Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Ms Atherton: It is Falmouth and Camborne.

Mr. Willetts: I do not know why that name sprang to mind. In fact, my hon. Friend the Member for Ashford cannot be here this evening because he is attending his association annual dinner at which Lord Cranborne was supposed to have been the guest of honour.

As I was trying to say, the hon. Member for Falmouth and Camborne (Ms Atherton) invites me to Cornwall every time that we debate this issue. At this rate, I shall indeed end up going to Cornwall to inspect the new deal there.

Ms Atherton: I am happy to invite the hon. Gentleman to Cornwall, as long as he meets the young people and the employers whom the Select Committee met--they might change his attitude significantly. If he wants only to visit the Falmouth and Camborne Conservative association, then forget it. If he wants genuinely to learn, however, I should be delighted to escort him personally.

Mr. Willetts: There is a limit to this, but I am sure that something could be arranged.

Mr. Keetch: May I suggest that, if the hon. Gentleman visits Cornwall, he does more than the Select Committee

10 Dec 1998 : Column 572

did? Despite the fact that we flew into north Cornwall and spent an hour driving across Cornwall, we visited only one constituency--Falmouth and Camborne.

Mr. Willetts: The purpose of the debate is not to discuss regional tours, so let us move on.

Personal advisers represent a labour-intensive way in which to deliver services. The wider introduction of the gateway, which a recent Government document says is a fundamental feature of the welfare reform agenda, means that many people will operate as personal advisers in the Employment Service. Will the Minister give figures showing how many people in the service are working on the new deal, how many personal advisers he believes need to be recruited to deliver the gateway for existing new deal groups in the years ahead, and how much extra effort and how many extra staff will be needed to deliver the further proposals for an intensive personal service for the many people who are not registered as unemployed but who may, in labour force survey terms, be seeking work?

I mentioned firms that have signed up for the new deal but have not yet taken on any new dealers. It will not do for the Minister, 18 months into office, to laud the success of the new programme but, when put under pressure, to blame what he calls the rotten statistical systems that he inherited from the previous Government. The new deal is a new programme and we were told that it would be properly appraised--the Government should be able to offer the information for which I ask.

The media have identified the problem of paedophiles in the programme, outlining some disturbing cases in which serious sex offenders have been referred to work that involves children. I thank the Minister for his letter of 8 December; it was courteous of him to write to explain the position. He said in the letter:


The Government cannot entirely wash their hands of the matter, however. There is a rather disconcerting tendency for new dealers to be offered almost indiscriminately to fill any gap in the labour market. The Under-Secretary of State for Wales, the hon. Member for Neath (Mr. Hain), I think, believed that they would all be classroom assistants; we have also been told that they will all be child minders. We must be careful in allocating new dealers to positions with such sensitive responsibilities. I would be grateful if the Minister could say in rather more detail than he was able to do in his letter what steps are being taken to prevent sex offenders from being referred to jobs involving children.

The Select Committee report made helpful and interesting comments on the gateway, but there seems to be a problem of people becoming stuck. I should be grateful if the Minister would tell us how many new dealers, especially in pathfinder areas, are still in the gateway four months after entering it. There seems to be a problem of people being left in the gateway. There are theoretical powers to move them on, but it is not clear how often these are being used.

I hope that the Minister will be able to answer some practical questions. If we are to assess the effectiveness of the new deal, the celebration of individual achievements will not do as the basis for appraising expensive new policy options.

10 Dec 1998 : Column 573

9.40 pm

The Minister for Employment, Welfare to Work and Equal Opportunities (Mr. Andrew Smith): We have had a good and a cheerful debate--and so it should be, because the new deal is a cheerful programme, bringing hope and opportunity to people. I speak as one who has visited Cornwall and seen the excellent work that is being done there on the new deal. In fact, I have visited the constituencies of all my hon. Friends who have spoken in the debate. I join everyone who has paid tribute to the Employment Service, to the new deal personal advisers and to everyone else who is working so hard to make a success of this important and ambitious programme.

I join my hon. Friends in finding it disappointing--although, perhaps, all too revealing--that not a single Conservative Back Bencher has taken part in the debate. I accept that my right hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Mr. Foster) apologised on behalf of the Conservative member of the Select Committee. However, it shows a dismissive attitude towards one of the most pressing social challenges confronting this country.

The hon. Member for Havant (Mr. Willetts) made a few amusing remarks and sniped here and there at the new deal. However, we had not a scintilla of a suggestion as to what the Conservatives might do differently, or what they might argue ought to have been done differently. They have a right nerve to talk about the priorities of allocating expenditure on new deal programmes when there would have been no new deal if, by some mischance, the Conservatives had won the general election and they had had their way.

The hon. Member for Havant made an important and serious point about sex offenders. I have written to him, to the Chairman of the Select Committee--my right hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland--and to the hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. Keetch) spelling out the position. The hon. Member for Havant said that the primary responsibility had to be on employers to have appropriate procedures to ensure protection for children and other vulnerable people.

The Employment Service follows common-sense procedures, and lists are held manually by a senior officer in each jobcentre. Staff are advised and reminded that referrals to vacancies should be made where appropriate. Clearly, there will be cases where it is not appropriate to refer particular people who come into a jobcentre to particular things. I assure the hon. Gentleman that, from a senior level right down through the Employment Service, no one would knowingly refer anyone who was likely to offend to a position where he or she would be working with children or other vulnerable people.

There is no doubt that the present system is not absolutely foolproof, and that is why the Government have an interdepartmental working party to examine precisely these matters. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will be making a statement shortly on the establishment of a criminal records agency to set out new and better procedures which, I hope, will command the support of the whole House.

I wish to refer to the Select Committee recommendations. A great number of tributes were paid, rightly, to the work of personal advisers. The report referred to the importance of following up the work of advisers, monitoring the case load and ensuring that the very best was made of the innovation--so important to

10 Dec 1998 : Column 574

the new deal--of the continuity and support that personal advisers give. The Government have acted on that recommendation, and we are monitoring the case load.

Moreover, we have given advice throughout Employment Service offices--involving training and a series of meetings with personal advisers--to focus their role and responsibilities on what is important, and to ensure that people are progressing in terms of enhancing their employability, moving into jobs or moving into other options that are right for them.

I find these debates and the Select Committee interviews and reports enormously helpful. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland rightly, and kindly, said, we are a listening and learning Department. We have been flexible, and we have been responsive to the Select Committee recommendations.

The hon. Member for Havant referred to the publication of information on the destinations towards whichpeople are moving at different stages of the gateway. Recommendation 5 said that that should be disaggregated, and we have done that. The information is there for all to see in table 11 of the Government Statistical Service statistics.

We acted on recommendation 18 on capacity building in the voluntary sector, and on recommendation 22 on ethnic minorities. That recommendation also informed a large range of initiatives that we have taken to promote the involvement of, and extend opportunities for, ethnic minorities. Several of my hon. Friends referred to that important issue--notably my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott)--as did the hon. Member for Hereford.

It is not the case that such issues were not anticipated at the outset as crucial to the new deal. I am on record as saying right at the beginning of the new deal, rather as my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington said, that an acid test of its success or otherwise is whether ethnic minorities get full and fair opportunities through it.

That is precisely why we said right at the outset that there had to be ethnic monitoring--for the first time in any Employment Service programme--so that we could see what progress people were making, and assess which initiatives were working and which areas were not delivering opportunities for ethnic minorities.


Next Section

IndexHome Page