And it's goodnight from them...
Work and Pensions Secretary James Purnell resigned after the polls closed on the European elections. Yvette Cooper has been announced as his replacement in the role. Minister for Employment and Welfare Reform Tony McNulty also resigned following his recent expenses scandals, and has been replaced by Jim Knight.
So what does this mean for welfare-to-work? Well, the key civil servants are all still in place, and the Welfare Reform bill is still trundling through Parliament. All of the key bid rounds are unlikely to be cancelled given the necessity of getting support in place quickly.
Given that, is it fair to suggest that Work and Pensions is going to hit another of the 'vague' periods that seemed to hobble its contracting in the years prior to Purnell?
For reference, the resignation letter. No mention of welfare-to-work:
Dear Gordon,
We both love the Labour Party. I have worked for it for 20 years and you for far longer. We know we owe it everything and it owes us nothing.
I owe it to our party to say what I believe no matter how hard that may be. I now believe your continued leadership makes a Conservative victory more, not less likely.
That would be disastrous for our country. This moment calls for stronger regulation, an active state, better public services, an open democracy.It calls for a government that measures itself by how it treats the poorest in society.
Those are our values, not David Cameron's.We therefore owe it to our country to give it a real choice. We need to show that we are prepared to fight to be a credible government and have the courage to offer an alternative future.
I am therefore calling on you to stand aside to give our party a fighting chance of winning. As such I am resigning from government.
The party was here long before us, and we want it to be here long after we have gone. We must do the right thing by it.
I am not seeking the leadership, nor acting with anyone else. My actions are my own considered view, nothing more.
If the consensus is that you should continue, then I will support the government loyally from the backbenches. But I do believe that this question now needs to be put.
Thank you for giving me the privilege of serving.Yours,
Rt Hon James Purnell MP
BBC News has collected responses to his departure here. None of these mention welfare-to-work either.
Update 10/6 - The DWP have finally put out a press release announcing the new ministers!
Comments
this just shows a lack of concern for every workers. Daniel you are correct the bidding rounds will be unaffected however contracts require the Sec of State signature so unless the replacement is very fast fND will be seeing even further delays.Just what we all do not need. DWP for goodness sake once the new SoS is in post, hurry and get those contracts in place quickly before an election is called and we are all paralyzed by purda. this is an appalling state of affairs and the growing unemployed of this country are the ones who will suffer and equally the ranks of dedicated W2W employees.
A brief thought on this. At the risk of dropping into punditry, the pre-Purnell vagueness probably had its roots in distaste for reform at the top of government, as much as in the merry-go-round of ministers who rotated through the job. This is no longer the case, so further delays are more likely to come from a simple inability to cope with the workload at civil service level.
DWP / Jobcentre procurement was one of the back office functions that had its staffing slashed in the efficiency programme before the recession kicked in. With this new, leaner team, it has suddenly had the funding it handles doubled or trebled, along with an expectation of shortening the length of each procurement process by half or more. Additionally, the job outcomes focus of the Commissioning Strategy will be somewhat problematic when there simply aren't enough jobs to go round, hence the increased funding for training, Future Jobs Fund and the like.
I am just wondering if conservative party come into power will this effect our jobs. i mean from their history, they usually work for the rich rather than looking after all levels in society. In regards to contracts, would they or can they stop Fnd going further or cancel existing contracts to save resources. This question may sound a bit strange but I am just looking at the possibilities of different types of governemt? can someone help?
Bubs
FND goes ahead no matter what.
Both main parties have supported the outsourced welfare provision. If anything the Tories will further devolve power to private providers away from traditional public service delivery. Both parties feel that outsourcing gives value for money and delivers better results (whether this is true is another matter). The money allocated to welfare provison will remain roughly the same. We are now all part of a multi biilion pound industry, there is no going back.
My first thought on hearing the news was that JCP has had more bosses than Newcastle Utd.
The Conservatives have never been big fans of New Deal, as it was originally funded by a £5 Billion hit on pensions, if I recall. I would think that private providers would be the big winners if they got elected. However, I could imagine them wanting a payment by results only basis for funding.
My concern is that whoever gets into power, they face making large cuts in public spending to get government finances straight. Who knows where that may lead?
Update 8/6 - Story updated to cover Tony McNulty's resignation and replacement, which generated almost no press coverage amid the general furore. This doesn't change the situation so much as underline it.
Not quite ahomage. New Deal was initially funded by the "windfall" tax on utilities in the late 1990's. Although New Deal was not endorsed by the Conservatives they were keen to help integrate people back in to the Labour market by utilising the private and voluntary sectors. Just before they lost the 1997 election they were on the verge of giving "America Works" a contract to help Lone Parents back in to work. Labour did not proceed with this idea fortunately.
You may also cast your mind back to the 1980's and 1990's where an increasing number of public services were tendered and delivered by the private sector. This trend has increased under Labour. My guess is this trend will accelerate still further under the Tories regardless of how much money is available.
Let's not forget that for companies such as SERCO Welfare to Work is a relatively small piece of business in the wider scheme of things. They possess a lot of experience in delivering a diverse range of public sector contracts ranging from running hospitals to largescale Defence contracts.
I only hope that contracts are awarded with a strong emphasis on quality and trackrecord rather than the size of the companies bank balance.
I will like to know more about the new deal
hello vsimonmichael , what is it you would like to Know?
vsimonmichael, take a look at the Jobcentre Plus guidance first. Bear in mind that in half the country, New Deal will be replaced by flexible New Deal in October, and New Deal is already winding down in those areas in preparation.
The view from the right...
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3691658/so-what-now-yvette.thtml