Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160
- 179)
THURSDAY 5 JULY 2007
MR JOHN
STOKER, MR
CAMPBELL ROBB
AND MR
RICHARD GUTCH
Q160 Mr Prentice: You are
looking for a strategic partner. Has that been done?
Mr Robb: Yes, we went through
a tender process and we are hoping to announce this week who the
winner of that is.
Q161 Mr Prentice: Who is that?
Mr Robb: It has not been made
public yet. I am not sure exactly what the process is.
Q162 Mr Prentice: It is just
that this was published in December, and you say you were going
to do this over the next three months. That would be the end of
March, and now we are in July.
Mr Robb: Indeed. We went through
a proper procurement process and a tender process to make sure
that it was done openly and accountably, and that has taken longer
than we had anticipated. We hope that the announcement is made
this week, or next week and we hope the exchange will be up and
running in the next few months.
Q163 Mr Prentice: I am still
not clear in my own mind whether we are going to see a huge transfer
of work from the public sector to the third sector or whether
it is still going to bump along at 2% or 3%. There are all sorts
of contradictory messages that are being sent out. Mr Robb, you
told us earlier today that there is nothing here to frighten the
horses, and yet in this document you mentioned that departments
are increasingly turning towards the third sector to deliver public
services and you also talk about the commissioning frameworks
that are being developed by the Department for Health, the commissioning
for health and well being. That could cover everything, could
it not?
Mr Robb: Yes.
Q164 Mr Prentice: Then a commissioning
framework, underpinned through statutory guidance, being developed
by the communities department for local government by April 2008.
The material that we have had from the National Audit Office certainly
gave me the impression that we would see a wholesale transfer
of services, whether to the private sector or the third sector,
as part of the Government's drive to get this commissioning up
and running?
Mr Robb: I obviously can only
talk about the aspects of this which relate to the third sector,
and the level of measures in there are about, as I have said all
the way through, ensuring that, where it is appropriate, where
commissioners believe it is useful to do so, the third sector
can play a role in delivering services for users. We believe that
that is appropriate because we believe that there are benefits
to be had for where that is done properly and accountably and
through the procurement process. It is about ultimately ensuring
that the public sector and the public services have the capability
to meet the needs of their users, and we believe that, where it
is appropriate, the third sector should deliver those things.
Q165 Mr Prentice: I do not
know if I am going to wake up one morning in 2008 and find out
that a lot of services provided by local authorities have been
floated off, whether to the private sector or to beefed up third
sector organisations being supported through contracts or grants
by public money. The National Audit Office says quite clearly
that these local area agreements, all flagged up in the latest
local government White Paper, will encourage local authorities
to move away from a traditional service perspective towards a
commissioning role. That seems like big stuff to me, and, yet,
listening to the three of you, it is all down played, nothing
really to worry about, it is something that will happen in the
margins, and I want to know whether that is true: if it is something
that is going to happen in the margins or whether it is something
that is going to be genuinely transformational. Can you understand?
Mr Robb: Again, going back to
the point, I believe where third sector organisations are contracted
properly to deliver services, they can transform those services.
At the current proportion of delivery by the third sector, I think
it is unlikely that you are going to wake up in 2008 and find
that to be the case.
Q166 Mr Prentice: Are there
local authority services that are ripe for transfer or could conceivably
be transferred? When we had a little seminar, I think I mentioned
adoption services and a whole series of services provided by local
authorities for children.
Mr Robb: You did.
Q167 Mr Prentice: Is that
an area that could be floated off?
Mr Robb: Ultimately, the decisions
will be made by the local authorities or the local area agreements.
Q168 Mr Prentice: Is it going
to be statutory guidance?
Mr Robb: Statutory guidance on
how to contract, where it is appropriate do so. I do not believe
that statutory guidance is about saying you must. It is about
where it is best to do so, where is there evidence to do so, working
with the organisations like Futurebuilders to find those innovative
ideas that make it happen. Ultimately, many of these choices are
made by local commissioners and local authorities and will be
in the domain of that area.
Q169 Mr Prentice: If we are
going to get services transferred, if they are conditional, would
it be appropriate to expect third sector organisations to provide
roughly comparable terms and conditions for their staff? Would
it be appropriate to expect them to offer pension entitlements
that do not mirror the public sector but are broadly comparable?
Would it be appropriate to expect third sector organisations to
show that their staff have the skills and qualifications, and
that they are spending money on training their staff to deliver
services that have been transferred from the public sector?
Mr Robb: In any contract and agreement
we would expect that the public sector provider provided all of
the appropriate costs that would allow those things to happen.
Q170 Mr Prentice: When I spoke
to the probation people in my constituency they were complaining
that the third sector organisations that would take over some
of the work would not have the same emphasis on qualifications,
staff training, and so on, and you are saying that is just fiction
and would be covered by the contract?
Mr Robb: It would be partly covered
by the contract, we would hope. We are also as a Government investing
in the third sector in terms of visibility to increase its workforce
skills and improve through capacity building. There are a number
of initiatives to ensure the voluntary, third sector organisations,
not just those that are delivering public services, have the capacity
do that. As part of their bidding for this process, they should
be taking into account those things, yes.
Q171 Mr Prentice: Are there
any areas where it would be inappropriate for third sector organisations
to take on what is now universally seen as the role of the state?
I am thinking of access to benefit entitlements, and so on, where
people are in receipt of benefits, money from the state.
Mr Robb: I am not sure. I think
that may be a question you might want to ask ministers. The approach
that we are taking in the Office is to find those places where
they can deliver better for users, and the Government has never
ruled anything in or ruled anything out. The approach we are trying
to take in the Office of the Third Sector is an evidence-based
approach, working with departments, users and providers to find
out which areas those are.
Q172 Mr Prentice: I understand.
It would be a big change, would it not? If we are talking about
employment services being moved from, say, Jobcentre Plus into
the third sector, if employees of the third sector organisations
could determine whether a member of the public, a citizen, could
receive a state benefit, that would be a big change, would it
not?
Mr Robb: That would ultimately
depend on whether there were third sector organisations who wished
to do that well. That would be a choice for trustees and management
boards of charities themselves. Ultimately, that would be their
choice as to whether that was something they felt was appropriate
for a charity or a third sector organisation to do.
Q173 Mr Prentice: Can I just
ask Mr Stoker about the Compact going back to 1998? We know that
a huge amount of public money is going into ethnic minority organisations.
Mr Gutch told us about Peacemakers, I think, in Oldham. In paragraph
13 of the Compact it talks about black and ethnic minority voluntary
and community organisations and that the concerns of those organisations
will be addressed through a specific code of practice which will
reflect their distinctive needs and circumstances. Has that code
of practice been published? I do not know. What does it say about
their distinctive needs and circumstances?
Mr Stoker: Yes, it has. There
are two codes actually. There is one which is for community organisations;
one which governs black and minority ethnic organisations. In
both cases they are basically about the spirit of dealings between
public sector bodies and the groups concerned. They are very largely
about making allowance for the fact that some organisations in
both categories will be less well resourced than organisations
of other kinds. The codes encourage public authorities to pay
special account in consulting with organisations of both kinds
and to bear in mind particular needs.
Q174 Mr Prentice: Should we
not be moving away from that, corralling black and ethnic minority
organisations separately?
Mr Stoker: I think maybe we should.
Certainly if that code was being produced these days, it would
be much more about diversity issues, generally expressed and much
less about a particular sector, but it just reflects the fact
that the Compact and the codes have developed as they have over
time.
Mr Prentice: Thank you.
Q175 David Heyes: To continue
Gordon's questioning on the Compact, it must be getting on for
its 10th birthday now. Certainly since it has been put together
is over 10 years, and it was put together at a time of great optimism,
with the arrival of the new government. I can certainly remember
my signatures on a local compact somewhere, together with the
mayor and various other workers from the voluntary sector. It
seemed to me that it was rhetoric and is still rhetoric. We are
still a long way away from achieving the fine aims of the Compact.
Just to quote it, it does say it is a starting point, not a conclusion,
and it is a general framework for enhancing the relationship between
government and the voluntary and community sector, but over and
over again in your evidence today, and the previous evidence we
have had, we hear "we have not got there yet, we are still
a long way away". Why is it that, 10 years after the Compact,
it is still rhetoric?
Mr Stoker: It is not all still
rhetoric. There is good practice as well as bad practice. Every
year there is an annual review of the Compact where ministers
sit down with local government leaders and also people from the
third sector. I went to my first of these last November, and everybody
did freely admit that there was still a gap to be closed between
the level of commitment at the top and delivery down the track.
Sometimes that is because of what is perceived, I think, by public
sector bodies as a force majeure. Other priorities which
come in, sometimes about resources, sometimes about leadership,
either at the top or in the line, sometimes simply about a cultural
change which has not yet completely happened and which has got
more steam behind it in some areas than others. I think that the
solution to this for the long-term (and it will take some time
to get to a better position) is not to sacrifice the aspirational
aspects of the Compact, this idea that you should move towards
relationships between the sectors which are genuinely different
and are based on fuller synergy and mutual understanding. I think
that the answer in the short-term to increasing confidence in
the process, particularly in the voluntary and community sector,
is to do the knitting better and for the public sector partners
in particular, not only the public sector partners but public
sector partners in particular, to put systems in place so that
they are better satisfied that they are actually living up to
what you might call the "book of rules" bit of the Compact.
Q176 David Heyes: Are things
being done to that end?
Mr Robb: Absolutely. I admit to
having been involved in the Compact since its launch in 1997,
and I was actually involved in the negotiations between the sector
and the Government when I was in the sector. I think there is
an interesting thing about it. I think it does work in places.
If you go to Tower Hamlets or Sheffield, in some local areas they
have taken this concept and they have really used it and they
believe it helps the relationship at a local level. The thing
about it as well is that it has been evolving. Over the years
it has been looked at a number of times and, essentially, when
you look at it, you say, "If we did not have this, we would
have to invent something very like this", and it has been
evolving over the years. The creation of John's post is another
staging post on the way to saying: "Which bit of it is not
working? How do we fix that?" We have done that. I think
the Compact Commission is a really exciting development. I think
it is a real opportunity, independent of government, to take government
and make sure it is living up to its commitments under the Compact
and also for the third sector to live up to its commitments under
the Compact as well. I do think it is a way of thinking about
a partnership between the two sectors, which is very helpful.
Q177 David Heyes: The reality
is huge disproportions of power. It is a clumsy use of that disproportional
power by governments and by public sector bodies that is the main
source of complaint in terms of things like constantly talking
about good procurement practice, a quality commission, and so
on. We have been saying that for years, and there is little evidence
that it is happening.
Mr Robb: The creation of the Office
of the Third Sector is one of the attempts by government to put
in place the mechanisms based in the Cabinet Office to really
drive this kind of practice across government; the creation of
the Compact Commissioner is another way of doing that. I think
there is evidence. There are places where it does work, there
are places where it does not work and we have to really push to
make sure that it does, and I think as regards the imbalance of
power, you are right, and part of the reason for having a Compact
in the first place is to say that we recognise that and the public
sector recognises that and here are some of the ways that you
can try to redress that balance of power by thinking about how
you commission, by thinking about how you consult, how you really
work with organisations. So, the Compact is there to redress that
balance. We have not been totally successful at doing that, but
we need to keep working on it.
Mr Stoker: What I will say is
that I am absolutely sure that at the strategic level in government—and
most places in local government too—there is absolutely
genuine commitment to making the relationships work. If you look
at developments in central government, since around about 2000
every spending review that has happened since has centred round
looking at ways in which the voluntary and community sector can
be enabled to play a fuller part in society as well as in services.
There has also been money put where the Government's mouth is
in the shape of capacity building, both through Futurebuilders
and also Capacitybuilders. So I do not think it is a question
of lack of genuine will to get these partnership arrangements
working better, it is just that there is quite a long process
of cultural change which is going to take a sustained effort to
get through.
Q178 David Heyes: What you
have just described as genuine commitment in local government
earlier has been described as continuing short-termism in contracts,
continuing insensitivity to the needs of the third sector in formulating
contracts, and so on. Is that genuine commitment?
Mr Stoker: There is scope for
improvement. I think the point in this is that you often get a
different perspective and a different kind of engagement if you
talk to either, say, a leader or a chief executive in a local
authority about partnership between the sectors than if you then
talk to the person that, maybe two or three tiers down in the
organisation, has spent a career procuring the services as a procurement
professional, they have a narrower view often.
Q179 David Heyes: And a very
tight budget?
Mr Stoker: And a very tight budget,
and used to thinking about things in cost terms rather than in
terms of broader value for money, and it is the leadership and
the cultural change and the systems to iron out the differences
between those views which is the gap in the market at the moment,
I think.
| 
