Year: 2011

At the launch speakers from BASW and the GSCC praised the Task Force group and the ‘excellent report’. The atmosphere was one of ‘uniting together’ to push the profession forward. Indeed when I asked three questions about the implications of the report for frontline workers I was loudly ‘tutted’ for even raising such questions!

One obvious question we should ask is: Where’s the cash? The recommendations that seem most attractive will require significant amounts of funding. But as both main parties claim that we are now entering a period of welfare retrenchment – how will this be paid for?

The recommendation that has seemingly gained most support is for the creation of a College of Social Work (or even a Royal College of Social Work). But the College proposal raises some awkward issues. When workers have contacted SWAN over the last few years the key issues they identify are:

1. The impact of managerialism on the job of frontline workers – the control of the work process, the embodiment of that control within IT systems, the lack of time to build relationships with clients/service users, budgetary restrictions, excessive case-loads, etc

2. The impact of marketisation on service delivery – the ways in which social workers – who come in to the profession with a vision of meeting people’s needs – find themselves forced to ‘ration care’; the ways that marketising pressures have undermined the quality of services and the working conditions of those who work in the (increasingly privatised) care sector, etc.

How exactly will a Royal College solve these problems?

The College is put forward as offering a single voice for Social Work. This, it is claimed, will allow us to gain visibility for all the good work we do. But the obvious question is ‘Whose voice will it represent?’ The frontline worker or the Director of Social Services? Will the voice of frontline workers and Directors be the same? Are those who promote marketisation of care and managerialism have the same interests as those frontline workers who are often appalled at the impact of marketisation of services on those that we work with?

When frontline workers find themselves under attack it is usually from their employing agencies – wanting to change their working conditions, their pay rates – or even their right to speak out about local events that affect social work clients. (It is only occasionally that social workers come under attack from the media, though, of course, such attacks do have a high profile, and do have an impact on the profession.) When such attacks happen, social workers are best served by uniting with their colleagues – and other workers – within their unions. Yet where does the College proposal leave Unison and social work trade unionism?

The College idea seems attractive. It seems to be tied to a promise of better pay and career pathways; it seems to offer protection; it seems to bring about recognition and bring social workers into line with doctors, nurses and others within the caring professions. But the suggestion that the solution to the crisis of social work is rooted in a more sharply defined professionalism – one that brings with it more distinction and distance from other welfare workers and service users – is an argument that is deeply problematic.

Last week, those involved with social work in the UK had a keen focus on the Social Work Taskforce’s final report. The report’s recommendations may be progressive and ameliorate some of the problems affecting social work. As students looking ahead to our future careers, however, it seems likely that some of the deficiencies underlying and threats to the profession of social work in the UK will persist. These issues include those addressed by the Taskforce; social work’s public image, tightly constricted resources, problems with retention of staff and the time consumed by bureaucracy, to pick a few.

There are also issues, however, which the report does not address such as the policy underlying performance indicators and rigorous means-testing which may lead social workers away from practice consistent with their values. Furthermore, there are issues outside the report’s remit which will affect social work in future such as the changing population profile, public spending cuts and the impact of climate change.

We feel that students need to not only critically appraise the profession we will enter against the social work values common to us all, but to prepare ourselves to change practice for the better. We need to consider the challenges of the future today if we are to contribute to social justice and serve humanity tomorrow; the reasons so many of us enter the course.

We know that students lack experience of the role we seek to influence, though many, particularly those on employment based routes, may have spent many years working in social care. Many are or have been service-users or carers themselves. As future practitioners our opinion must have an influence. We also know that it would be counter-productive to exclude service users, carers, academics and current practitioners from our debate, and we welcome their input. At the same time, we recognise that a student-orientated forum developing a coherent student voice has value.

To this end, on 17th February next year we have devised and arranged a student conference entitled ‘Neo-liberalism vs. Social Justice’ Can I practise the social work I believe in within the statutory sector?’,to address these issues. At this point, because of limited space, the conference is restricted to those students based in London.

Nonetheless, we call on social work students across the UK to consider the social work they want to practice now, while there is opportunity to reflect, organise and campaign. Our firm wish is that students open up this debate for themselves and start imagining a social work of which they wish to be part, not simply one they do not favour or reject. If we do not have a destination, we cannot plan to reach it.

As a start, we propose that we distribute the outcomes of our conference to any students who are interested in campaigning for a better social work future. There are many ways in which we could do this, conferences, seminars or student campaign groups, but the goal is planning what to do when we enter practice.

Please contact us for more information on what we are doing and spread the debate among all social work students.

Dan Morton and Natalie Angel

We should not be fooled into thinking the cuts are an economic necessity, they are ideologically driven. If the aim was to reduce the debt then money could be found by scrapping Trident (saving £35 bn), by initiating a one-off tax on those in the city banks whose estimated Christmas bonus this year will be £7bn, by demanding payment on the estimated £125bn that the wealthy have ‘dodged’ in their tax payments or by ending the cash bonanza that have given guaranteed super-profits to those large companies involved in various PFI firms schemes.

The ConDem government aren’t interested in any of these solutions. Instead they want to use the ‘shock’ of the debt crisis to push through the wholesale privatization of vital public services.

Those most to blame for the financial mess – the banks, the private sector and business leaders – have been left untouched. The people who will be most hit are those with least money and resources, those that social work traditionally works with – older people, lone parents, disabled people, mental health service users, carers, those on benefits, black and minority ethnic communities and social housing tenants. The wealthy tax avoiders and tax dodgers are left alone – the poor on benefits are stigmatized and vilified for being poor.

British social welfare policy and practice has never been renowned for its humanity but the inhumanity of the Coalition Government is breathtaking as it removes billions of pounds of benefits and services. This is social violence and leads to even further fear, insecurity and anxiety to some of the most vulnerable in our society. Their hope that privatization will fill some of the holes will guarantee services that lack care and compassion for both users and workers. Profit and care just don’t mix and too expect otherwise is simply delusional.

But there is an alternative to austerity. In France, Greece, Ireland and across the globe there are growing struggles against such measures. In Britain we are seeing the beginnings of such a movement. Students are at the forefront of this with student SWAN members involved in marches and occupations against education funding cuts. We celebrate the resourcefulness, resilience and resistance of the student movement.

SWAN supporters have also been active in the growing anti-cuts protests and campaigns around the country – and we encourage all our members and supporters to actively engage in local anti-cuts groups.

The scale of the present assault on the poorest in our society is unlike anything any of us have witnessed for several generations. The time has come for those involved in social work to make a stand against the social violence being unleashed by the ConDem coalition: to speak out, campaign and join the movements of resistance.

Another world is possible!