Child Protection Privatisation Plans.

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27452457

All the Tory supporters here on AB...do you think this is a good idea, given the record of privatisations lately ? Who should be allowed to bid for these new contracts then...ATOS or G4S perhaps ?

[Brenden]

No mikey I shudder at the thought of it going private after seeing what some privatised nursing homes for the elderly are capable of doing (for profit) .

[mikey4444]

Thanks Brenden. Yes, its shocking that our Tory Government should even be thinking about this, let alone making plans. Shame on Cameron and his ilk.

[mushroom25]

Maria Colwell.
Victoria Climbie.
Baby P.
Daniel Pelka.

you might find what's being proposed distasteful, but can you truly say that 30 year's worth of lessons have been properly learned and the present system is 100% fit for purpose?

[mikey4444]

Its certainly not fit for purpose mush and nobody would claim that it was.

But do you really think that giving over complete control of the enormously
complicated area of Child Protection to a private company, whose main aim is to increase profits for its shareholders, is going to make things better ? Not even Lady Voldemort, in our worst nightmares, considered that route to improvement.

This is a daft idea, from a Tory Government that has long run out of good ideas, if it even had any in the first place. Its not about efficiency...its just about saving money, and that is what is disgusting about it.

[woofgang]

not sure if its a good idea or not but most private care homes are run well, its just that its the bad ones that hit the headlines.

[mushroom25]

no of course not.

actually this is one of those issues that could be used to ambush door-stepping politicians next year. always ready to answer questions on Europe, the economy, unemployment, the NHS... but thoroughly unprepared to field questions on (for example) transport policy, or the privatization of care.

[mikey4444]

Then we appear to agree Mush...privatisation of Child Protection is a Bad Idea, and I agree....it is unlikely that an Tory canvasser will come down my street but if he or she does, then I will certainly pose the question.

[Prudie]

It needs to be properly funded and sufficiently staffed by responsible well trained people. Neither an organisation driven by profit nor one that is driven by cost cutting would be likely to fit that requirement so I don't see the difference between it being privatised or government run. Neither would make the grade IMO.

[mikey4444]

But we have a government that thinks its a really good idea for schools to be staffed by unqualified teachers, so what chance do you think we have of relying on these same politicians to make new and sensible changes to Child Protection plans ?

Nil I would guess. Once again, these changes are being planned to save money, not to do the job better, and its bl**dy disgraceful !

[whiskeryron]

Would it not be a good move to put the recently mentioned P.I.E in charge by cutting out the middle man & saving this God forsaken alliance a pile of money?

[mushroom25]

just going off topic, but still to do with our present government's crusade to save money or impose skewed ideology - on Wednesday's midlands today the cameras were afforded access to the "Trojan horse" school in alum rock and it has to be said there was no evidence of islamification, extreme or otherwise. the report ended with a suggestion that the schools may be allowed to rise from the ashes as free schools.

which given mr gove's insane insistence this is the future of education, quite frankly makes the whole issue stink.

[black_cat51]

hi, Mikey444. I think it's very unlikely that you have the skilld for child protection work unless you are already working in it. Thereofre all that will happen is that it will be the same people doing it, just working for a different employer

[andy-hughes]

The minute you give someone a financial incentive to do their job - other than their salary - you have problems.

Instantly, tunnel vision commences - everything comes down to cost, and how to save and reduce it, and that rarely leads to an improvement in any delivery of end-product.

But child protection is not a 'product' and despite the cornerstone of Tory ethics which is to try and run everything like it's a Sainsbury's, and 'competition' always strengthens the 'consumer's 'choice' - even when there are no 'consumers' and no 'choice' - such as health and education.

It will not end well except for the fat cats at the top who will ideally morph into grateful party donors.

[youngmafbog]

It depends what you mean by privatisation.

Handing it over lock stock and barrel is not a good idea. Handing management may well be good if, and I doubt this could happen, civil servants could write a galf decent contract.

G4S? You must be having a laugh.

I aminterested to know why you seem to thjnk all Tories want to privatise everything. This is simply not the case.

[Peter Pedant]

I was pretty appalled I have to say.

as a commentator said: the private firms that have taken over some contracts arent exactly beacons of success

[ludwig]

I agree with what andy-hughes says in principle. What I would like to see is the existing system work better. All of the tragedies mentioned in mushroom's first post were avoidable, if people had just done their f*king jobs properly. Can it really be too hard to make that happen?

[emmie]

child protection in state run institutions hasn't done well has it.
physical, sexual abuse, child protection didnt help Baby Peter, or any of the little ones subjected to horrific abuse. Those in state run care homes,
preyed on by staff, or by the likes of Savile and his ilk.
I don't care for the idea that if its a privatised business that should be a profit making business, protection for children in care, homes should be a priority, well funded, properly managed, with those running the services experts in their field, the homes of whatever description shouldn't be under the banner of a business run by large corporations, faceless at a distant bosses. So not sure privatisation is the answer, but state hasn't done that well either.

[emmie]

these were state run, however i am not sure i like the idea that a business takes over homes in this way, not run by the likes of ATOS, they have already proved they are not a company to be trusted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-25637486

[Gromit]

What tends to happen when local services are privatised is that a big management company such as Serco put in a bid of many hundreds of millions of pounds. Local companies who could actually do the job much better are not big enough to bid for national contracts. So bids come frome the usual suspects, Serco etc.

They get the contract and then re-employ most of the people who were doing the job before but on far worse contracts. The service goes to pot, the clients are unhappy and complain to their MPs and they scheme gets shelved.

The Coalition will finished soon (if it hasn't already) and hopefully this waste of time will not happen.

[emmie]

you don't answer the points i have made on state run care, much of it a shambles, read or listen to testimonies from those who have been in care, any number of high profile people, some have had good experiences by being fostered, but many languish on and on, left to their own devices, or abused physically, sexually,