Public Services (Social Value) Bill

I entirely agree. I was about to say that this is not just about the social enterprise sector. One of the good things about the Bill is that it is about social value wherever the commissioning take place, whether in the public sector, the private sector or the voluntary and community sector. There was perhaps a tendency in the past to limit social value to a particular niche in the market for the voluntary and community sector. That sector does fantastic work, but not exclusively. If we can get social value into some of the big private sector organisations, we will see more productivity and a greater impact. A range of large corporate organisations are recognising that doing good is good business. Getting that combination of people using their existing business model to achieve social action and social change is a big movement in this country. We have heard talk about responsible capitalism. There are moments when something happens in society, and I think that we are at one of those moments. Many big organisations have recognised that for their own sustainability—not for charitable purposes, but to do good business—using their procurement, supply chains, product development and investment for social action in communities will be very beneficial. I think that there will be a move from the traditional corporate social responsibility of doing some charitable work once a year to embedding a social action model at the heart of business, small and large, in this country. It is a development that I welcome hugely. I want to make a few comments about that change. The amendments that my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow West has tabled refer to the definition of social enterprise, which is important, and I hope that the Minister will address it, but I also think that the system currently has barriers to big corporations taking the agenda forward. If we are to have commissioning in the private sector that focuses on social value, we need to think about that. A social enterprise called Create opened its doors in my constituency only a week ago. It provides work opportunities for young people and older people who have been homeless. It brings them through a production kitchen to gain catering skills and provides outside catering services. It is a business that describes itself as being ““for more than profit””, which I think is an interesting description. It started in Leeds and also operates in Doncaster, Liverpool and, now, Salford. In Leeds it now runs a five-star, top-class restaurant—a little like Jamie Oliver's Fifteen—which teaches homeless people catering skills. It has a relationship with Morrisons supermarket, and if the people it trains do not go into catering, they are often job-ready and can go into the work of work. That fabulous partnership works for everyone involved and, increasingly, big companies want to work in that way. Perhaps the Bill can do something to say to the private sector, ““Commissioning for social value is good business for you.”” John Lewis and the Co-op have done that for decades, but I want us to be able to have a range of different examples that are big in retail, manufacturing and the important sectors of our economy that use the power of their businesses, whether employing former offenders and people who have had difficulties in their lives. That is why I pressed the Minister on whether we can have goods and services, because I think the artificial distinction that this is just about services could limit the ability of the big corporate sector to come into this field. That is something that he might think about remedying if there are legislative opportunities in future. When I pressed the Minister in Committee on whether there ought to be a definition of social enterprise, I was grateful for his answer:"““The right hon. Lady's fundamental point is right...there is a spectrum, from pure charitable activity to social businesses. Some blurring of lines might not have mattered until now. She may be right that we have reached the point at which some definition in law is needed.””––[Official Report, Public Services (Social Enterprise and Social Value) Public Bill Committee, 19 October 2011; c. 16.]" He indicated that, in the review of charity law, there were perhaps two legislative opportunities for that. Will the Minister confirm that such a definition is still firmly on his agenda? As we expand the sector and enable the NHS to establish a range of social enterprises, a definition is essential—not a definition that is a straitjacket or exclusive, but a definition that makes it clear to people what we mean by a ““social enterprise””. The Social Enterprise Coalition has done a huge amount of work on what that definition might look like. It talks about organisations that have a clear social or environmental mission, generate the majority of their income in trade and, crucially, reinvest the majority of their profits for community benefit, and organisations that are autonomous and independent, majority-owned and controlled in the interests of their social mission, and accountable and transparent. Those criteria would be a good way of putting into legislation any definition that we might end up with. That would be important, because there is a tendency for people who do not meet those criteria to badge themselves as social enterprises, and many people in the social enterprise sector feel that the brand—if we like—that they have built over the past 30 or 40 years is being tarnished by people who pretend to be social enterprises because they think it will get them into the commissioning framework and reward them with contracts. It would be important also for the public to know that when we are commissioning, with their money through public contracts, we are attempting to achieve the maximum social value. I obviously support the Bill, and I am delighted that we have managed to shepherd it through its various stages. The hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington has done a marvellous job in getting it so far, and for a relatively new Member to have the opportunity, in a private Member's Bill, to change the law is incredible. I, like him, do not want the best to be the enemy of the good; I want to see whether we can make a start. But this is only a start, because when we look at the public services White Paper and at transforming public service delivery with many more providers in different organisational shapes and forms, and when we use public money in particular to commission services, we have a responsibility to ensure that at the core of such work is not just the bottom line or the maximisation of profits for the private sector, but the achievement of as much social, economic, and environmental impact as we can. If we do not do that, we will miss a real opportunity for transformative change. The Bill is a chink of light, but there is the opportunity to do much more, and I hope that the Minister, in his term of office and in his current post, will be able to take the agenda forward. I genuinely think that he supports what we are trying to achieve, but I know that he will struggle with parts of government which find the whole idea of social value and social enterprise anathema. I well remember 10 years ago, as public health Minister, talking to the NHS and to the Department of Health about involving patients, about social enterprises and about different ways of doing our business, and they looked at me as if I was slightly unhinged. Those organisations understood the public sector perfectly well, as they had been running a huge monolithic NHS for ever, and they understood the private sector perfectly well, too, because they understood private companies; what they did not get, between those two models, was the range of organisations that over the next 10 years all of us in our own ways would help to bring to the surface. This Bill is an opportunity to highlight that issue, and I urge the Government to go further and faster—on this agenda, rather than on their economic agenda—[Hon. Members: ““Ah!””] On this agenda, they are probably going too slow, and not deep enough! That is not quite as catchy as ““too far, too fast””, but on this agenda there is a need to go faster, deeper—madder, truly, whatever! I will support the Minister in whatever he can do to strengthen his arm in those debates, and I hope that he will be encouraging when he responds.