There is much to concern us Liberal Democrats in the reforms suggested to housing benefits, particularly with reference to the potential ‘zoning’ of populations and communities according to socio-economic group. Whilst this happens to some extent at the moment just as a by-product, as it were, of the sheer vagaries of the market, this reform seems to possess an actual intent to exclude those on lower incomes (whether in work or not) from having any foothold in more affluent areas.
We have seen the rise of gated communities within our own country and abroad, attesting to a growing divide between rich and poor that shows quite clearly that richer people shun and have security issues with those who are less well-off and, in many cases, just less lucky than themselves. Sao Paulo in Brazil shows this in stark relief as can be attested to by the increase in helipads over the past few years. These now number some 420 across the larger urban area and ensure that the better-off need not even pass through poorer communities by terrestrial means. They can simply drop in now on favoured shopping areas and residential zones, thereby avoiding the traffic and maintaining a deliberate state of oblivion of fellow citizens’ circumstances and needs.
If David Cameron’s Big Society is to gain any traction and credibility, it is surely a certainty that it needs to work and be shown to work in communities that contain families on different levels of income cooperating for mutually beneficial outcomes. Many rural communities provide good working examples of families on different incomes living in close proximity to each other, and cooperating as volunteers to vouchsafe community facilities and practices. Now, one could argue that this arises out of need, as rural communities have no choice but to cooperate to get the level of services they require. Nevertheless, it works, and could form a useful model.
But if we deliberately create conditions where the less well off have to vacate whole affluent urban areas, and even, as some have predicted, whole regions of the country, by creating zoned areas of wealth, you may have created a means of propagation for the Big Society to take root, but in a highly cynical way. That is, people only helping each other because they have shared cultural references and broadly similar aspirations. You could call it the “you’re one of us” version of the Big Society.
If the Big Society is to take off it has to embrace the bigger picture. It needs to find its roots in whole, mixed-income communities, where empowered citizens cooperate to ensure beneficial outcomes for all. It’s difficult to see how the same Government that seems intent on these housing benefit reforms can also sincerely advocate the Big Socie
Helencflynn's Blog 