Clause 15
Welfare Reform Bill
10:45 am
Danny Alexander (Shadow Minister and Disability Spokesperson, Work & Pensions; Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey, Liberal Democrat)
I beg to move amendment No. 40, in clause 15, page 12, line 38, leave out paragraph (c).
The amendment relates directly to the previous debate on the powers proposed in clause 14. The amendment—a probing amendment designed to elicit more details about the Government’s intentions—seeks to delete the provision that allows contracted-out parties to carry out functions under the clause in making the sort of directions discussed previously.
By way of a preamble, let me say that I welcome the Government’s general approach to contracting out. There is an enormous amount of evidence, from a variety of organisations. I have mentioned them before, but I do not apologise for mentioning them again. There is the SHIRLIE project in my constituency, right the way through to national providers. I have visited the Working Links project in the Parkhead ward, Glasgow, a tremendous neighbourhood scheme not only for people on incapacity benefit, but for a range of people who find themselves excluded from the labour market.
The Government’s approach is absolutely right: it makes use of skills and experience in the private and voluntary sectors to deliver the kind of back-to-work help that the Bill proposes. I must say, in passing, that it is a shame that the Government have not gone further. In our previous sitting, we discussed the fact that although 60 per cent. of pathways areas have been led by contracted-out parties, 40 per cent. are still led by Jobcentre Plus. I hope that Ministers may review that split in a few years’ time, once the schemes have been rolled out and have been seen to work. Such a review could be conducted on the basis not of the views of Jobcentre Plus staff about their own performance, but of an objective assessment of the performance of different contracted-out parties.
The area of controversy in this clause is the degree to which the powers in earlier clauses, particularly those relating to conditionality, should also be given to the contracted-out parties, the voluntary and private sector organisations that carry out this work. Later amendments will draw particular attention to the powers that relate to sanctioning, so I will not burden the Committee with them at the moment. The powers in clause 14 allow the Minister to make directions about what may or may not be counted as work-related activity. We want to probe the Government’s intentions on the provision that would allow contracted-out partners to make those same directions. Contracted-out organisations could make directions to individuals about what should or should not count as work-related activity.
Can the Minister clarify the circumstances under which private and voluntary sector organisations will use that power? What mechanisms of accountability will be in place to ensure that people can complain or appeal if necessary against such directions? Will that complaint or appeal be to the organisation to which that work is contracted out, or will they have a right of redress to Jobcentre Plus or another Government body? The Bill allows for powers to be exercised differently in different localities. The city strategy was mentioned by the Minister in previous debates. Will the claimants who have been subjected to a direction under clause 14 by a contracted-out party, which may be different from a similar direction issued in another area of the country, have the power to appeal? We have already had a debate on the powers and I look forward to the Minister’s response.