Now, personally I've long believed in that. unlike many of my lefty mates, I don't believe that the state should have a monopoly on the provision of services. I think that the best provider should provide it, I don't really care who it is that provides it so long as it is there. In my view, the role of the state is to ensure that those most in need are provided for, and to provide that service if it is the best provider, but I don't think it should be the only option.
But, as ever, the coalition government under Cameron makes plans and outlines them in purest conservative philosophy and dogma. Personally, I think his statement that "The state will still have a role in ensuring "fair funding, ensuring fair competition, and ensuring that everyone - regardless of wealth - gets fair access" is as much bollocks as David Willett's promise to ensure that poor children can reach the best universities. The problem was that the key question was the last asked and he ducked it without being held to account.