Member News
By Joe Chapman - 20th September 2010
There are a variety of dangers associated with the coalition's new work programme, a Liberal Democrat fringe heard on Sunday.
Joined by a variety of academics and third sector representatives, welfare minister Steve Webb had to defend his government's plans to outsource welfare schemes to voluntary and private sector providers.
Specifically, panellists discussed the new 'black box' approach whereby contractors will be judged explicitly by their results and ability to get people into work.
But Professor Roy Sainsbury of the University of York told attendees only big firms will have the capital to deliver big schemes. This obviously endangers the government's intention of having SMEs as part of the supply chain and in the makeup of voluntary and private sector organisations contributing to Cameron's 'Big Society'.
He also poured scorn on the present Provider Led Pathways scheme, intended as an experiment for the new welfare reforms.
Sainsbury added that the existing model of Provider Led Pathways hasn't really worked, with only 12 per cent of business from the scheme being sub-contracted to smaller businesses and bigger firms keeping the lion's share of the contracts.
Speaking for the Shaw Trust, Sally Burton said that the organisation had helped 23,000 people last year and was a vital contributor to welfare programmes in the UK.
Yet, their ability to function as a prime contractor in the new Welfare to Work programme would be extremely limited, she said, with voluntary and charity bodies struggling to compete with the private sector when it comes to capital investment.
Being a prime contractor rather than sub-contractor was vital in order to influence policy, the chief executive said.
Burton also maintained that the best possible way to help people back in to work, as evidenced by the Shaw Trust's practice, was to adopt an individualised approach which deals with people according to their needs and on a case by case basis.
On the subject of procurement, and ensuring that small businesses are not squeezed out of the tendering process to provide welfare programmes, Webb argued said that work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan-Smith (IDS) was looking at contracts at the moment – to ensure that smaller providers to get access to delivery of services.
"If IDS gets the extra money needed to the get long-term out of work into placements then something very interesting could happen," said Stephen Lloyd (Lib Dem, Eastbourne).
However, he accepted that economic limitations might mean that the comprehensive spending review delivered less public investment than was being hoped for.
The panel also discussed the problem of benefit fraud, with Burton saying that the vast majority of people on incapacity benefit want to be in work and can work, noting that they tend to get "caught in benefits traps".
In other comment, Lloyd said that the "work capability assessment is a blunt instrument" and that it was inadequate for dealing with people who have mental illnesses.
The panel also discussed the pros and cons between using public, private and third sector providers in welfare to work schemes, with Webb noting the benefits of a more innovative and vibrant third sector and commenting on the conservative practices of the public sector.
Concluding, Sainsbury said that people don't like Job Centre Plus and that the benefit of working with organisations like the Shaw Trust is that people are receptive to third sector providers.
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.