On Politics and theology: Part 3: Big Society

The Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government led by David Cameron promoted the Big Society, a concept developed in the early 2000nds.  For a resume of the birth, life and demise  of  Big Society see:

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

See also:

https://www.newlocal.org.uk/articles/big-society-2-0-what-sets-our-paradigm-apart/#:~:text=Built%20around%20principles%20of%20localism%2C,the%20intellectual%20basis%20for%20Cameronism.

The concept and its  proposed application and implemention by reducing the power of the state and placing responsibility on the voluntary sector to deliver was fraught with problems:  not least the lack of sufficient government funding to improve capacity within the sector and also the sector's chaotic fragmented nature.

The then Church of England Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams,  had this to say of Big Society:

"Introduced in the run-up to the last election as a major political idea for the coming generation, [the Big Society] has suffered from a lack of definition about the means by which such ideals can be realised.

Big Society rhetoric is all too often heard by many therefore as aspirational waffle designed to conceal a deeply damaging withdrawal of the state from its responsibilities to the most vulnerable.

If the Big Society is anything better than a slogan looking increasingly threadbare as we look at our society reeling under the impact of public spending cuts, then discussion on this subject has got to take on board some of those issues about what it is to be a citizen and where it is that we most deeply and helpfully acquire the resources of civic identity and dignity".

The response of the Church of England generally is encapsulated below:

• Initial Support & Skepticism: While the Church of England generally supported the idea of community empowerment, it was concerned that the initiative was merely a way to reduce state funding for social services.
• "We are Already Big Society": Church leaders argued that many of the proposed activities were already being done by churches, viewing themselves as the "lifeblood" of communities.
• Criticism of Implementation: Despite criticisms, the Church engaged in efforts to tackle poverty alongside the government, showing a mix of pragmatism and critique.
• Alternative Viewpoints: Some perspectives in the Church of England looked at the agenda through a socio-theological lens, focusing on using resources like land and buildings for social good.