APPENDIX 30
Supplementary letter from Stephen Ladyman
MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health
to Chairperson, National Care Standards Commission (21C)
Thank you for your letter dated 24 February.
I am sorry to hear that the Committee was left
confused by the evidence given by Ms Berry, the Chief Executive
of the General Social Care Council (GSCC) and myself. Hopefully
I will be able to bring some clarity to the matter.
I do not believe there was anything contradictory
about what we both said. As Ms Berry rightly pointed out in her
evidence, the establishment of the GSCC was a direct result of
a long-running campaign by the profession to regulate social workers.
It was only as policy developed that it came to encompass a much
wider definition of people under the umbrella title of social
care worker. However, this widening of the definition did not
detract from the fact that the largest and most easily identifiable
section of this workforce remained qualified social workers. For
this reason, it was agreed that this group would be the most appropriate
place to start. It is not, as you state in your letter, on the
face of the Care Standards Act 2000 that this group is given priority
as the Act does not state any preference when prioritising groups.
It is true, however, that the explanatory notes to the Act did
refer to incremental registration of occupational groups and,
I believe, this statement reflects that which I have stated above.
It is the case, therefore, that social workers were given first
priority as a group because the profession demanded it and the
Government listened and acted upon those demands. The only determination
of such groups by the Government was in reaction to this and to
the extensive consultation undertaken in developing the Act.
This situation also relates to your second query
regarding domiciliary care workers. Firstly, however, I wish to
make clear an important point about the rules for registration
on the Social Care Register, which the GSCC have put in place
and which are agreed by the Department of Health. The Act requires
the GSCC to satisfy itself that the applicant is of good character.
Part of the application process is the verification from a senior
manager that the applicant is fit to practice. This would include
any necessary checks the employer is required to enforce. Staff
CRB Disclosures are a regulated responsibility of the employer
that must be carried out before the person can work in the sector.
A CRB Disclosure is not, therefore, an obligatory, stand-alone
piece of evidence currently required in order to register. These
are the rules as they now stand for social workers and it is likely
that similar rules will apply to domiciliary care workers when
they are invited to register. However, the drafting of any such
rules will be a matter for the GSCC and agreed through the usual
channels.
Secondly, as was the case with social workers,
what priority is to be given to the various staff groups to be
registered by the GSCC will be decided after full consultation
with the profession and other stakeholders. The GSCC will then
offer advice to the appropriate Minister on how this work should
be taken forward. There is tremendous weight given to such advice
by both myself and my officials in the Department. As part of
this advice, the GSCC will propose rules of registration that
will lay down the necessary prerequisites.
It has been and remains the Department's opinion
that, as part of our drive to raise standards, NVQ level 2 should
be attained before an applicant can register. However, I am aware
that there is a considerable body of opinion that believes that,
in the first instance, given the low level of qualifications in
the workforce, a lesser level of attainment should suffice; for
example, proof of completion of an induction programme. This,
I believe, is based on the recognition that applying a level of
qualification, even at NVQ level 2, might prove to be a barrier
to the rapidity of registration and therefore detrimental to our
work to improve service user protection. This debate continues
and no decision has yet been taken. As with previous matters regarding
registration of occupational groups by the GSCC, any decisions
will only be made after consultation with stakeholders and after
advice has been received from the GSCC. I hope that this provides
the clarity the Committee requires on these two points.
12 March 2004
|
