The government has come up with new plans to improve the education of excluded children. Part of the plans will involve letting private or voluntary agencies run pupil referral units. Is it just me or is the government's answer to everything to open it up to private competition? Does this approach actually work? Are we eroding the welfare state bit by bit?

I agree Sineon, it certainly seems to be the government's answer to everything! it would be interesting to hear if the problems do get solved - and if so, how?

'Sponsored by tesco's ' comes to mind, mum can work on the checkout to get her tax credits whilst wayward child fulfills his obligations in a portacabin in tesco's car park. ( cynacism is all that's left i'm afraid)

Now if Tesco sponsored the portacabin on the child's school site then maybe that would be ok as long as his school had his own social worker perhaps also sponsored by Tesco but then Cadbury's would be better and then staff could have chocolate to compensate for pulling their hair out. And just think it will be until their 18 soon yippee......lots more choccie bars !!!

I'm not always sure how useful admission to failure is, which is what it seems like this is. And as mentioned in the article, I'm not sure it's true anyways.

Having worked with volunteers in various community and young people organsiations for the past 10 years, most people have expressed doubt about the accountability when work is farmed out from local authority or better yet the NHS to private companies. At least when work is commissioned to voluntary orgs/charities, there's an added level of accountability from their membership and governing bodies. Who holds private companies to account? One of the complaints I used to get was if it's a private company, who can patients complain to? Are private companies obliged to listen or take on board views and opinions of the public they serve?

A great opportunity for voluntary orgs/charities with this sort of thing, provided they don't get shafted in the process. There are some great alternative schools and programmes out there. I think the key is to review what good practice there is going on in PRUs and allow them to continue this work and perhaps targetting the bottom 5-10%. The problem I've seen repeatedly with work around excluded/NEET/at risk young people is that the things that work don't get identified and don't get repeated. So all of that good practice is lost and it becomes like re-inventing the wheel.

Also, if privatisation is on the cards, what lessons can be learned from previous experiences?