Lesley Riddoch: 'Broken Britain' will stay bust without radical surgery

Observing cracks in the path outside her house, I suggested picking out broken sections and re-pointing.

"The path wasn't laid properly in the first place and I'm having no more cement. We need to relay the slabs."

This is not the time for quick cuts or fast fixes. It's time to systematically relay the slabs of "broken Britain".

But judging by the random proposals made to date, that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

Let's cut child benefit to "wealthy" parents, teenagers or public housing subsidies so Tesco and Asda can supply the affordable housing of the future.

Let's make prisoners and unemployed people work (even though that substitutes for paid labour and requires more public cash to organise).

Of course the benefits system needs change. But all the cuts proposals betray an inconvenient truth. Britain currently lacks a sense of direction and a public consensus about the shape of the desirable society. Scotland ditto.

It's strange. Few can tell the Labour leadership contenders apart and David Cameron (thus far) sounds as pink as Gordon Brown on a bad day. But while politicians sound alike, the public does not.

Do Brits (or even Scots) believe invalidity benefit claimants should be protected or "moved on"? Do we believe an equal society benefits everyone? Are we working to create a child-centred world? Are Scots proud of Gaelic? Do we want more roads or more public transport? Do we believe in climate change? Do we instinctively like or loathe entrepreneurs – do we still join trade unions? The jury is not just out – it's all over the place.

Margaret Thatcher may have a lot to answer for – but subsequent greed and inertia have allowed lofty principles and swathes of social democratic thinking to wither on the vine, leaving us now as we are. A people suddenly and painfully aware that we know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Like alcoholics in a moment of sobriety we look aghast and uncomprehending at our recent behaviour. Our fundamental lack of direction is glaringly obvious in the current cuts debate.

Take politicians – happy to cherry-pick ideas from other countries but unwilling to consider the growing conditions that have allowed those foreign trees to flourish.

The Americans are writing about Free Schools, the SNP is impressed by them and the Tories have adopted them, promising state cash in England for non-selective schools set up by local parents. But neither Michaels Gove nor Russell feel they can consider the pre-conditions that make Free Schools a Scandinavian success.

In Sweden children start school at seven after acquiring basic speech and problem-solving and teamwork skills in the country's affordable, high-quality and near universal kindergartens.

Nor can politicians here snap their fingers and summon up another Swedish success factor – massive public support for an equal and child-centred society.

Eighy-five per cent of Swedish fathers take parental leave. Mikael Karlsson is one. According to an admiring US newspaper feature he owns a snowmobile, two hunting dogs and five guns, "but in his spare time, this soldier-turned-game warden shoots moose and trades potty-training tips with other fathers. He can't imagine not taking baby leave. Everyone does."

That's how Sweden can levy taxes at 47 per cent of GDP, compared with 27 per cent in the United States and 37 per cent in the UK. That's why Swedes spend 3.3 per cent of GDP on family benefits – the joint highest in the world. But Sweden's public deficit is 2.1 per cent and its debt levels are 40 per cent of GDP – somehow this "caring" society has produced an economy that's in better shape than our own. High productivity and political consensus keep Sweden going – the absence of both is pulling Britain down.

Can politicians perform the act of joint heavy lifting needed to "lift the slabs" and lay down the foundations of a truly "fair" society?

It'll be far simpler for each section of the governance juggernaut to blame someone else and slog along randomly cutting here and slashing there.

The public will tend to want backroom and management functions cut and front-line, public sector and caring services protected. This is a phoney war.

I'd love to see front-line, caring services cut by 2.25 billion a year – the amount Scotland spends denying our alcohol problem. But since opposition MSPs voted against minimum alcohol pricing last week – public spending on ineffective education campaigns will probably rise. So will prisons spending, if those MSPs also oppose the proposed short-sentence switch from jail to community payback.

We don't do long-term thinking in Britain. We do habit. More's the pity.

So managers – good, bad and indifferent – will probably be asked for 10 per cent savings across the board. That's a recipe for disaster.

I don't want 10 per cent less sticking plaster or 10 per cent fewer services that are unfit for purpose – be they private, public, front-line or backroom. How can Scotland spend over the odds on health and still be the sick man of Europe? How can quangos produce so little tangible benefit? How can politicians provide so little leadership?

St Andrew's Church in Bo'ness led the way yesterday by streaming its Sunday service on to phones and computers. Public services must follow that digital example – yet many axe-wielding managers don't book their holidays online and have never watched YouTube.

It would be a shame to waste this crisis. But it looks like we will.