Education and welfare systems must be examined

IT sticks in my throat to say that I agree with David Cameron, but he is correct that something has to be done about the legions of youths leaving school who have no intention of joining the rest of us working for a living yet who manage to sustain themselves by manipulating the benefits system (“Cameron calls for chance to ‘finish the job’”, The Herald, October 3). I disagree with his proposed solution to the problem by cutting benefits. What needs to be addressed are the factors that lead to these young adults being forced to make the decision to opt out from what most of us would consider to be meaningful lifestyles.

These children and their parents must shoulder much of the blame for lack of ambition and direction but one must question the performance of the educational system that was charged with preparing these youngsters for adulthood. What is the point of compelling adolescents to remain in education for whatever length of time when it is as plain as a pikestaff that the system does not cater for the requirements of a significant percentage of those it processes?

I also wonder how many Herald readers would be excited and motivated by a potential future career as a zero-hours shelf-stacker on minimum wages that are insufficient to sustain a decent standard of living? At the same time a benefits system that appears to allow parents to abandon responsibility for their offspring and dump them on the state presumably because they themselves suffered the same fate is just not right.

The problem Mr Cameron and any government must solve is not what to do with our Neets (Not in Education, Employment, or Training) but how to stop them being created in the first place.