Privatisation gone too far - SV650.org

10-05-06, 09:14 AM

Think this is wrong.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/10052006/17...atisation.html

10-05-06, 09:42 AM

Why so? - Be interested to hear your views on it

10-05-06, 09:49 AM

Private companies primary function is to return a profit for either individuals or shareholders. Look at the state of the railways OK these companies inherited an infrastructure that had been underfunded by continuous governments.

When it comes to rescue services I feel they should be left in the hands of a non profit organisation. Would you be happy to see the ambulance or police service privatised

10-05-06, 10:15 AM

It's the way the public sector is going i'm afraid mate

the NHS is full of contracted services from cleaning to disposal. The military (my area of knowledge) is also full of contractors making a mint off the MoD. This is just a logical step in the direction that it's already going.

I personaly can undertsand the logic behind it; it works out cheaper per anumm (blame the accountants for this one) whilst not necessarily costing less over the period.

It means that capital investment i.e buildings/helicopters etc gets put in place which due to in year affordability, won't happen with Govt funding,

And it also releases highly paid pilots, to go back to doing what they should be doing, which is employed from deck by the RN.

However, I agree entirely that the motive for a contractor is profit. I am closely involved in a particular set of negotiations under the defence training review - goggle that and see what you come up with. The essense of it is that training will take place under 50% contractor auspices.

You hit the nail square on the head when you say "inherited underfunded infrastructure" The **** poor maintainance of the country's infrastructure and the unwillingess to pay for it's upkeep has lead all governments of whatever persuasion to follow this route - private money is effectively borrowed to fund the continued provision of the service, as it was always "too expensive" to maintain it with govt cash.

Likewise, parking decriminalisation is one area of unease that I feel. Performance related pay for contracted traffic wardens? Not an ideal proposal, but one that is followed. The traffic enforcement contractors keep a percentage of ticket monies recovered. No contractor in their right mind is going to say "lets keep tickets right down this year ay?" - so i understand your concern.

In my experience, some of these partnerships work, and some are utterly shoddy. I hope this one works out for the better.

10-05-06, 09:14 AM	#1
sharriso74 Guest Posts: n/a	Privatisation gone too far Think this is wrong. http://uk.news.yahoo.com/10052006/17...atisation.html

10-05-06, 09:42 AM	#2
hoodlum Guest Posts: n/a	Why so? - Be interested to hear your views on it

10-05-06, 09:49 AM	#3
sharriso74 Guest Posts: n/a	Private companies primary function is to return a profit for either individuals or shareholders. Look at the state of the railways OK these companies inherited an infrastructure that had been underfunded by continuous governments. When it comes to rescue services I feel they should be left in the hands of a non profit organisation. Would you be happy to see the ambulance or police service privatised

10-05-06, 10:15 AM	#4
hoodlum Guest Posts: n/a	It's the way the public sector is going i'm afraid mate the NHS is full of contracted services from cleaning to disposal. The military (my area of knowledge) is also full of contractors making a mint off the MoD. This is just a logical step in the direction that it's already going. I personaly can undertsand the logic behind it; it works out cheaper per anumm (blame the accountants for this one) whilst not necessarily costing less over the period. It means that capital investment i.e buildings/helicopters etc gets put in place which due to in year affordability, won't happen with Govt funding, And it also releases highly paid pilots, to go back to doing what they should be doing, which is employed from deck by the RN. However, I agree entirely that the motive for a contractor is profit. I am closely involved in a particular set of negotiations under the defence training review - goggle that and see what you come up with. The essense of it is that training will take place under 50% contractor auspices. You hit the nail square on the head when you say "inherited underfunded infrastructure" The **** poor maintainance of the country's infrastructure and the unwillingess to pay for it's upkeep has lead all governments of whatever persuasion to follow this route - private money is effectively borrowed to fund the continued provision of the service, as it was always "too expensive" to maintain it with govt cash. Likewise, parking decriminalisation is one area of unease that I feel. Performance related pay for contracted traffic wardens? Not an ideal proposal, but one that is followed. The traffic enforcement contractors keep a percentage of ticket monies recovered. No contractor in their right mind is going to say "lets keep tickets right down this year ay?" - so i understand your concern. In my experience, some of these partnerships work, and some are utterly shoddy. I hope this one works out for the better.