Earlier this week, David Cameron attempted to breathe new life into the Big Society with the announcement of a £10m Social Action Fund, as part of the government’s Giving White Paper. Yet in the prolonged arguments over the prime minister’s flagship concept, there has been almost no mention of the professions and national institutions that are best suited to its ends.
Doctors, engineers, teachers and many more professional groups are defined by their distinctive contributions to civic society and to public services. Furthermore, these professional bodies and societies are self-funded, charitable organisations. They provide strong, rewarding professional and social networks which link practitioners’ offices, chambers and hospitals throughout the country.
These great institutions are part of our national identity, and in true British style, their virtues remain understated. Sustained by loyal, usually lifelong and often publicity-averse members, advertising these virtues doesn’t come naturally.
Avner Offer’s concept of the economy of regard—the non-market economy characterised by reciprocal giving and support—has yet to be recognised in this professional world. Yet all its characteristics and benefits are apparent here. The professional and social ties at the Royal Institute of British Architects, for example, are at the heart of commitments by architects to validating university examinations, setting training and professional development standards and to maintaining their globally valued awards. Institutions survive and prosper through the imagination and generosity of their members in these areas.
The regard of members for their professional institutions increases the occasions when they exercise real scrutiny and authority over members’ efforts to keep themselves up to date, set and implement practice standards and make distinctive contributions to government policy. Tick box tokenism is corrosive.
Measured devolution of some responsibilities from expensive government to these cost-effective charitable professional bodies, under the watchful eye of regulators, is attractive. The latter do their work at the coalface of the relevant public services. It is hard for government alone to reach these areas where policy has an impact.
What’s more, the values of these national institutions fit very well with civic conservatism and the Big Society. David Halpern, director of the Behavioural Change Unit at the Cabinet Office, remarked that the voluntary sector has “found a way of harnessing the latent capacities of citizens”; the same could be said of professional bodies. In some cases, as their exhibitions and museums demonstrate, these institutions have for centuries provided the heartbeat of the professions and contributed hugely to British life, economic growth, and global influence. It is a shame that their significance has been neglected at a time when the state is so in need of their support.
One reason for this oversight is the lack of a collective medium through which their various contributions can be expressed. There has been almost no organised attempt to share expertise between the professions to meet common challenges. This probably reflects the highly distinctive and valued traditions of each group. After all, why, from the narrow standpoint of each profession, should the Royal Town Planning Institute find common cause with the Royal College of General Practitioners?
But the perspective changes when most national problems are considered. For instance, this particular alliance could be key to limiting the concentration of off-licenses selling harmfully cheap alcohol. There is some urgent catching up to do here: institutional bodies should be leading the way in creating multi-professional teams to tackle common problems.
A professions summit would provide the necessary venue to start mobilising expertise for the good of us all, whilst promoting the unique and independent characters of the professions with their different blends of art, craft and science. This might, for example, prompt a Royal College for Policing to which some Home Office leadership functions could be devolved, thus relieving the tax payer of core funding for the Association of Chief Police Officers and Superintendents’ Association. It might also encourage academics to practice in education by ensuring that, like their medical and engineering counterparts, they are credible in staff rooms and policy meetings. NHS consultants could learn a lot from police management training arrangements – the chairman of my university health board is a former deputy chief constable, not a clinician.
Sharing expertise would promote professionalism and provide more—and better—applied research, driven by a resolve to improve services. As the state is rolled back, more space for the professions to realise their latent power and reassume their responsibilities for public good will be created. It is an opportunity not to be missed.
The author is professor of oral and maxillofacial surgery at Cardiff University, a trustee of the Royal College of Surgeons and a fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences
The professions and the Big Society
May 26, 2011
