same services as ever, or will they take their designation as social enterprises seriously, look around themselves, and start to take on a wider purpose? Could we envisage them becoming forces for good on the local social scene?  Forgive me if I missed some public pronouncements on this, and that it is therefore obvious to anyone, but there are going to be these powerful, asset-rich organisations, with the potential to use their position and resources to impact on local communities in ways not previously open to them. 

What I think could potentially be happening here, is that mechanisms are being developed which "sweat" public assets to achieve more with them than would previously have been  the case. In the era of public spending austerity, the idea that additional money is invested in regeneration programmes might be on the way out, and, in its place, could be a drive to achieve community development and regeneration objectives as consequences of investment of mainstream service resources, which, when placed in the hands of local social enterprises, might be invested in ways that support local economic and community development as well as delivering essential services.

I think those involved with the Big Society, with voluntary and community organisations and with regeneration and community development activities need to consider this possibility and its potential implications.

A key theme of what has been coming out of Cumbria has been emphasis on the important role of Parish Councils as giving democratic legitimacy for local actions. This is probably only to be expected in a sparsely populated area like Eden. However, many of us think the Big Society approach is going to run into its biggest challenges in urban areas, most of which do not have Parish Councils. Indeed this has come as a surprise to some of the people I have spoken to about the Big Society, and it is nearly always the case that the structures that do exist in urban areas, such as Local Area Committees, are appointed rather than elected. There ARE a very few urban Parish Councils (some called Community Councils) in England (I believe they are much more common in Scotland), and legislation was passed in 1997 which allowed for any urban area to have such a body if they wished. They haven't really caught on as yet, however.

So, the question I am asking is do we need many more urban parish councils, or at least some kind of very local elected body, to make the Big Society happen? Would the existence of many more people with democratic mandates to improve their areas help or hinder Big Society initiatives?

I'm calling this Hyperlocal Democracy (unless you can think of a better term). And I'd welcome views on it.