Examination of Witnesses (Questions 280
- 288)
TUESDAY 15 JUNE 1999
RT HON
ANDREW SMITH,
MP, MS ANGELA
EAGLE, MP, MR
CHRIS BARNHAM
AND MR
JEREMY GROOMBRIDGE
Kali Mountford
280. I am having a second bite of the cherry
so I will be very quick. I am interested in my own area actually,
the Calderdale and Kirklees pilot. We have been told that 40 per
cent of the R&O interviews will be done from other areas like
Somerset and Gwent. How confident can we be that those staff have
adequate understanding of the local labour market in Calderdale
and Kirklees and can deliver the service we need?
(Ms Eagle) Initially they will be collecting information.
The call centre is virtual: you might get directed to someone
who does not actually live in Calderdale or Kirklees. When we
did our pilots in Lewisham and Camden, on some of these issues
they were dealt with in Glasgow and Belfast and we did not have
a problem. That is all I can say. Clearly somebody who is answering
a virtual call centre hundreds of miles away from your area is
not going to say "I saw a job in the shop window around the
corner, why do you not apply for that?" The Registration
and Orientation interview, certainly in the call centre variant,
is going to be about establishing information, entitlements, evidence
for the claim and perhaps some more general comments about Job
Search straight away which would involve going down to the local
Employment Service.
(Mr Smith) Can I add to that? The 40 per cent figure
strikes me as high, and might be considered to be unnecessarily
high. I would want to get it down significantly below that if
at all possible because the idea with the call centres is to have
one in each pilot area and of course to network them for an overflow
facility. It would seem to me that something is not working very
efficiently if as much as 40 per cent has to be put in the overflow
capacity. We will go away and look at that.[5]
281. That is encouraging. We have visited Glasgow,
it is not necessarily that horrific but nevertheless we all think
our own area is unique, do we not?
(Ms Eagle) What happens if they all went on holiday?
282. Good point.
(Mr Smith) Other things being equal I think we can
all see very good reason why it is better if those at the call
centre on Registration and Orientation do know something more
about the area because issues are going to arise about appointments
for attending ONE centres, issues are going to arise about travel
to those ONE centres, and these are the sorts of things where
you are going to need local knowledge.
283. Those are the issues that have been raised
particularly by the voluntary sector representatives, people with
disabilities. We have looked at the variants on the basic model,
and obviously the call centre model is one such variant, I know,
Angela, that you visited Kirklees and spoke to the voluntary sector
there. Is there a possibility that we could perhaps include the
voluntary sector in the call centre pilots a little bit more because
they have such extensive knowledge that they could give added
value to the pilots?
(Ms Eagle) As we have tried to do in all the pilot
areas, we have a networking process and a two-way flow of ideas,
information, opinions and consultation with the voluntary sector.
If they have particular contributions that they think they can
make they should let the local implementation manager know how
they might become involved. We will listen to any suggestions.
Kali Mountford: Thank you, that is encouraging.
Judy Mallaber
284. We are short of time so I am going to sweep
up a whole number of questions on the private/voluntary sector
in one go rather than keep coming back again. We are interested
in knowing what skills, experience and expertise private sector
organisations can bring to the ONE project that are not present
in the public sector and also if you can give some examples of
the type of innovation that has been shown by those private sector
organisations that have been shortlisted currently? Particularly
I am interested from the Employment Committee, having met Reed
and looked at the New Deal, as to whether their performance in
the Hackney New Deal sector is going to influence in any way what
we think about their ability to deliver. Finally if you could
just say whether you have had any problems with those organisations
that have been shortlisted, are they all still with us?
(Mr Smith) In terms of the skills, expertise and value
added that they might contribute, it is a trite answer but it
is one of the purposes of the pilots to find out what they can
add. You can imagine the sources of that value added. They might
manage the front end more efficiently. They might have more vigorous
and robust regimes for performance improvement against the indicators
of performance. They might have original ideas as to how the initial
interview is to be conducted. They might have new proposals on
how the ONE service is to interface with both the core BA and
ES operations and the downstream services. The short answer is
that we will find out and that is why we are doing it. In terms
of the sorts of experiences of those bidding, clearly a number
have been involved in the New Deals, the New Deal for Young People,
the New Deal for 25-Plus pilots, others have got employment agency
more broadly advisory experience, others have been involved in
Welfare to Work programmes elsewhere. It is quite a broad pool
of experience which they are drawing on. The applications, the
bids, will be judged strictly on merit and moreover we are very
mindful that we are talking here about a gateway, the first point
of contract, the entry to a system that has got to serve the needs
of some very vulnerable people, some of whom literally do not
know where their next penny is coming from, and therefore it is
very important that the quality and standard of service meets
the demanding thresholds. We shall be ensuring that happens.
285. Are they still with us, the current bidders?
(Mr Smith) They are all still with us. Whether each
of the bidders is fully engaged with each of the areas in which
they had an interest— When I visited the North Nottinghamshire
pilot I was advised that one of the bidders—someone can
remind me which one it is or I can let the Committee know later—I
was asked this at a public meeting and I told the public meeting
that I had heard, as indeed I had heard, that they were not focusing
their main attention on pursuing that bid. It was Arthur Andersen
if I recall correctly who were concentrating their attention more
on a bid elsewhere.
Chairman
286. Thank you very much indeed. Perhaps you
would just indulge me before you both get up and go. I have waited
20 years to hear a Social Security Minister speak as Angela has
spoken this morning, if I may say so. Andrew and I have plenty
of discussions through the Employment Select Committee. I have
a bit of a puzzle. It was always an unwritten assumption that
because we did not let people know what they were entitled to,
and by God we were not going to let them know, that was always
a way in which we saved money in the system.
(Ms Eagle) Yes.
287. Another thing that I would just like your
comment on is how are you going to reassure the Daily Mail
readers that you are going to devise this very sensible accessible
client driven service but still be tough on scroungers and tough
on fraud?
(Ms Eagle) Firstly, I think there are two crude models
of our welfare system. One is the one we are emerging from where
it is horrible to use, it is so unpleasant and nasty that people
avoid it at all costs. It is like a treadmill that is going too
fast, where the staff have massive amounts of processing to do
and they do not have time to get their accuracy rates up. My view
is that you lose more in fraud and programme wastage in that kind
of system than you do by moving to the system we are trying to
pioneer in the ONE service which is personalised, helpful, maximising
people's entitlement but saying "we really do not want you
to be on our books if you are of working age and you can actually
get a job". Shepherding, helping, being there to give confidence,
get a dynamic movement rather than have this kind of system that
is horrible where nobody gives you any information about what
benefits you can get and they hope they will save money because
you will not apply for the right one, if I can caricature it.
I think there are savings in the programme and fraud, improvements
in security to be made by moving to the second model, I am convinced
of it. I think a lot of our programme expenditure is duplication,
overpayments. The PAC would tell you, it certainly did when I
was a Member of it, how difficult it is to get benefits payments
right in that kind of environment. I think there are savings to
be made by moving to this other system and I hope very much that
these pilots will prove that.
(Mr Smith) Our messages are not uniquely tailored
to the Daily Mail. For the readers of all newspapers and
none I think the basic message "no interview, no benefit"
is a pretty tough one. I think the message that people have got
responsibilities that go along with their rights is one which
the general public supports but I think equally they will see
that making more help available in a more efficient and effective
way is better for the client and better for society at large and
ultimately better for the taxpayer too. On the level of fraud
I would simply put the question back: would there be more or less
fraud if people were not all asked to turn up for an interview?
The answer is no, there would not be less fraud without the interview.
Mr Kirkwood
288. We have had very good value out of this
morning's session, I am sure all my colleagues would agree, but
because of the tightness of time there are one or two areas we
have not covered, particularly evaluation and some of the targeting[6]
We are to get Heads of Report on 22 June which does not give a
lot of time but I wonder if we could get some questions to you
by way of written communication perhaps you could try and answer
them.
(Mr Smith) We would be very pleased to.
(Ms Eagle) Happy to.
Mr Kirkwood: Thank you.
Chairman: On behalf of my colleagues, thank
you very much indeed for an interesting conversation on attempts
to join up Government from a joined up Select Committee. Thank
you.
5 See Ev. p.118. Back
6
See Ev. p.118. Back
|
