Southwark Circle

Almost a year ago, I picked up a leaflet full of recipe ideas at the Bermondsey Street Festival, which had been produced by Southwark Circle, a membership organisation open to anyone living in Southwark over the age of 50.  Members get help with life's practical tasks, as and when they need it from a network of handy, local people called Neighbourhood Helpers who are CRB and reference checked. 

Anyway, I read today Madeleine Bunting's interesting article on welfare reform on the Guardian's Comment is Free site, highlighting the work done by Southwark Circle as a model of what good, thoughtful 'win,win' reform can look like.  

Contrast this article and the generally positive tone, with that of Diane Abbott's responding to a suggestion, that the unemployed might be encouraged to move to areas where work is available provided their social housing was also portable.   There's no question that she raises many issues which would make such a move unattractive to those affected.  But surely that cannot be a reason for not even considering it.  As Madeleine Bunting notes in relation to the Labour government:-

" its instincts were too closely bound up with using the state as the instrument to deliver services. But the consequences are that the "service user" becomes passive. If services are restricted, they have to exaggerate need to qualify, locking them into what can often be demoralising dependency".

Clearly the Labour government had run out of ideas but it's a bit depressing to note that none of the leadership contenders are offering anything fresh or at least are prepared to say it at this stage.

Surely innovation is what is required in order for those who are in need to receive the type of service they are entitled to.  One of the partners involved in the development of Southwark Circle is an organisation called Participle, also based in Tanner Street, Bermondsey.  They have set out their vision for 21st century public services in what they call Beveridge 4.0.

"Changes in society, demographics, lifestyle and availability of resources, have left us with services that are out of step with modern Britain. We need to stop patching and mending institutions and services designed for another era, the time has come to create something new. A radical new vision for our public services is required. 
We call our vision Beveridge 4.0."

Once again, Southwark leads the way. 

Oh, and what's that I hear you ask ?  Who was in charge when this innovative project was conceived and developed .....?  

Where does charity begin or end?

BM attended an open meeting organised by a long-established (650 years) local charity yesterday, at which they shared the welcome news that they are now in a position to start distributing grants to worthy causes again, having been preoccupied with other matters for the past few years.   It's a sign of the general anxiety being felt that on a day when England were playing and the weather was suddenly Summer-y, the attendance at this meeting which ran from 3-5, was beyond what the charity had anticipated.

Several things stuck in my mind from the session.  Firstly a great deal of good work is being done by small groups, associations and the smaller local charities who now fear for their very existence.  Secondly, is it possible that some of them duplicate other services on offer from the local authority and thirdly, for the charity running the session, how do they establish in deciding which grant applications to approve that they are not funding duplicate projects?   (I have no answers, just questions).

The other interesting snippet (gleaned via a presentation given by Kids Company) was that several City firms seem to be ramping up their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) time, offering in some cases, 5 CSR days per annum in addition to annual leave  to staff.   Clearly at a strategic level, the bigger firms understand what the 'Big Society' concept means and are showing willing.    The local Southwark Volunteer Centre, which handles these offers and brokers time for projects in need,  is experiencing a surge in offers of CSR time.  The sceptic in me assumes this must mean that it's tax deductible, but you can't look a gift horse etc.

Overall the session was a useful reminder of just how complex our 'society' is with statutory services supported by so many varied volunteer groups.  Again, while one can't deny that problems exist which is why many of these groups were formed, I didn't and don't believe that our society is 'broken' in the way some would have you believe.

I love the inter-tubes!

Let joy be unconfined!  Sometimes a plan comes to fruition and so it is with great delight that I can relay what BM has been hatching over the past couple of weeks.

Readers may recall that BM is Chair of Govs at a Nursery & Children's Centre and we are due to have our annual Bermondsey Summer Fete in July.  Sensible Footwear initially drew my attention to Old Town and their gorgeous fabric 'Bermondsey in Bloom' as a result of which and after some enquiries, we are now in a position to display that lovely fabric at the Centre during the Fete; along with the Pearly King & Queen sing-along, Punch & Judy show etc and in return we are sending to Old Town some fabric designed by the children when we re-opened as a Children's Centre in the heart of Bermondsey.  Roll on July 17th!

My Big Society

BM has been grappling with an unexpected dilemma - she has been asked to take over as Chair of Governors in a primary school, in addition to her role (also voluntary) as a Chair of Governors at a Nursery School & Children's Centre.  Whilst flattering, methinks this vividly illustrates just how shallow the pool of talent for school governance actually is. 

Having deployed similar tactics myself in order to persuade good candidates to get involved in school governance, I recognise all too well the assurances given that this will not take up too much time, only 2 meetings per term etc.  However, despite reservations and with the caveat that I do not know how long I can commit to, flattery won out...so once more into the breach or something like that.  Updates to follow as the full extent of the commitment is revealed.

Changing the world

The American anthrolopogist, Margaret Mead famously said:-

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

It's a quote that Bermondsey Dad is fond of using to inspire and motivate, largely to good effect.    Sometimes however, it's easy to get bogged down in the minutiae of everyday life and and since effecting real change can take time, it's difficult to get a sense of how a project is going.   We think of our projects as merely local, but of course everything that was ever worthwhile is local.   There's also a strangely English (and Irish) reticence about broadcasting our ambitions for fear of derision. 

Aaanyway...Bermondsey Mum has been acting as landlady to one of the campaign volunteers who happens to be American and BM loves Americans - loves them!  Have a look at his website and marvel at the sheer optimism and the conviction running through it like Brighton rock, that it is possible to change the world! And Go LibDems!
  
http://www.kyletaylor.com/

     

Big society

Okay, first things first: I am married to a councillor and am a school governor, Chair for the past 2 years. So I think I know a bit about my local community and I suspect that it is fairly representative of the national picture. I see no evidence of a reservoir of popular outrage ready to be channelled into progressive action. In my experience as a school governor, people can be persuaded to volunteer for one-off events or to deal with a specific project but the greater the degree of commitment required, the more difficult it is to recruit volunteers. People generally mobilise themselves into action over single issues eg uniting against a building development or a campaign to save a hospital from closure. In many ways, those of us who are school governors are just the same, the single issue being our children's education, only the time frame is extended.

So under Dave's plan, the various public services which are not working will be replaced by these volunteer-led organisations. What he doesn't explain is who is going to police them? A whole support structure exists for instance to ensure good governance of schools and even that's not foolproof. Who's going to vet the volunteers who want to take over a hospital or fire the local Police borough commander? And by the way, I'm not talking about CRB here, I'm more concerned about such organisations being hijacked by those with an axe to grind but not necessarily the skills to match.

And finally, for me the main problem with the whole idea is that it feels suspiciously like a smokescreen to distract us when the cuts come. If we all join hands, get together, feel good about ourselves we won't notice or mind that services we have paid for in taxes are replaced with something a lot less reliable, unaccountable and shambolic.

Ultimately, I want Government to do its job and govern or govern better!