By Robert Templeton
Social Work England is raising its fees while also receiving extra government funding. That combination highlights a fundamental question about the kind of regulator social work needs.A credible regulator cannot depend on the flotsam and jetsam of shifting political tides.
Independence requires stable and transparent funding from the profession it regulates.
Regulation is about protecting the public, not the profession
There is a common misunderstanding that regulation exists to, or at least has some role in, promoting the profession. It does not. Its purpose is to protect the public.When a regulator drifts into advocacy, roles blur, expectations rise and public trust erodes.
The profession’s voice should come from membership bodies like the British Association of Social Workers (BASW) and perhaps, one day, from a strong professional college.
The regulator’s role is simpler and sharper. It should keep the register accurate, set and maintain education standards and address malpractice fairly and promptly. Do that well, and both the public and the profession gain confidence.
Poor experiences of regulation
The comments under a recent Community Care article about Social Work England show just how damaging regulation can be when it falls short.Social workers talked about fitness to practise cases dragged out for years, ending in no action but leaving them stuck in limbo, carrying stress and reputational damage the whole time. They referred to renewal applications collapsing because of system errors, with months of chasing while people’s livelihoods are left hanging in the balance. They talk about receiving support that felt more like a script than genuine help and cases that changed hands again and again.
While these are individual cases, and Social Work England will have its own side to these stories, reports such as these do not support public protection.
Why independence matters
Funding that depends on political decisions is unstable. Ministers change, budgets move and priorities shift. Instability shows most clearly in fitness to practise cases, where timeliness and case handling are persistent weaknesses across all regulators.Independence cannot guarantee perfect outcomes, but it creates the conditions for fairness and timeliness. Predictable and ring-fenced income allows a regulator to recruit and retain investigators, case managers and legal staff. It supports strong triage, early resolution, where risk is low, and clear reporting on how long each stage takes.
Frequent government cash injections – in Social Work England’s case, to tackle fitness to practise backlogs - do the opposite. They invite political pressure and crowd out long-term investment.
The fees question
This will be unpopular with practitioners, but good regulation costs money. Fees will rise.Social Work England’s renewal fee has increased from £90 to £120 this year. For comparison, the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) charges just over £123 a year, the Nursing and Midwifery Council £120 and the General Medical Council £463.
Salaries differ, but the principle is the same across healthcare: the profession funds its own regulator. Social work is an exception.
The need to show value
If registrants were to fund the regulator, value would need to be visible. Spending would need be clearly broken down across the register, education standards and fitness to practise.Performance measures that matter would have to be published in plain view. These should include how long cases take, how often early resolution is achieved and how many cases conclude without a full hearing where that is safe and fair.
While such data is collected now, it needs to be clearer, more detailed and fully transparent.
Respecting both the public and social workers
Efficiency and treating people well are fundamental to good regulation. Social Work England would need to manage its workload – which, admittedly, has far exceeded expectations - so that backlogs are cleared quickly and never allowed to build up again. Timeliness is key, and is the difference between protecting the public and leaving practitioners and the people they serve in damaging uncertainty.This also means treating both registrants and complainants with respect and supporting them through the process. The aim should be to help both sides reach a swift and fair resolution.
Learning from fitness to practise cases
Regulation should not end with individual outcomes. Social Work England should take the themes and practice issues that appear through its work and feed them back to employers, educators and professional bodies. That way what is learned from fitness to practise can inform training, workplace standards and professional development.Social Work England does some of this already. It publishes reports on education standards and has begun to share themes from fitness to practise cases. It also states that it aims to support both registrants and complainants.
However, regulatory watchdog the Professional Standards Authority, while finding Social Work England met 17 of its 18 standards last year, has criticised its performance on the timeliness of fitness to practise cases. And, as set out above, many social workers report poor communication, uncertainty and stress.
The acknowledgement is there, but improvement is essential. A regulator funded entirely by its registrants must deliver consistently on timeliness, communication and feedback if it is to be trusted.
What Social Work England should stop doing
If the regulator were funded by registrants, ensuring independence,, it would need to stay in its lane. That means regulating, not campaigning. It means maintaining the register, setting education standards and managing fitness to practise.It does not mean improvement programmes, employer standards or campaigning work that properly belongs to employers and BASW.
The clearer the remit, the clearer the budget, and the stronger the accountability.
Representation and the profession's missing voice
Perhaps part of the problem is that social work has a chronic representation problem. Too few practitioners join the professional body, leaving the national voice thin.BASW has grown but represents around a fifth of registrants. This is significantly less than is the case for similar bodies in equivalent professions, such as nursing, physiotherapy or occupational therapy. Perhaps not coincidentally, these bodies have a broader set of functions, whether as trade unions or as colleges that are guardians professional standards.
The College of Social Work (2012-15) failed because it could not attract enough members to fund itself. That vacuum has led some social workers to expect the regulator to speak for the profession. It cannot and should not.
Investing in the profession
Paying for good independent regulation and paying for, and shaping, a strong professional voice should not be seen as a burden but an investment; an investment in our own profession.A stronger professional body makes the profession more robust. It can stand up for itself with authority, secure better working conditions and deliver better outcomes for the people social work serves.
The regulator protects the public. The professional body champions the profession. Social workers need both.
Lessons from history
I qualified in 1994, when Virginia Bottomley, a former social worker, was health secretary and responsible for the profession, and there was no national register. Four years earlier, she had called for streetwise grandmothers to become social workers.Since then, I have seen regulators created, abolished and reshaped. The General Social Care Council brought a national register, but it was scrapped in 2012 in the coalition government’s “bonfire of the quangos”, with its role passing to the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), which already regulated 15 professions.
During its tenure, from 2012-19, social work was the biggest profession HCPC regulated. While this created parity with other professions it, felt like a snake that had swallowed an egg. The swallowing was fine; it was the digestion that hurt.
The College of Social Work promised a strong voice for the profession but failed when the sums did not add up.
The statutory review of Social Work England
The upcoming statutory review of Social Work England is an opportunity to choose: a regulator pulled along by politics, or one with the independence and focus to protect the public fairly and consistently.But independence comes at a price and paying it is the profession’s investment in its own future.
Robert Templeton is a social worker who served on the HCPC Council from 2012-19
