Interviews

The Work Programme does not owe the voluntary sector a living, says ERSA chair 4

Finance | Vibeka Mair | 22 Nov 2011

Matthew Lester, chair of the Employment Related Services Association, has little truck with charities that complain about the Work Programme.  Vibeka Mair reports.

Matthew Lester, operations director at the Papworth Trust, became chair of the Employment Related Services Association (ERSA) earlier this year. His charity, which supports disabled people into employment, is a subcontractor on the biggest welfare-to-work contract the Work Programme, which is being run by the Department for Work and Pensions. He describes its involvement as “risky”, but adds that “most good things tend to be”.

The Work Programme has had a shaky 12 months. It’s been scrutinised closely by the commentators, including ERSA which most recently called on the government to take urgent action to clear the backlog of Work Capability Assessments that have built up.

Lester also says that tight timescales in the Programme meant that prime and sub-contractors did not have sufficient time to explore innovation and imaginative approaches.

Others have also criticised the lack of charities in the supply chain, but Lester is less sympathetic with these complaints. ERSA, which he co-founded in 2005, is sector-neutral. Its almost 100 members are 50 per cent charities, but it also includes public and private-sector suppliers.

Lester takes a non-sectorial approach to contract wins in welfare-to-work programmes and feels that charities need to recognise the difference between contracted work and charitable activities:

“I am part of the charity sector,” he says. “But some act like the world owes the voluntary sector a living because it is doing good work. Let’s not confuse doing good with performing well - as a contractor you need to perform to survive.”

“I am not supportive of those in the voluntary sector who whine and moan and think the world owes us a living. It’s a competitive world and if the state provides better and cheaper facilities through a commercial organisation than a voluntary one I don’t know why the taxpayer should buy from the voluntary sector."

Lester does concede that the voluntary sector offers something unique to the commercial sector, most importantly community engagement, and can deliver contracts extremely well. But he predicts other sectors could catch up.

“I predict that knowledge over time will end up being subsumed and lost in the commercial sector. I will be cheesed off but if it actually means that the commercial sector serves many people well then I’ve achieved my objects as a charity to ensure disabled people have equality.”

Tweet