Employment Service (Hansard, 4 November 1997)

§ Mr. Alan Howarth

Responsibility for the subject of the questions has been delegated to the Employment Service agency under its chief executive. I have asked him to arrange for replies to be given.

Letter from Leigh Lewis to Mr. Mike Hancock, dated 4 October 1997: The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question regarding the average cost of placing a young person into work. This is something which falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive. The Employment Service does not separately monitor the average cost of placing a young person into work. It is required, by its annual agreement with the Department for Education and Employment, to monitor and report the average cost of placing an unemployed person into work (regardless of age). The last year for which this figure is available is 1996–97, when the average cost was £234. In addition to this, the Employment Service also monitors the average cost of placing a long term unemployed person into work (£431 in 1996–97) and the average cost of placing a person with a disability into work (£321 in 1996–97). Neither of these unit costs are analysed by age of client and there are, at present, no plans to do so. I hope this is helpful.

Letter from Leigh Lewis to Mr. Mike Hancock, dated 4 October 1997: The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question concerning the effectiveness of the Employment Service preferred supplier system and the reaction of agencies who deal with young people to the administrative processes involved. I am satisfied that the preferred supplier system being used by the Employment Service is effective in helping both it and potential contractors to make the best use of their resources. The Employment Service benefits from the ability to invite competitive tenders from a manageable number of organisations, while potential contractors benefit from knowing that their bid will be taken seriously. This approach is being used for Employment Service programmes designed to help unemployed people of all ages to improve their prospects of finding work. The Employment Service, is not, however, operating a preferred supplier system for the New Deal initiative for young people aged 18–24. 161W Organisations have generally accepted the rationale behind the preferred supplier system in relation to established programmes, and I am not aware of any problems—either from agencies dealing with young people or from others—about the administrative processes involved. I would, of course, be happy to look into any specific issues of which you are aware. I hope this is helpful.

Letter from Leigh Lewis to Mr. Mike Hancock, dated 4 October 1997: The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question requesting information about young people placed into employment by Portsmouth Employment Service Jobcentre during the latest 12 month period. This is something that falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive of the Agency. The two Employment Service Jobcentres in Portsmouth—Portsmouth North and Portsmouth Central—placed 920 young people aged 16–24 into employment in the 12 months ending September 1997. I hope this is helpful.

Letter from Leigh Lewis to Mr. Mike Hancock, dated 4 October 1997: The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question relating to the planning undertaken by Employment Service managers in each district in Hampshire with respect to New Deal delivery. All New Deal district plans are due to be assessed by regional assessment panels starting next week. These panels, which will include senior Employment Service management, Government Office Directors and senior employer and voluntary sector representatives, will assess plans against agreed criteria to establish whether they represent robust and realistic proposals to implement New Deal. Where necessary, the panel will require plans to be amended or, in extremis, recast to ensure that this is so. Delivery planning for New Deal in all Employment Service districts has been subject to progress monitoring and reporting on a fortnightly basis since the end of August 1997. The latest fortnightly progress reports (for the period ending 20 October 1997) show that the Employment Service Hampshire districts of Mid-Hants, Portsmouth, Southampton and Guildford, which covers parts of Hampshire, are all on course to submit their delivery plans on time for regional assessment. All plans, once approved, will be published. If you have any specific concerns my Director for London and the South East, Richard Foster (tel: 0171 211 4395), will be happy to discuss them with you. I trust that this is helpful.