Mr. John McKeon:

The research all over the world is the same in that respect. I have read all the research and every piece of research comes to the same conclusion. I am not paid to take a particular approach. I try to be dispassionate about what the data say to me. I do not approach this with a certain view; I ask what the data say and I am relating that to the Senator. There are problems and challenges with Intreo, JobPath and LES. None of us is, or ever will be, perfect.

One has to look at what the overwhelming data say both in terms of the performance outcomes that we published and made available to the committee and customer satisfaction. For example, we have spent a great deal of time discussing personal progression plans at the meeting. We ask people to what extent they agree with the statement that their personal adviser helped them to develop their personal progression plan to set goals and focus on a job. Only 4% disagreed with the statement. When they were asked to rate their plan using a scoring system of zero to five, the average score was 4.57. We have to examine the data. I appeal to the committee to do that. It is easy to take anecdotes and stories and try to design the general out of the exception. By and large, the stories I hear are the exception, not the general, and we have to be careful in how we apply ourselves to the data. If we are serious about evidence-based policy, we have to use the evidence. From day one on this project, we have produced voluminous evidence and we have published voluminous research. Nobody has challenged the research or the data but what I have heard is stories. Do we make policy based on stories or on evidence? I submit that we must make it based on the evidence. The evidence in this respect is strong. If there are cases where JobPath employers do not live up to the standard, I will not refrain from killing them. If they are not doing what they are meant to do - one Deputy mentioned fraud and so on - I will not stand for it as a civil servant.