Romania’s Big Society

Last month I attended a debate hosted by the Institute for Popular Studies on the reform of the Romanian state. President Basescu and other speakers were addressing the question of what the shape and size of the state should be to meet the challenges of the 21st century – whether it was time to redefine what is meant by the ‘social state’. Let me make a few observations on this topic.

Firstly, as President Basescu said, this debate is not confined to Romania. It is taking place across Europe, including the UK. Why? Because we are all confronted with the same problem – how to reduce government spending at a time when the public’s needs are growing. Our populations are getting older, healthcare is becoming more expensive, pensions are being paid for longer. And a new generation is also putting new demands on the state. More and more school leavers are going to university, and our children need more skills and higher qualifications to compete in the global market in the future. Governments do not have the money to pay for this. Budget deficits need to be reduced. Government debt needs to be brought down to sustainable levels. How are we going to do it?

Well, we can’t depend solely on the state. David Cameron’s concept is to switch our focus from a big state to a ‘Big Society’. Social services are not just provided by the state in Britain. For centuries it was the church that ran schools and provided children with an education.  We still have thousands of church schools (some with state funding, others without) that operate today. A lot of services for the elderly, for children and for disadvantaged groups are provided by charities and other voluntary organizations. Some operate with grants from the state, others use private donations or other funds. And because many have years of experience, and highly-motivated and professional staff they provide excellent services that the state would find it hard to replicate.

I have seen similar organizations at work in Romania. Romania is now rated a leader in eastern Europe in palliative care thanks to the example of the Casa Sperantei hospice in Brasov. I’ve visited local groups working with disadvantaged children in the Ferentari district of Bucharest who have formed an Alternative Education Club to help them with their schooling, and to play sport. Young people with cancer – The Temerarii – have formed their own clubs in Iasi, Cluj and elsewhere to support each other in fighting the disease. There are hundreds of other examples. The question for governments is whether they can encourage and tap into this energy and experience, so that even if the state cannot always meet the needs of an individual, society as a whole can. Can they devise a new partnership between governmental and non-governmental actors, one that can help provide the best services to Europe’s citizens in the future?

And that brings me to my third and final point, the EU. What we do together at the European level needs to be compatible with what we do at the national level. President Basescu observed that Romania’s future competitiveness depends on whether we can show flexibility in our labour practices as well as efficiency in our public services. Romania will find an ally in Britain in reducing the bureaucratic burden on business, in promoting growth and – as David Cameron put it in Davos in ‘unleashing enterprise’ across Europe. And that spirit of enterprise and innovation is as necessary today to reshape the social sphere as it is to relaunch the economy.