Out of work? Heaven help you ....

The Big Society has had a bad week and it looks likely things are not due to improve. Matters looked bleak when Liverpool pulled out of a Big Society pilot programme and they then moved from bad to worse when its driving force, Lord Wei announced his intention to scale back his commitment.

If all this didn’t give Cameron a headache, then pronouncements by Dame Elisabeth Hoodless didn’t help. Twenty-four hours later, revelations emerged that Eric Pickles blocked proposals to protect Cameron's flagship "big society" project from the harshest of council spending cuts. By now the PM must have been feeling like the King of Kadesh at the Siege of Meggido – except for Cameron, there was no escape route.

One concern coming from the Third Sector is that they feel they are being squeezed. The Government is encouraging them to take over delivery of critical services (running of libraries, job clubs etc). Against this, they have inflicted substantial cuts to local funding in order to reduce the deficit.

Consequences of this can be found on the GB Job Clubs website. Many of their network of over 100 local clubs are strapped for cash, so they are offering the chance to ‘put their names in a hat’ for a free laptop. GB Job Clubs was set up in 2009 by Chris Neal (a retired derivatives broker with strong Tory connections) with support from the Cobden Centre. Like many charities, it is struggling financially. The organisation was initially funded by Neal with a £500 start-up budget and has since received some support from local authorities and the Church Urban Fund.

With the latest raft of austerity measures, this funding is under threat and is likely to impact on Neal’s network. If local clubs cannot secure finance for premises, equipment and day-to-day running costs, they could close – bringing an end to the amalgamation of Tory small state idealism as seen in the Big Society and localised job-hunting services.

Would they be missed? It is far too early to gauge whether they have achieved any success. Neal claims 30% of those who lose their job find another one through friends, family or contacts and his clubs provide the social networking to make this happen.

What is known is that historically, they have not been particularly successful. First opened in 1984 in the North East, a number of studies argued they were of limited value. A 1986 Guardian report into how the scheme was functioning in Dundee found that of the city's 7,100 long-term unemployed, only 147 people had been found places at job clubs and only six people on the wider Job Start scheme had actually found work.

If they fail, or are forced to close their doors, many providers will be expected to pick up the slack they leave behind. The sector has the necessary skills and experience to take over the role, but existing job club clients will be used to a service that mentors, supports and befriend. In some instances volunteers will have given many hours encouraging clients and building their self-worth whilst helping them write CVs, providing transport to interviews, or simply offering a resource to create peer self-help support groups.

These resources are expensive and providers will be hard pushed to match such intense levels of support. If they have to take over the functions of job clubs they will need to think how they will deliver this kind of service. Equally, if job clubs survive and find the funding to continue, providers will need to consider how they will make themselves an attractive and welcome alternative.

Evidence shows only 8% of clients attending programmes run by independent training providers secure full-time, sustainable employment. With statistics like this, it would suggest the jobless would probably be just as successful sat at home writing for jobs whilst watching morning TV. Indeed, this option could save the Government millions whilst offering the unemployed the chance to feel they had some say in their own future.

There has never been any kind of caring and supportive initiative designed to support the jobless and help them achieve the goals they feel are important to them. Many want the chance to work, but current and previous provisions are dominated by ‘targets’ and ‘sales figures’ that simply move the jobless off the unemployment register and into some kind of work – even if it doesn’t suit the client. Equally, others want the chance to retrain, but the current funding structure for contracts means that it is against the best interests of providers to support this option as they will not get paid if the client goes to college.

In short, the system doesn’t work, won’t work and ultimately will collapse!