The final item of business today is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-11033, in the name of Sarah Boyack, on the Engine Shed and supported employment. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes with disappointment the announcement by the Edinburgh-based training organisation, the Engine Shed, that it is to cease operation; understands that the organisation, which has offered individuals with learning disabilities a successful transitional work-based training route into paid work with a variety of local employers since 1989, will be wound up over the next six months due to funding pressures; is concerned that the Engine Shed is the latest supported employment project in Edinburgh to cease operation following the recent closures of BlindCraft and Remploy in the city; is further concerned at the reported continuing gap between employment rates for disabled and non-disabled workers in Scotland; acknowledges the role of supported businesses in tackling the barriers that prevent many disabled workers from accessing employment; notes the Scottish Government’s policy that every public body should have at least one contract with a supported business; notes with disappointment confirmation in response to freedom of information requests earlier in 2014 indicating that some 44 public authorities, including NHS boards, local authorities and central government organisations, do not meet this policy aim; notes the view that there is a need for a renewed effort to grow the supported employment sector in Scotland and prevent closure of further providers, and wishes the management team at the Engine Shed well as it explores potential alternative avenues for delivering placements to young adults with learning disabilities in order to continue to help them successfully make the transition into paid work with Edinburgh employers.
17:40
First, I thank members from across the chamber for supporting my motion and allowing this important debate to go ahead. For many of my constituents, the issue is hugely important, and I am so pleased that staff, volunteers and trainees and their family members from the Engine Shed are in the public gallery to hear our debate.
For almost 25 years, the Engine Shed has provided work-based training placements for young adults with learning disabilities. Although the Engine Shed is a member of the Scottish Union of Supported Employment, its approach is slightly different: it offers transitional support, providing young people with the opportunity to access training and work experience in an integrated setting.
The Engine Shed operates a cafe, a bakery, a tofu production line and outside catering services. Trainees are taken on for up to three years, initially working full-time in the business. They then move on to a mixture of work placements with mainstream employers and further training in the Engine Shed before moving into paid employment with a variety of workplaces.
As an MSP, I have been a strong supporter of the Engine Shed’s work. I have attended graduation ceremonies and heard first hand from the trainees about the skills and confidence that they have gained from being part of the organisation. I have also heard from many family members who have spoken powerfully about the difference the Engine Shed has made to their loved ones and the opportunities that it has allowed them to pursue.
Unfortunately, in recent times, the organisation, in common with other voluntary organisations, has faced a yearly battle to secure funding. Funding from the council contributes about 40 per cent of the Engine Shed’s total income, with the remainder coming from the organisation’s social enterprise operations. The value of the Engine Shed’s council grant has dropped—it is less now than it was in 2003, so there has been a significant drop in the past decade. The organisation has been looking for ways to maximise its income from its social enterprise projects but, as the Scottish Government has acknowledged, many social enterprises struggle in today’s harsh economic climate. I understand that the Scottish Government’s third sector unit has been considering the issue, so I hope that the minister will have some positive news for us in his response to the debate.
Earlier this year, following the failure to secure funding beyond March 2015, the Engine Shed’s management team took the difficult decision to wind down the operation.
The situation has its roots in the review of employability services in Edinburgh. As part of its work, the review undertook to consider investment in services for job-seeking disabled clients. It found demand for an integrated employability service that would serve people of all disabilities, one-to-one services, greater involvement in the development and delivery of engagement with employers, and a clear desire for the service to ensure paid work opportunities with progression.
From next year, the council is moving to a supported employment model that is consistent with the Scottish Government’s supported employment framework. Services will be provided under a single contract, and four of the existing providers of employment services for disabled clients are working together to take forward a consortium for the contract.
Although it is not part of the consortium, the Engine Shed has attempted consistently to engage those involved to see whether there is an opportunity to retain the unique contribution to support for young adults in learning employment skills that the Engine Shed has provided.
The management team has been looking at alternative funding options and it has worked hard to make the operation more self-sustaining. Therefore, I was concerned at the characterisation that I have received from the council that the Engine Shed had somehow rejected an offer to be part of the process.
We are left with a difficult situation, with the Engine Shed’s work simply not able to fit in with the council’s place and support-based model. Therefore, it has become no longer financially viable.
I have spoken before in the chamber about the value and importance of supported employment opportunities. The Scottish Government urgently needs to address the fact that 46 per cent of working-age disabled people are employed, compared with 76 per cent of the general working-age population. As Inclusion Scotland notes, only 13 per cent of adults with learning disabilities of working age are in employment.
Moreover, disabled people are more than three times more likely to have been out of work for five years or more than their non-disabled counterparts. There is a real issue here that needs to be addressed. I campaigned against the closure of Edinburgh’s Blindcraft and Remploy supported workplaces because I did not want the experience that they offered people with disabilities to go.
The Scottish Government encourages all public bodies to have at least one contract with a supported business. Earlier this year, when we debated the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Bill, Labour MSPs highlighted a freedom of information request that indicated that 44 public authorities, including national health service boards, local authorities and central Government organisations, do not meet that policy aim. There is a real gap between policy objectives and policy delivery.
I whole-heartedly support the ambition of supporting people into mainstream work when that is appropriate, but we need to recognise that some people will need more support than others. The client groups who benefit most from the work of the Engine Shed would not easily be served by the supported employment model that is currently being advocated. Many in those client groups have profound learning disabilities and, at the point at which they are referred, do not have the skills that they would need to get an immediate placement with an employer, regardless of the support that was offered.
Now that the Smith commission has proposed that responsibility for the work choice programme be devolved to the Scottish Government, I ask the minister to seek to ensure that that new funding stream is devolved to local government. As the Learning Disability Alliance Scotland points out, supported employment for adults with learning disabilities has never had a clear source of funding. There is an urgent need for that to be addressed. I know constituents who have not been able to work since the closure of the Blindcraft and Remploy supported workplaces in Edinburgh.
The Engine Shed has served as an important bridge to the more traditional supported employment opportunities for people with learning disabilities. There is a real danger that, without the dignity that the Engine Shed has given them and the intense support that it has offered, they will lose out and will fall through the cracks in the system.
Let us think about a possible solution. We urgently need the Scottish Government to carry out a review to look at what the position is now, in the absence of opportunities with Remploy, Blindcraft and now the Engine Shed. That review should examine the funding opportunities that exist at a Scottish level. Given the pressure that local authorities are under, there is a real need to review the situation and to come up with an outcomes-based approach. We should not just look at our policy ambitions. We can all sign up to good policy ambitions, but this is an incredibly hard time in terms of employment for disabled people, particularly those with learning disabilities, and we in the Scottish Parliament need to do more to support them.
I look forward to the minister coming up with some new opportunities and new ideas, and perhaps announcing a review to identify where we are. That would give new hope to people who, in the aftermath of the closure of the Engine Shed, will not have opportunities.
17:48
I congratulate Sarah Boyack on securing this debate on the Engine Shed and supported employment and on what I thought was a very thoughtful and constructive speech. The subject of the debate is an issue of concern to many people in Edinburgh and it is close to my heart, as I am the vice-convener of the cross-party group on learning disability. I would also like to put on record the proactive work of the constituency member for the Engine Shed, Marco Biagi, who last year had separate meetings with the Scottish Government, council employability staff and the Engine Shed’s founder and chief executive officer, Marian MacDonald. Parliamentary protocol prevents Mr Biagi from speaking in the debate, as he is now a Government minister, but he has joined us for it.
Like Sarah Boyack, I pay tribute to the Engine Shed and to Marian MacDonald for establishing the operation, which for more than 25 years has successfully provided a route into employment for thousands of young adults with learning disabilities by offering training programmes that lead to placements with employers and eventually to paid employment. The skill, expertise and experience of the Engine Shed’s workforce has provided a shining example of the strengths of supported businesses in Scotland. The general secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress, Grahame Smith, rightly highlighted the importance of supported businesses such as the Engine Shed when he said:
“The value of on-going training, social interaction and mentoring offered to people with disabilities to become more independent, and play an active part in the workplace and their communities, cannot be underestimated.”
It has been noted that the City of Edinburgh Council is moving to a new city-wide support service. However, a move to only one model of support surely raises the question of how much choice people with a learning disability will have if only one model is available to them. If that is a so-called results-based model and the provider is paid for each person they support into employment, how do we ensure that people being placed into employment are supported to sustain that employment over time?
Maureen Hope of Edinburgh, who wrote to my colleague Gordon MacDonald MSP, highlighted the importance of choice in supported employment. She stated:
“Choice is vital and the Council’s policy simply will not be suitable for the Engine Shed trainees—they need much more help to get to the point where even considering employment becomes appropriate. That being said, they placed 80% of their trainees into employment before the recession and even now, over 60% go into paid jobs, my own son being one of them.”
That good record of placing people into sustainable employment would not have been possible without the unique support that the Engine Shed is able to provide.
Ian Hood of the Learning Disability Alliance Scotland has captured the widespread concern that is felt about the council’s proposals and what they could mean for the young adults who currently work at the Engine Shed. He stated:
“What the Council wants to do is help young people move straight to work with some support. But not all young people are ready for the workplace. The Engine Shed was helpful for them, they were able to work in a real environment with other people and a lot went on to get jobs afterwards.”
It is important to note that there are concerns that withdrawing funding for services such as the Engine Shed in favour of one model of support will simply limit the opportunities that are available to some of the most vulnerable and marginalised members of our society. To be frank, I am not comfortable with that situation and nor should any other member of the Parliament be.
In the past year, more than 10,000 people in Edinburgh have signed an online petition and a further 3,000 have signed a paper petition to keep the Engine Shed open. How does the consultation to which the council is committed relate to the level of public concern that is expressed through those petitions?
The model of supported employment that is in place at the Engine Shed clearly has much to commend it. I would have hoped that the debate would be about how we make that model sustainable rather than casting it aside.
Although I deeply regret the fact that the Engine Shed is to close, I hope that the expertise and knowledge that have been built up during the time that it has been open might eventually form the basis for another scheme of a similar nature. The Engine Shed board is to be commended for seeking new ways of providing vital support for young people with learning disabilities from not only Marco Biagi’s constituency but throughout Edinburgh and the Lothians to gain the skills that they need for a lifetime of work.
17:53
The news that Edinburgh-based training organisation the Engine Shed is to cease operation is sad indeed. Like others, I commend Ms Boyack for bringing the issue to the Parliament for debate.
As I have said before, supported businesses that provide training play a valuable role in tackling unemployment among disabled people, and their role should be enthusiastically supported and applauded. If the Government is to make as much of a contribution to sustainable employment for disabled people as possible, there must be a greater focus on supporting training programmes to help the transition to the mainstream workforce. However, it must also be recognised that, for long-term sustainability, training organisations need to develop sources of funding that are independent of the Government.
Supported businesses in Scotland offer training opportunities for more than 400 individuals every year. It is a crucial role, but it seems that that figure should be increasing, as the approach is widely recognised as the best means by which disabled people can gain employment and start to live independently with a good standard of living. The chief executive of Remploy, Bob Warner, said:
“There is now an acceptance that disabled people would prefer to work in mainstream employment alongside non-disabled people rather than in sheltered workshops”.
The closure of the Engine Shed is a terrible setback in that regard and I am sure that we would all rather not have such an event happen again. Add to that the reality that recent figures put the employment rate for disabled people in Scotland at just 44.3 per cent and it is clear that much more needs to be done.
The Government should focus its attention on supporting training programmes to help disabled people learn the skills that are needed in the mainstream workforce rather than propping up sheltered employment schemes. Ms Boyack is right to point out that the Government has failed by some margin to meet its own target of every public body having at least one contract with a supported factory or business, with almost 40 per cent of public bodies failing to comply.
That is not the only point to make. The direction, not just the implementation, of policy needs to be reviewed and much improved. Indeed, the Sayce review concluded that
“Government funding should be invested in effective support for individuals, rather than subsidising factory businesses”.
That is precisely what the United Kingdom Government is doing and I hope that Parliament can welcome that.
To effectively support the training model of businesses such as the Engine Shed, we must first recognise the challenges that it and many supported businesses face. As I have said many times before, commercial viability should be welcomed where it is genuinely achieved, yet it is apparent that preferential contracting can shelter some businesses from genuine market forces. That may detract attention from operations such as marketing, product development and, indeed, innovation, which the businesses need in order to increase revenue from product and service sales. Therefore, I will repeat what I have said before—I hope that the operation of all supported businesses will evolve to increasingly include working within market incentives.
Accordingly, I hope that we are not faced again with the sad news of the closure of a training business such as the Engine Shed. Such businesses do great work to bring disabled people closer to full-time employment, which is the object and which can make an invaluable contribution to their wellbeing. Furthermore, I hope that the debate will focus the Government’s attention on facilitating the training-based model of supported employment rather than the sheltered model. These businesses and, most importantly, their employees or trainees, need stability going forward. Operating in a sustainable and commercial manner with focused Government support should deliver that.
17:57
I thank Sarah Boyack for bringing this extremely important debate to Parliament, and I commend her for her speech.
The Scottish Government firmly believes that all people of working age should be encouraged and supported to work when they wish. That applies especially to people who have a disability in respect of our obligations to do everything that we can to facilitate them to find employment, whether it be in supported employment, in supported businesses or elsewhere.
The benefits of having a job, including the respect and the sense of wellbeing that come from being in work, are widely accepted. Many people with disabilities—even those with severe disabilities—can and do choose to work and they work very well indeed.
I have had the opportunity to visit a large number of supported businesses—the Engine Shed is supported employment rather than a supported business. As I have said before in numerous debates on supported businesses, what struck me—I did not know this until I saw it for myself—was the commitment, the effort and the determination of the people in those businesses. Their commitment to the workplace and to their work colleagues was immense and quite forcibly striking.
There was perhaps a greater level of commitment than many people without disabilities display towards the conduct and pursuit of the duties of their work. In some cases, the absentee rate was actually lower, even for people with severe disabilities, than the rate for people who do not have disabilities. Perhaps that was because of the sense that those people had of overcoming their difficulties to show that they could contribute to society in the same way as the rest of us—and perhaps better.
It is quite shocking that the employment rate in Scotland for people with disabilities is at 42 per cent. However, it is even more shocking, as Sarah Boyack mentioned—and as Ian Hood, to whom she referred, commented in an email exchange with me—that the level of employment among those who have learning disabilities is so low in Scotland. Indeed, it is shockingly low.
As a constituency MSP for 15 years, I have observed that certain problems, in relation not only to employment but to the ability to get proper training and education at school, college and university, are most acute for children, young adults and adults who have learning disabilities. The fight to enable them to obtain access to what others receive as of right has often been enormous, and it has often been sustained at great cost to the parents and other family members who are engaged in it. That has been a uniform characteristic in every single one of the 15 years for which I have been an MSP. I have dealt with individual constituents whose stories I probably cannot—or should not—tell, but I am sure that the territory would be familiar to other members who have represented such constituents for several years.
The difference is frankly shocking. Perhaps the most important thing that we can do is to say collectively, whichever party we are in, that we must address the issues more effectively. We must acknowledge that, although good things are done, we have, together, to do far better in Scotland.
We recognise, as Jim Eadie said, that one size most certainly does not fit all. We must consider that every disabled person is different and that provision for a range of support needs must be in place.
We also recognise that supported employment is a successful model. As Cameron Buchanan said, it provides a good environment to enable many people to flourish, and in some cases—as Sarah Boyack highlighted—it allows them to move into mainstream employment after a period of time. I have seen that happening with supported business. When I visited the Haven premises in Inverness in my constituency, I heard that the proportion of people who move on from those premises to mainstream employment, after receiving training and support to give them the confidence to make that journey, was around 15 per cent. One size does not fit all by any means.
I am a passionate supporter of supported businesses, and I have visited a great many of them in Scotland. There are also other services such as Project SEARCH, which is a six-month work placement and training programme that has had success in helping young people with learning disabilities into work in Scotland and which is now operating in a number of areas, including Edinburgh.
I turn now to the Engine Shed. We have heard moving, eloquent and passionate speeches from all the members who have contributed to the debate. Incidentally—and I do not often say this—it is sad that there are so few members in the chamber tonight. Be that as it may, we have heard from the members who have contributed that the Engine Shed is a social enterprise that has helped many young people with learning disabilities to gain skills in a real work environment and which has supported them to move on to mainstream paid employment. Sarah Boyack and Jim Eadie described the Engine Shed’s work in detail.
Partly because of changes in funding from the City of Edinburgh Council, the company has decided that it will no longer be financially viable and has taken the decision to cease its operation in 2015. I understand that the current position has arisen in part as a result of the council’s adoption of the supported employment model, to which Sarah Boyack and Jim Eadie alluded.
We support the development of supported employment services, and we recognise that local government is best placed to implement that approach locally on the ground. As members have said, we are told by the council that the move will enable funding to help around twice the number of disabled people in the city. Given that—as I said—the employment rates for disabled people are so low, any increase in that number is a welcome change.
As has been said, and as Mr Hood has confirmed, the Engine Shed has made strenuous attempts to join the said consortium. Sarah Boyack alluded to the fact that, thus far, those attempts have been unsuccessful, but I hope that the City of Edinburgh Council will consider the matter further. I will ensure that I send a copy of the Official Report of the debate to the chief executive of the council, to convey the clearly expressed views of members from across the chamber that the issue should be looked at further if possible.
A range of potential business support is available from Scottish Enterprise and Just Enterprise, which is the Scottish Government’s business development service for voluntary bodies and charities. In addition, we have invested £320,000 per annum in the supporting social enterprise alliance, which involves Senscot, Social Firms Scotland and Social Enterprise Scotland and which is an intermediary group that is funded to support the development and growth of social enterprises. We recognise the difficulties that such bodies face in remaining viable.
I understand that the Engine Shed has 13 employees who are at risk of redundancy and that 28 February next year is the expected redundancy date. The Scottish Government’s partnership action for continuing employment initiative, which is known as PACE, is dedicated to helping individuals and employers by providing the advice and support that people need when faced with redundancy. PACE services have been offered and I understand that the delivery of support activities by PACE commences this month. A PACE presentation will be delivered onsite by Skills Development Scotland and Jobcentre Plus advisers on 8 December. Other PACE support services will be on offer, including one-to-one interviews and workshops, at the request of the affected employees.
I am grateful that the services of PACE have been made available to the Engine Shed, but will the minister ensure that PACE speaks to Remploy, which has a good record in preparing people with a learning disability for job interviews to give them the confidence and skills that they need when seeking to gain employment in the marketplace?
Yes, I will certainly take up Mr Eadie’s suggestion. I think that PACE is probably planning to do so in any event. I have met Remploy and I am aware of the excellent services that it can provide.
In relation to Blindcraft in Edinburgh, of the 26 disabled people who left and sought new jobs, 17 have entered work or education. That is not enough, but it is a significant number. The closure of Remploy in Edinburgh had a huge impact, with only 11 of the 27 who lost their jobs being in work today.
We can all agree that we need to do more in Scotland to assist disabled people in general with employment, whether that is in supported employment or supported businesses. That is one of the most serious challenges in Scotland today; indeed, that was the sentiment that I expressed at the count when I was declared re-elected, because I feel that it is of such importance.
I pledge to do everything that I possibly can, working with Sarah Boyack, Jim Eadie, my ministerial colleague Marco Biagi, who has stayed for the debate, and Cameron Buchanan. Political parties are entirely irrelevant in this matter, which is about doing the right thing by disabled people and using the vast resources of Scotland to do far better. I feel ashamed that we have not been able to do more to get a better outcome. We must do better in future.
Meeting closed at 18:08.Previous
Decision Time