News

Donal Mullally says the obsession with cost is stifling social care provision. The government should take heed.

These are challenging times to be a trade union activist in a social services department. For diehards like myself who kept the flame alight through Conservative governments of the 1980s and 1990s, there were high expectations that the return of Labour would herald a new golden era for public services. Nowhere has the disappointment been as great as in social services.

Five years later the outlook is bleak, and there is a general recognition that social care provision is seriously underfunded. Moreover, we are in a recruitment crisis and are seeing a growing public perception of failure fuelled by events such as the Victoria Climbi‚ inquiry.

So how did we get to this state? The appointments section of this publication gives the game away. The debate over who should deliver our social services is over and the skills demanded at the senior level are those of commissioning and "strategic" planning. This grim uniformity suggests one source - the joint review.

A uniform approach is valuable if its theoretical framework is strong, but there is mounting evidence that this is not the case and that the influence of the joint review has become part of the problem rather than the solution for social care policy development.

Evidence at the Climbi‚ inquiry highlighted the failure by inspectors to identify weaknesses in child protection systems. The reality is that reviews have focused on cost rather than quality as the defining issue. Progress has been judged largely by the extent of commissioning in the private and independent sector and dedication to the relentless pursuit of cheaper service delivery.

Particularly concerning about the role of the joint review is the apparent reluctance of councils to challenge their conclusions. Outsourcing - the stock-in-trade of the "modernising" department - removes control from councillors but not responsibility.

The dilemma for the government is that the joint review process has become the only show in town. Most independent observers would agree that it has favoured an ever-increasing role for the private sector and has caused an increase in charges and rationing of services.

For a government instructing the electorate to judge it on the quality of its public services it is surely time to listen to the growing chorus of academic, professional and community opinion calling for a fresh assessment of the role and influence of the joint review process in determining the future of social care provision.

Donal Mullally is chairperson of Wakefield Unison social services committee.