Post by nickd on Aug 16, 2011 17:34:57 GMT 1
Yesterday the Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition went head to head over how they should react to the aftermath of the recent riots
Despite what's being said in some quarters, there were distinct differences. This has a huge relevance to how Cameron envisages the Big Society happening. Cameron made a lot of meat out of our broken society and indicated it must be our number one priority to tackle a gang culture which has ripped the country apart. Whereas Miliband's speech was very different in terms of searching for the route causes behind the riots. If the Big Society is ever to take off, this becomes pivotal to who's got the right understanding.
Who's right though?
Here's what the Guardian made of it...
Cameron
David Cameron's spoke of a 'slow-motion moral collapse' to an audience of young people at a youth club in Witney, Oxfordshire.
David Cameron took a calculated risk. He made his "wake up, Britain" speech on Monday about troubled young people and how he plans to stop them rioting to an audience in his Witney constituency that included a fair proportion of young people with time on their hands. As well as fidgeting furiously, they were troubled by some of what he said.
The hastily arranged event went off quite smoothly and, apart from the graffiti-style faces of hoodies (unhugged) painted on the wall behind him, the TV pictures looked fine. So it could have been a lot worse for the prime minister in his own backyard. Witney is a lovely Cotswold town west of Oxford, a bit of Britain which doesn't look very broken on a bright summer's morning – or in the winter either.
But what the local MP was calling the "slow-motion moral collapse" of parts of Britain touches even rural West Oxfordshire. It is awash with voluntary "big society" projects and has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country, around 1.5%. Yet youth centres are closing to save money, there is petty crime and substance abuse, too few buses.
The posher villages north of Witney – the Camerons live in one of them – include some shady citizens, investment bankers, peers of the realm, former News of the World executives. The kids say there was speculation last weekend that shops on the town's picture postcard high street might be looted too. There are enough expensive ones from which to choose.
Miliband
Ed Miliband was speaking head-to-head with the PM, but chose a less hazardous venue, his old school, Haverstock comprehensive in Hampstead – not quite the Eton of the state sector – during the holidays. Instead the Labour leader's audience consisted of party activists, business and community activists and a teen posse brought in from Peckham to ask questions. They asked plenty – and he answered at length, another contrast.
In fact both leaders' speeches included more common ground than either of them would readily admit. They spoke of the responsibilities of wider society for conditions and attitudes shown by the looters – voters ask "what gives politicians the right to lecture us?" about morality after the expenses scandal, said Cameron – and promised a tough response to lawlessness as their immediate concern.
Yet Miliband seemed wiser and more measured, both to eschew "kneejerk gimmicks" and populist solutions like water cannon and imported US police chiefs as well as to strike a more inclusive tone. He called for "a genuine national conversation" about the week's dreadful scenes, one which would provide a platform for disaffected youth to contribute too.
The Labour leader has the luxury of being recently out of office and, though proud of Labour's efforts to help the poorest, in a contrite mood. His task is to sound sensible and not to make mistakes. Most eyes are on Cameron. This is his opportunity to rise to his deadliest challenge since the last one, the economic crisis which he can now hand over – lucky George – to his chancellor. Failure to measure up to events may doom his premiership. "Never let a crisis go to waste," as they say in Chicago.
At the award-winning Base 33 youth club (one of Cameron's favourite big society projects) in an ecumenical centre off the high street, the PM's 30-minute speech showed signs of hasty repackaging of familiar themes, plus a few new targets – 120,000 problem families to be rescued by 2015 – in response to the quickening pace of events.
Its delivery went the same way. Around 50 people were packed into the small-but-cosy upstairs room, party activists like council leader, Barry Norton (also Cameron's admiring agent), the media and 25 young Base 33 club members – the figures "33" were on the painted hoodies on the wall – rounded up by early-morning mobile phone call from the boss, Methodist minister, Richard Donoghue. Aged 10 to 19, they gave him affectionately ironical wolf whistles when he introduced the morning's VIP guest. "He's a friend," whispered one.
____________________________________________________
On listening to the two of them, I'd say Miliband had the edge in terms of how he was on the same wave length. He seemed more receptive to taking away ideas and thought there should be a proper chance for everyone, including the rioters to contribute.
Is our society has broken as Cameron says or is Miliband being too soft?
Worryingly Cameron, on several occasions mentioned 'family champion', Emma Harrison. Harrison is multi-millionaire boss of A4E which is one of the welfare to work private contractors. Harrison's profit making motives have been questioned in a number of quarters. Is Cameron being a little naive in pinning all his hopes on too much private enterprise?
Perhaps he would be better off in engaging with the true not for profit sector, those that have a wealth of experience and are motivated by a passion rather than a profit?
Thoughts anyone?
Link to Guardian for full story..
www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/15/uk-riots-david-cameron-speech