Things you don't often read in the Guardian...

Not being (which won't surprise you dear reader) a regular Guardian reader, I'd not seen anything by Dave Clements. And I guess I would - in my intolerance - have simply labelled him another trendy lefty public sector worker. Today though he wrote this:

With the exception of those whose livelihoods depend on it – reportedly half a million took to the streets in March – there has been a notable absence of opposition to the cuts from the wider public. The funny thing is that for all the official plaudits, nobody dare mention the apparent indifference of the supposed beneficiaries of public services. The institutions borne of the welfare state are far from “cherished”, as the leader of the opposition would have us believe. If anything, they are endured because of the lack of an alternative.

I think Dave's got it about right there - in my recent election campaign, the "cuts" were only mentioned by those facing possible redundancy (a feeling and experience I was able to understand having been in that situation up to Christmas - when possibility became reality). I was also struck by Dave's questioning of the statist norm:

It is not so much that the state is a drain on private enterprise; it is more that the political culture it gives expression to inhibits social enterprise. It crowds out – to borrow a phrase – the social action on which a healthy society is dependent. If we are to revive the public service ethos and defend public services that people need and want, we must first develop a respect for people’s autonomy and begin to recognise their capacity to run their own lives.

It seems to me that this position - rejecting the controlling Fabian state - represents the opening for a new politics where autonomy and liberty are given. A politics that embraces left and right, debates the merits of collective and individual rights and argues about the balance between personal choice and community power but does all this in the context of a much smaller state.

If more on the left embrace this option - and there are many, I don't doubt, who share Dave Clements' view - we might stumble towards a society less helpless in the face of officialdom, less dependent on the state, more grown up in its independence and less prepared to be pushed about by government, big business or their agents. We might get closer to sorting out our own problems - to that mystic place where 'Big Society' is real rather than something teetering close to being just a differentiating slogan.

I guess I can dream a little!

....

Happy Christmas and Thank You

Happens every year, dunnit? Christmas, that celebration of all things good and shiny (not to mention the kitsch that we all secretly love). Or is it some religious occasion?

However you think about it, Christmas is a time when - just maybe - we think a little beyond our usual selfish bounds. Stretch our minds - if not our time and cash - towards others and their problems. This isn't some kind of indulgence but a good thing - those who try to put it down to schmaltz or whimsy are missing the point that thinking about others is the starting point for us doing something for others. Without the thought there is no action.

Now I know I talk about the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of public services - and I mean it when I say that the private sector is (most of the time) vastly superior in service quality, timeliness and reliability. However, this isn't ever meant as a criticism of individual public servants - people who, on the whole, try to do a decent job within a rubbish system. And quite often - I've seen plenty of examples in recent snowy and icy days - go above and beyond duty to serve the public.

I've no time for these people's so-called leaders - fat-cat union bosses like Bob Crow and Len McCluskey who think there's something clever in behaving like playground bullies. It isn't just the ignorant left-wing ideology but the hectoring, ranting and divisive style that does no service at all to public servants.

However, this Christmas around 100,000 public sector workers are looking gloomily at an "at risk" notice - an indication of possible redundancy - and wondering whether the sugary finger will point at them come the New Year. And there's perhaps another 100,000 who know that letter is just around the corner. All this on top of the tens of thousands of public and voluntary sector people who have already been made redundant (not of course to forget the private sector).

The Government may have run away with the idea - egged on by rapacious bankers and developers - that the magic money pit was bottomless. The country may be in a huge financial hole - much of it created by the profligacy of Blair and Brown. But it isn't the fault of those public servants with redundancy notices any more than it's the fault of the ordinary taxpayer who is about to get the bill for that criminal government we dumped in May.

So if you know someone with that letter telling them their job's "at risk" or who is counting down the days to redundancy go and give them a hug, buy them a beer or simply wish them well. It's the least we can do really. That and say...

"Happy Christmas and Thank You"

.....

I'm alright Jack

***




I while ago I posted a couple of questions prompted by a "survey" being conducted at my place of work. The second question was:

If there’s a choice between sacking some people or you all not taking pay rises or annual salary increments but you’re not threatened, would you still take the cash knowing someone else will lose their job?

I have discovered the answer - and it's "I'm Alright, Jack". More people indicated that they'd prefer to see someone lose their job than forgo an annual pay increment. So much for the caring, sharing voluntary sector, eh?

....