BASW has been directly informed by the DH that the GSCC is to be abolished. BASW campaigned over many years for registration for Social Workers, but was not entirely happy with what we got.
We are on record as saying that the GSCC overplayed its role in public protection, stirring up public fears and concerns that Social Workers were incompetent and dangerous while doing little to address the myths that arose around Social Workers being all powerful malevolent beings promulgated by certain ‘name and shame social workers’ websites and various media outlets.
The GSCC laid great emphasis on conduct hearings which we sometimes experienced as being weighted against the individual social worker, although we do give the GSCC credit for its fair decision in the case of the Baby P social workers. However, there was insufficient acknowledgement that many social workers who fell foul of the GSCC had been unfairly disciplined by their employers and often were as much the victim of systemic failings as those they tried to serve.
The GSCC’s most conspicuous failing was to take any action on the unfairness of the legislation which gave the Code of Practice statutory force as far as employees were concerned but featured no sanctions for employers whose treatment of staff is often appalling and contributes far more than the actions or omissions of individual social workers to poor outcomes for service users. This would have required primary legislation but the GSCC was in a position to push for this.
The GSCC had not moved forward in its declared intention to register the rest of the social care workforce and had not been particularly active in addressing issues with the Social Work degree, particularly as far as placements were concerned. These were all issues picked up by the Social Work Task Force and being taken forward now by the Reform Board under headings of employment standards and social work education.
The function of the GSCC as far as registration of social workers and maintaining of standards in the profession is concerned is to be taken on by the Health Professions Commission, to be renamed, possibly, the Health and Care Profession Commission, or following the model of the Care Standards Commission, simply the Care Professions Commission. Our DH source could not comment on where the GSCC’s current responsibility for monitoring social work education at degree and post qualifying levels was to rest, although it seems likely from its other work that the Health Professions Commission would take this on too.
Of course the main area of concern for BASW is whether a body currently concerned solely with health professions, albeit across a range and including Nurses, ed psychs, physios, paramedics, speech and language therapists, and OTs who are often colleagues of ours, can adequately understand and work with the social work profession and the public who are served and supported by social workers.
It is assumed some GSCC staff will transfer to the new agency, but will they, as seems to be the case with the Care Standards Commission, have significantly less of a voice and less influence than health colleagues? We are assured that any panels considering conduct and fitness to practice will include people from the profession under consideration. Something which will concern social workers is that our registration fee is likely to rise from the present £30 a year to £76, in line apparently with health personnel on similar pay levels.
It is important to mention the Government’s rationale for this change. They acknowledge that the GSCC had made progress over the last year on the immediate public protection risks which had seen the sacking of Mike Wardle as Chief Executive. The GSCC had been tasked with working out changes needed for it to become a fully independent organisation and it appears that this would have cost £21m and meant a charge for registrants of £250 to £300 a year, which was unacceptable. This is in the context of a new Government which has declared war on quangos of course and the official announcement includes other health agencies which are being abolished or retained.
The transfer of social work registration from the GSCC to the revamped Health Professions Council will take place by 2012 at the earliest and a professional liaison group will be set up as soon as possible. It is unlikely that the HPC will go on to register other social care professionals – the Government is not convinced that full statutory regulation is required for them and is committed to a ‘light touch.’
BASW members would want to be sure that any light touch did adequately protect service users from the tiny number of care staff who may not have their best interests at heart, especially in the context of service users employing their own personal assistants.
BASW hopes that the new body responsible for registration of social workers will work hard to gain a good understanding of social workers, the constraints upon us, the hugely difficult and delicate situations in which we work, the complexities surrounding our public image and our aspirations to form a College of Social Work.
We have some apprehensions about another event which could be interpreted as a ‘health takeover’ – only movement towards an individual independent College of Social Work will enable us to be confident that the Government truly does support and endorse us as a profession as it claims, and we were pleased to hear that the HPC would be working closely with those involved in the development of the College.
The Care Standards Commission is to be retained, and BASW welcomes this move. It is vital that this large organisation is enabled in its work across health and social care to inspect and monitor to make sure service users are being well served and treated with respect and dignity. The CQC has some way to go to show a good understanding of social work and social care – BASW is always ready to assist them to gain this increased understanding and urges them to work positively with us and with those who are developing the College.
