A plan for “civil society”

The term “civil society” is often thought by policymakers to mask a lack of real ideas. You can see why—it is a slightly nebulous concept that stretches from the establishment, such as the Church of England and Edmund Burke’s “little platoons,” to the radical fringe, like the Occupy movement and Greenpeace. In between are the trade unions, mutuals and co-ops; the Boy Scouts or Girl Guides; the dog lovers; and the myriad of local community groups. It is also called the voluntary sector, or the third sector (after the state and private ones).

But we have a programme that could change that, and give the term “civil society” real meaning and bite. Politicians of all stripes should pursue this programme, but it ought to have a particular appeal to the Opposition, as Labour searches to relate progressive politics to the lives and concerns of citizens in an era of uncertainty and dislocation.

First, we need to ensure that the government machine is supporting rather than hindering the sector. We need “civil society” units in every key department that look out for opportunities for the voluntary sector to achieve outcomes rather than relying on top-down, statist approaches. This must be backed by a unit in the Cabinet Office and a voice at the Cabinet table. All major public services—health, education, criminal justice, and so on—need a strategy to involve civil society, scrutinised by the relevant select committees.

We need to ensure civil society is represented at a local level, as the unit of power (we hope) increasingly becomes more localised, with more devolution, elected mayors, and strong combined authorities. In some cases, this may mean representatives from the voluntary sector having places on decision-making boards and bodies—although we do not want to insist on one institutional mechanism to fit all.

One of the key roles of civil society is supporting and creating social capital, the glue that binds communities together. But that is hard in many areas, especially in those that are short of resources. We need access to real-time data, a social infrastructure index to monitor the spaces and places where interaction takes place, from parks and libraries, to sports facilities and meals on wheels. We also need more support by local government and the private sector to identify assets that civil society can use, or take over if no longer wanted.

The voluntary sector needs improving—there are too many groups that do not deliver much and get in the way of those who could do better. This is a touchy subject for these kind of organisations, which pride themselves on their independence from the state or the private sector. But this circle can be squared by making its regulator, the Charity Commission, focus on regulating and creating a new civil society improvement body, run by the representatives from the sector, to use data to spread best practice and identify and call out worst practices.

The voluntary sector is a key part of our society, and it creates extensive and positive externalities. It should be a place where government funding should flow, as it does for much of public infrastructure, in a regular and not a random way. A fund of serious proportions should be created and used to help civil society in the places where it finds it hardest to take root and flourish—often in more deprived parts of the country. It should be ring-fenced in the way that the overseas aid budget is. We also need a review of the way that tax reliefs work, to make sure we are using existing subsidies well and ask whether they could be extended.

Finally, we must recognise that much of what the voluntary sector does is deal with problems created by the market. There should therefore be obligations on the private sector to produce less negative effects—another good reason for reframing company law and corporate governance. We should encourage the growth of new corporate forms such as B-Corps, where firms commit to better behaviours, or employ more subtle “nudge”-style approaches to this end. In addition we float the idea that business—particularly smaller ones—could be offered local rate relief against spending that supports civic activity.

For too long, policymakers have seen the third sector as an afterthought, filling a few gaps left behind by the activities of the state and the market. But post-Brexit Britain needs civil society and it needs it badly: it gives meaning to people’s lives, it expresses mutuality and it creates a dynamic of creativity and autonomy. It is time that we develop and enact a programme to give civil society its place in the sun.