| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
A challenge was included in an announcement last Tuesday to Parliament about our Welfare Reform Bill, when I announced the national extension of our pathways to work programme. Jobcentre Plus has a vital role to play in the success of our innovative welfare reform strategy. The pathways strategy, which is internationally renowned, is a holistic approach to tackling health-related, personal and external barriers that people face in returning to work. It is already changing many thousands of lives for the better. The tailored, personalised support offered by pathways empowers individuals. It is an essential change of emphasis in respect of our incapacity benefit customers, and we wish to see the approach replicated nationwide and facilitated by the private and voluntary sectors. It will enable us substantially to capture some of the capacity, expertise and talents that exist in those sectors.
In that context, we aspire to an 80 per cent. employment rate, which would mean that 1 million people were helped off incapacity benefit, and 300,000 lone parents and 1 million older workers were helped back into work. That will mean reaching out to those whom the tide of opportunity has so far not reached, and we will have to listen to our customers to shape our services to achieve that ambition.
I shall respond to some of the comments made in the report and observations made in this debate. I apologise if I am not able to respond to every point, but if hon. Members feel that I have not fairly responded to their concerns, I am happy either to meet with them or to correspond with them on specific points.
Hon. Members rightly expect Jobcentre Plus, like all public services, to be challenged to deliver its services more efficiently and effectively. The hon. Member for Daventry expressed his continuing support in principle for the challenges of the Gershon agenda. I am pleased that Jobcentre Plus has met the cost and staffing reduction targets that we set for it last year, but I fully understand the Committee’s concerns that our efficiency drive may have impacted on customer service.
We take the Committee’s comments seriously. Action has been or is being taken to address them, but our view of the severity of some of the issues raised in the report differs in some important respects from that of the Committee. I may have a chance to reflect on them in a moment.
I am delighted that my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey) is still in her place. Her presence publicly symbolises her continuing commitment to Sure Start, which supports those who remain outside the labour market. Among them are those who are the most vulnerable, particularly young mums. However, statistics show that of those who are entitled to support through family centres, one in 10 are young dads. That point is often missed in public debate.
I share my
hon. Friend’s concern about the link between Sure Start,
children’s centres, Jobcentre Plus, employment advisers and
outreach work. In fact, I have asked that we consider in greater detail
how we can strengthen Jobcentre Plus interaction with the
children’s centres, which have been a remarkable
innovation and a phenomenal investment in recent years. In time to come,
we will wonder what was in their place just a few years
ago.
I recently visited a children’s centre in Harpurhey, which is one of the poorest areas of Manchester. The children’s centre provides support and advice to young mums—there was one young dad there, but mostly young mums. It was built on the site of a derelict car park. The opportunities that have been created by that facility are an antidote to the sense that politics changes nothing. We know that that is not the case, but we have to go further and strengthen the links with Jobcentre Plus.
We must be live to the concerns that my hon. Friend raised about the centres being an opportunity for those with the sharpest elbows to access an important public service. We must ensure that the centres are an important way for young mums and dads to have the chance to get back into the labour market or, importantly, for people to get into the labour market for the first time. We rightly concentrate on getting people back into the labour market. The debate is not framed around getting people into the labour market for the first time.
In respect of outreach work and the general issue about contact with the public, several concerns were raised in the report and in the debate about contact centres. I do not represent a rural constituency, but I recognise that there are issues about the most effective, appropriate and convenient way to maintain contact with Jobcentre Plus customers. Many of our customers wish to interact by telephone and, increasingly, through IT and the website, but for some that is not appropriate. We must remain vigilant about ensuring that the right opportunities remain in place for those customers.
Outreach work through children’s centres is important, as are opportunities to carry out business by post and through home visits. I would like staff increasingly to go to other facilities such as council offices and public libraries to interact with our customers. If there are specific problems in hon. Members’ constituencies—if that interaction is not happening—I would be happy to correspond or meet with them to discuss those problems.
We must have greater ambitions. I have seen some genuinely inspiring projects in the past couple of weeks. I am sure that others will have seen or been involved in similar initiatives. In Vauxhall, which is one of the poorest wards in Liverpool, the streets ahead project—outreach work involving knocking on people’s doors—would have been almost unimaginable some years ago. Such interaction is not dependent on the Government. Streets ahead and voluntary organisations bring together all the agencies that are involved in this field, and interact on people’s doorsteps.
I saw a similar project in the east end of Glasgow. It, too, involved knocking on citizens’ and customers’ doors and interacting in an innovative way that has not happened previously.
Mr. Rooney: I take my hon. Friend’s point. He is right.
4.30 pm
Sitting suspended for a Division in the House.
4.45 pm
Mr. Rooney: There is a danger of we parliamentarians grouping people together and thinking that they cannot do anything, but we should recognise the tremendous amount of internet transactions that are made. We also need to learn from the private sector, which does not deny customers access to goods because they cannot use a particular form of communication. We need to bear that in mind.
I repeat the point about those with mental illnesses, for whom telephoning is absolutely inappropriate. That is not the only problem; there are also delays after the claim has been made. Such people are not allowed just to wander into an office to check progress. The only way to check progress is on the telephone, and then they finish up in a citizens advice bureau or in our surgeries.
Mr. Jim Murphy: My hon. Friend is right. For those with mental illnesses or learning disabilities, That is the nature of the challenge that we face in trying to support 1 million people who may have mental illnesses or learning disabilities to come off incapacity benefit and get closer to the labour market. Those with mental illnesses represent the biggest inflow on to incapacity benefit.
Mr. Boswell: I strongly agree with the tenor of those comments. Does the Minister agree that it would be bizarre and unacceptable if his Department, which has lead responsibility for disability issues, was failing to implement the public disability duty that is imposed by the Equality Act 2006?
Mr. Murphy: There is no question whatever of that occurring. Our efforts to support a net reduction of 1 million in the number of people on incapacity benefit will be assisted by support from pathways-style personal advisers, who are renowned as having been a success.
To return to the point about contact centres and outreach, I acknowledge the significant problems that some contact centres experienced with the telephone service last year. However, a process is now in place for managing work flows and matching them to staff resources, and that process has been tested. Jobcentre Plus successfully managed the annual peak in call volume in January this year and has strengthened its contingency planning. I am confident that we now have effective strategies for maintaining service during the peak staff leave period over the summer, and I have asked officials and management of Jobcentre Plus to ensure that that is indeed the case.
When problems
arose last summer, Jobcentre Plus put in place temporary working
arrangements in a limited number of contact centres, which was the
appropriate thing to do. Based on the efforts that are being made in
Jobcentre Plus, I am confident that we will not see a repeat of the
problems of last summer. However, those difficulties were not caused by
staff cuts, as has been suggested. In fact, Jobcentre Plus is building
up its contact centre network and was recruiting contact centre staff
during the period in which problems arose. For a period, standards were
not what they should have been, but that was the result of a
transition to a new way of delivering our services that will ultimately
enable us to support our customers more
effectively.
The hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare (John Penrose) raised some points about value for money and IT. We will provide the Committee with the cost of future IT systems and information on the negotiations with Electronic Data Systems in a report to the Committee before the summer recess. The hon. Member for Daventry made a further point about financial issues. In answer to him, I can say that we will give the Committee the unaudited performance and resource accounts for 2005-06 before the recess as well.
John Penrose: Will the details that the Minister plans to provide also include information about any additional efficiencies that the new IT systems are supposed to create and any implications that they will have for staffing, resources and potential job cuts, in addition to those already envisaged in the agency?
Mr. Murphy: I shall reflect on whether it is possible to provide the additional information that the hon. Gentleman has requested.
In relation to official error, which was raised by the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey and the hon. Member for Daventry, it is generally acknowledged that the amount of fraud has halved since 1998. As the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey said, the error taskforce, chaired by the Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Plaskitt), is considering ways to drive down official error. My hon. Friend will be providing more detail on the strategy to tackle error and Jobcentre Plus will monitor the action plan closely. However, underpinning the establishment of that taskforce is the acknowledgement that we have to do more about official error. Simplification is one way to overcome it. We should be looking for ways to simplify a benefits system that is complicated for our customers and our staff. That is one of the issues that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary is considering.
The target of completing Jobcentre Plus roll-out by July will have been met in all but about 10 or 12 cases, and in those it is a matter of making necessary alterations to buildings to enable what is generally regarded as a remarkable transformation in the culture and layout of the offices in which the unemployed receive support and advice. Next week in Wales I shall formally open the last Jobcentre Plus office, which will mark the fact that last Jobcentre Plus roll-out has been completed throughout Wales.
On the performance disparity mentioned by hon. Members, it is unacceptable that someone on jobseeker’s allowance or any other benefit in Glasgow, for example, receives a different level of support from that available in Gillingham or elsewhere. This is about strong performance management. Occasionally, there are management disparities at local and district levels and elsewhere and we have continually to drive to ensure that, while we retain some flexibility on decision making at local level, people receive a similar level of support in terms of interventions at 13 and 26 weeks. Such interventions have sometimes not been strong enough.
The hon. Member for Daventry spoke about point scoring. However, I can put it no stronger than to say that I note what he says and will reflect on his observation.
The Committee showed understandable interest in the Jobcentre Plus computer systems, as has been recognised in this debate, and I acknowledge that there is more work to do. Jobcentre Plus administers many benefits, some of which are extremely complex. Computer system changes are therefore rarely straightforward. Hon. Members have suggested that a more modular or incremental approach might work best, and Jobcentre Plus has been developing that approach. However, since the Committee’s report was published, we have started refocusing our IT strategy on the changes that we will need to make to support our welfare reform programme. Committee members and other hon. Members will understand that we have listened to the Committee’s concerns as we roll out that strategy.
The report also scrutinises our programme of office closures. It was right for Jobcentre Plus to review its office network. When it was formed in 2002, Jobcentre Plus brought together the Employment Service and the majority of the Benefits Agency. In many towns, both agencies had separate offices, sometimes on the same stretch of road. Reducing duplication has been a necessary step following the amalgamation of the two bodies.
The hon. Member for Cardiff, Central (Jenny Willott), who is no longer in the Chamber—for a good reason, I am sure—asked how we could free advisers from unnecessary clerical duties and responsibilities. There is determination to do that and to remove the responsibility and need for them to collate clerical statistics. This is about providing additional clerical support to the personal advisers. It is important to note that the number of advisers has increased in recent years, both in real terms and as a proportion of Jobcentre Plus staff—from about 10,000 out of 80,000 to about 11,000 out of some 71,000. That is a welcome commitment as we continue to personalise support for individual customers.
I wish to say a word or two about the partnership with the private and voluntary sectors, which my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, North was keen for the Government to focus on. Much of the face-to-face work with people who need support in finding work is carried out by personal advisers. Jobcentre Plus is supported in its work by private and voluntary sector organisations working under contract to provide specialist employment and training services. Jobcentre Plus spends more than one third of its budget on services delivered through external contractors. Those partners are an essential resource and a key part of our success in coaching and supporting people back to work.
We acknowledge
that there have been problems in the past with procurement. We have
introduced a provisions forum that enables proper consultation and
communication to take place. Providers can influence the development of
our contracting strategy, for example, on the size and length of
contracts and procedures for letting and ending contracts. Partnership
with the private and voluntary sectors is integral to the future of
welfare delivery in this country.
We will continue to ensure that the Department delivers best practice in
procurement and contracting as we develop and extend our work in this
area, which is appropriate when we consider the crucial role of the
private and voluntary sector in the national roll-out of pathways to
work.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, North again for the leadership that he has shown in the Committee, for enabling trenchant observations of mistakes and for creating a consensus in his Committee. I also thank him for achieving consensus on the success of Jobcentre Plus. It is important that, as we reflect on what can be done about the mistakes and failings in the past, we also celebrate the remarkable achievements in our constituencies and listen to those who have experience of being pathways customers.
Our welfare reforms will continue to revolutionise employment-focused support for all those who can and want to work. Our cities strategy, about which we will make an announcement later this month, will open up new opportunities for delivering employment services in cities, enabling the civic leadership, business, the voluntary sector, the media and others to design their own solutions to the distinct problems in their cities. Given that two thirds of those who receive benefit in the UK live in our great cities, the nature and scale of the challenge is clear to us all. This vision can only be built on the foundation of an efficient, modern service. Jobcentre Plus must go further not only in getting the basics right but in being flexible and responsive to the changing customer needs. It must develop priorities about personalised welfare support.
Efficiency is not an optional extra in public services. In leading the Committee’s work on this scheme and in this debate, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Bradford, North, has raised some crucial matters. I am happy to take note of the points made by hon. Friends and other hon. Members today. I agree that we are striving to achieve the right balance between our customers’ needs, demands and aspirations and the necessity of running an efficient service.
We have made remarkable progress in tackling the roots of poverty and worklessness, but we have to go further. The Committee’s report acknowledges that. Jobcentre Plus is not just about helping individuals to fulfil their potential but about families and communities feeling the benefit of people’s lives being changed for the better, which is why it is so important that we address the issues raised in the report, continue with our drive to modernise Jobcentre Plus and deliver the quality of service that people rightly expect from other public services.
Just because we are dealing with some of the most vulnerable people in our society, we should never lose sight of the fact that they remain aspirational, determined and focused on improving their lives and the lives of their families. Jobcentre Plus, the Government and the private and voluntary sector and others have an important role to play in the partnership and in helping to bring about that transformation. Our discussion on the Select Committee’s report identifies that. I thank the Select Committee for its work.
Adjourned accordingly at Five o’clock.
| Index | Home Page |