During a discussion last week about Government plans to reform incapacity benefits, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, John Hutton flagged up an increased role for the voluntary sector in getting claimants off benefits and into work. (See Hansard for full record)

Mr Hutton: As part of the reforms, which will be set out later this month, it will be very important that Jobcentre Plus supports the voluntary sector and some commercial and private sector providers, in order to provide a stronger and better menu of support for those of his constituents—and mine—who are claiming incapacity benefit. When he sees the Green Paper, I hope that he will give it his very strong support.

9 Jan 2006 : Column 4

Mr. Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con): I welcome the last part of the Secretary of State's answer, but does he accept that voluntary organisations such as the Shaw Trust have a much greater success rate than the statutory sector? Can he say now what steps he will take to ensure that jobcentres do not keep in-house work that could be farmed out to such very successful organisations?

Mr. Hutton: I join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to the Shaw Trust, which is doing excellent work for us in a number of very important areas. Again, he will have to wait for the publication of the Green Paper, but a very important part of the reforms that we want to introduce is that we learn to draw on the expertise and skills of a wider variety of organisations that can help us to get people off benefit and back into work. The voluntary sector will have a very important role to play in helping us to do that.

According to the news item (see "Voluntary sector should have greater role in delivering work-focused benefit reforms" news item 24/1/06),
the only role for voluntary organisations is to help deliver welfare into work.
It seems as if the only advice expected or valued from voluntary agencies is on employment matters.

Logically this not only excludes Welfare rights advice but could consider WR advice as counter productive, I.e. advising/representing claimants on their rights to benefits rather than encouraging them to find work.

Is there an agenda by the DWP/new labour that WR advice is old fashioned, obstructive to welfare reform and in effect part of the problem. (The consequence of which is to starve funding and allow to whither away).

Or am I just being paranoid?

Paranoia doesn't enter into it - The agenda is based on the premise that the disability benefits budget is too large and they intend, through one route or another, to do something about it: however, they still have to get it through Parliament intact and hopefully there are still enough old labour to oppose it - the alternative would be for the bill to get through only with the support of the opposition -most embarressing and potentially fatal to certain factions....


Note:

All views expressed are of a personal nature, and do not reflect in any way the views of my Employers.

I suspect Voluntary sector is a euphemism for privatisation, as for work focused reforms, well workfare springs to mind, as for being paranoid? perhaps in the micro sense it's realism based on the current political consensus following the line of the free market economics and being in enthrall to the multinationals.

It all makes me think of Dad's Army and private Fraser's phrase "were doomed" i wish they would bring a Keynesian consensus, anything but the current urgggggggh.

These are purely my own observations and bear no reflection on any of the Welfare Rights organisations i do paid or unpaid work for (phew, honest).

Which reminds me that training stuff you sent me, was really useful.

Andy

don't think you're being paranoid at all Derek, rather I think that you're pointing out yet another example of the lack of "joined up government" (arrrgghh...sorry for newspeak).

But what I mean is the agenda of Welfare to Work completely taking place in a void from the more general provision of social welfare advice.

I mean this from the perspective of if the latest wheeze is to succeed in assisting long term IB claimants into work, they are going to be dealing with a majority of people who, as you note, will usually have benefit & tax credit issues, quite possibly debt issues, there are often housing issues or maybe community care problems for other family members, as well as possible employment issues related to discrimination due to ill health - anyway, you get the picture.

In my opinion, unless an approach is developed that begins to recognise this fundamental truth, attempts to assist people back into work are, at best, going to experience greater intransigence than if claimants could access a proper holistic free and independent advice service - at worst, I would predict that a great deal of time and money will be spent on people who quite simply will not engage as expected due to their other pressing problems, caused to a larger or lesser degree to the amount of time they have been receiving benefits.

The Legal Services Commission appear to be moving towards forcing contract holders to begin to provide advice across a range of topics, if the recent CLS strategy document is to be believed, yet the DWP cannot seem to find a way to engage in the agenda at all.

And don't even get me started on the almost complete absence of onus being placed on Employers to begin to address working practises and recruitment policies that discriminate against the very same groups that these policies are supposed to be helping....