While
societal changes brought about by the industrial revolution
led to the existence of trade unions – created to improve
the lives of workers – so too did that period of mass
migration from country to city, and agrarian to industrial
economy, lead to a torrent of money flowing into charities
and charitable causes – existing to improve society
at large.
This influx of cash allowed for a discernable increase in
charitable output, but charities themselves, of course, had
been around for considerably longer than the nineteenth century;
and during much of their existence they were carrying out
what can now be described as ‘public services’.
As far back as 1601, the Charitable Uses Act was created to
regulate the distribution of charitable funds: “...for
relief of aged, impotent and poor …maintenance of sick
and maimed soldiers and mariners ...schools of learning …repair
of bridges, ...redemption of prisoners…” and the
list continues.
Many of these services were deemed to be within the remit
of charities as they, for various reasons, were better placed
to deliver them (or willing to in the first place) than government.
This idea was effectively rescinded in the 1940s with the
creation of the welfare state, however, charities carried
on delivering a number of services in a number of different
areas.
Jumping forward, a report from public sector union PCS in
July this year argued, among other things, that current government
undertakings involving public service delivery would be returning
us to that past ‘privatised’ system which is,
in its opinion, outdated and unworkable.
In the introduction to the report Third Sector Provision
of Employment-related Services PCS’ general secretary
Mark Serwotka also argued that current talk of reform of the
public sector – i.e. having third sector organisations
take over more of its responsibilities – is not open
to criticisms about commercialisation levelled at “conventional
privatisations”.
“We consider that many questions about the expansion
of the state’s use of the third sector have not been
answered, or even considered in any detail,” he wrote.
“It has the potential to return significant sectors
of the public service to a pre-war model when the “deserving
poor” were expected to show gratitude to their charitable
benefactors. This would be another phase in dismantling the
welfare state…”
The report itself suggests a variety of reasons why third
sector public service delivery is unsustainable, including
boards being too close to business, organisations being too
big or too small, users not being involved in governance and,
ultimately, that this ‘outsourcing’ of services
would lead to privatisation by the back door.
In response, Acevo and the Shaw Trust released a report The
Case for Change: Third Sector Provision of Employment Services
which picked the PCS report apart pretty effectively, and
in light of this Acevo and PCS met to debate service provision
at the TUC conference in September. The debate, says Nick
Aldridge, Acevo’s director of strategy and communications,
was “surprisingly positive”. “I was trying
to demonstrate how some of their arguments were completely
inaccurate and uninformed,” he says. “For example
– in their view the third sector includes private companies,
which is a very basic misunderstanding that I was able to
clear up.
“The PCS have been very vociferous in criticising charities,”
he continues. “I think it’s fair to say that their
aim has been to suggest that charities can’t be trusted
with important services because they lack the professionalism
and accountability that are needed and, in the PCS’
view, can only be found in the public sector.”
This really isn’t surprising, as the PCS’ members
are in the public sector after all, hence it not really wanting
to see public sector jobs dissolving. Its vitriolic outspokenness
on this issue, however, could leave the public believing that
PCS’ concerns are shared by the trade union community
at large; but this doesn’t seem to be the case.
Top
The union perspective
There does, in fact, appear to be a good deal of consensus
between many unions and the third sector when it comes to
reforming public services.
The TUC, for example, is a member of the recently created
Third Sector Network, which aims to form a consortium of
charities, co-operatives and trade unions, among others,
to work collaboratively on issues of “common concern”.
At its launch back in May, Tom Wilson, the TUC’s head
of organisation and services department, said: "Trade
Unions share the commitment of other third sector organisations
to giving people a voice... Unions are about collective
strength and this network provides a great foundation for
the wider third sector to work together."
T&G ACTS, which has members in Oxfam, Shelter, and Turning
Point, to name but a few, launched its Valuing the Voluntary
Sector campaign last year. Though part of the campaign calls
for “a final salary pension for all employees”
which is probably not a sustainable option, its funding
priorities for government are in line with sector campaigning,
including full cost recovery, longer-term contracts and
simplifying the funding application process.
Unison, as well, is broadly in line with the principles
laid out by the NCVO for transforming, and not transferring,
public services. Its national officer for the community
and voluntary sector, Mike Short, says: “The qualities
we think the sector brings to civil society in general are:
innovation; independence; and, often, a local community
base, so a real link to citizens.”
Short says Unison has always supported the voluntary sector
in its role of identifying gaps in public sector provision
of services and providing otherwise unavailable options.
“And many of those solutions have ended up being provided
by the public sector – so you’ve got the voluntary
sector partly acting as an R&D wing for the public sector,
and we think that sort of innovation is really essential.”
Short also believes that it will be extremely difficult
to achieve the step- change in service delivery that Acevo
has talked about, saying that the sector simply lacks the
capacity to carry it out.
Does this mean then that he, like PCS, considers the sector
to be a ‘second class citizen’ in terms of service
delivery? “We support the kind of traditional role
the sector has been doing for years and years and we don’t
see them as second class,” he says. “Acevo is
arguing for this huge step change in provision for the voluntary
sector – the voluntary sector doesn’t have the
capacity to do that. And most charities that you speak to
say ‘we do not have the capacity to do that’.”
Mubeen Bhutta, policy officer at NCVO, says that there is
an element of truth to that statement. “If government
wants to see greater involvement from the third sector,”
she says, “then it will have to invest up-front in
the capacity of organisations to take on contracts”.
She points out that Futurebuilders is designed to allow
organisations to be contract ready, but adds that there
needs to be additional long-term investment.
Top
Working together?
In order to push for this longer-term investment, and the
various other areas which need to be fixed if a real transformation
of public services is to occur, it may well be worth operating
in tandem with the unions, which represent a powerful collective
voice and are no strangers to lobbying government. In this
way, the Third Sector Network is certainly a step in the
right direction.
NCVO’s Bhutta believes that there are “massive
opportunities” for unions and the sector to work together,
as both the public and voluntary sectors share an interest
in meeting the needs of users and communities. “That’s
the whole point of seeking to transform or reform public
services; to make them better, to make them more responsive
to users – and that’s something that both the
third sector and public sector share.”
Neil Cleeveley, director of information and policy at NAVCA
agrees with this, saying: “There are a whole raft
of shared objectives that people working in the voluntary
and community sector and people working in the public sector
share about social justice, social benefit, public benefit
and so on, and there is clearly a lot of common ground.”
He, as are most people involved in rational debate on the
subject, is quick to point out that there are many services
being provided perfectly well by the public sector, and
that there “are some public services that the rest
should keep our hands off for a whole range of reasons”.
“A large part of our role is in helping to get the
commissioning right, getting the shaping of services right,”
he adds. “And in that area in particular I think there
is probably a lot of common ground between ourselves and
the unions.”
Acevo’s Aldridge, as well, sees definite potential
for working more closely with unions, “particularly
on issues such as workforce development and TUPE where I
don’t think we have all the answers yet,” he
says. “But it certainly looks like we’ll need
a more strategic cross-sector approach for workforce development
if we’re going to maintain the kind of staff quality
we need for public services.”
So will we be coming full circle to a pre-war, post-industrial
revolution level of service provision from the third sector?
No; and no-one is suggesting that that should be the case.
What we do need is the transformation of services to best
deliver all round, and it makes sense that a collaborative
effort, involving the public and third sectors and the unions
which represent them, is the best way for this to actually
be achieved.
Further information
PCS’ report can be found on its website
Acevo’s report can be purchased for £7.50. See
the publications section at www.acevo.org.uk
The NCVO’s take How voluntary and community organisations
can help transform public services can be found at www.ncvo-vol.org.uk
Top
|
