The article first argues that current debates have tended to lose sight of the long tradition of joint work between the probation service and the voluntary sector; examples of such partnerships in the past are presented to help inform the current debate. Five central issues in the debate are then examined. One of the issues being debated is whether or not the tasks of the probation service can be distinguished according to which must be performed by probation professionals and those which can be performed by private persons or organizations. Secondly, there are issues of accountability, which the Home Office may not have fully resolved in its policies. Probation work contracted out to the independent sector is more difficult to monitor; thus, accountability apparently suffers. Thirdly, there is a problem centered in the apparent incompatibility of some of the aims and interests of the probation service and the private organizations who may be performing tasks on behalf of the probation service; this is particularly true when private organizations used to provide alcohol and drug treatment services may not give sufficient priority to criminal justice goals in the treatment regime. A fourth set of issues relates to the nature of the partnerships envisaged and how contracts may constrain the creative dynamic of some of the private organizations. Finally, the issue of funding focuses on the degree to which the probation service can be trusted to sustain financial commitment to a program operated by a private agency. 6 notes and 45 references