Private sector = corruption. (?)

[reohn2]

...... the NCB being responsible for Aberfan.....

But the Aberfan slagheap was put there by private mine owners long before the mining industry was nationalised,as were the many,many other slagheaps in other mining areas which the cost fell upon the NCB(the country's taxpayers)to make safe after Aberfan,along with the many open mine shafts up and down the land which needed making safe when private mine owners walked away!
And don't forget the diabolical condition miners worked in under private mine ownership,the most dangerous job a man could do,before nationalisation of the coal industry!

EDIT:- BTW I'm also reminded of the Welsh private slate mine slag heaps just left when the mines closed,been to Llanbris lately?

[Ben@Forest]

...... the NCB being responsible for Aberfan.....

But the Aberfan slagheap was put there by private mine owners long before the mining industry was nationalised,as were the many,many other slagheaps in other mining areas which the cost fell upon the NCB(the country's taxpayers)to make safe after Aberfan,along with the many open mine shafts up and down the land which needed making safe when private mine owners walked away

That may be true but there had been repeated complaints to the NCB which they ignored. Poignantly one of the petitionss to sort the slag heap out had come from children at the school.

[pwa]

...... the NCB being responsible for Aberfan.....

But the Aberfan slagheap was put there by private mine owners long before the mining industry was nationalised,as were the many,many other slagheaps in other mining areas which the cost fell upon the NCB(the country's taxpayers)to make safe after Aberfan,along with the many open mine shafts up and down the land which needed making safe when private mine owners walked away

That may be true but there had been repeated complaints to the NCB which they ignored. Poignantly one of the petitionss to sort the slag heap out had come from children at the school.

Aberfan is a stain on the Labour government of the time and on the NCB. There can be no dodging that, though it is so long ago that its relevance to this discussion may be distant. For anyone interested, I recently found this piece on Aberfan which poignantly and informatively covers the tragedy, its makings and its aftermath in pictures and words:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/id ... 0a19828c47

[hjd10]

We read much about the private sector. The water boards used to be (well) run by ordinary civil servants on ordinary salaries

You have hit the nail on the head 'ordinary civil servants', those systems are clogged with red tape and full of checkers checking checkers. The private sector brings innovation and how to make a profit, the public sector becomes a bureaucracy that isn't efficient. In a nutshell.

[Oldjohnw]

We read much about the private sector. The water boards used to be (well) run by ordinary civil servants on ordinary salaries

You have hit the nail on the head 'ordinary civil servants', those systems are clogged with red tape and full of checkers checking checkers. The private sector brings innovation and how to make a profit, the public sector becomes a bureaucracy that isn't efficient. In a nutshell.

I must say I'm not seeing much efficiency with the current health services passed to the private sector. Plenty of money for a tiny few, though.

[hjd10]

We read much about the private sector. The water boards used to be (well) run by ordinary civil servants on ordinary salaries

You have hit the nail on the head 'ordinary civil servants', those systems are clogged with red tape and full of checkers checking checkers. The private sector brings innovation and how to make a profit, the public sector becomes a bureaucracy that isn't efficient. In a nutshell.

I must say I'm not seeing much efficiency with the current health services passed to the private sector. Plenty of money for a tiny few, though.

Even when this sort of enterprise happens the government has contract monitoring teams that are there to check compliance, they normally end up trashing the relationships and don’t save any money whatsoever. Government and good contracts don’t go together. ☹️
I’ve seen this happen too much sadly.

[Tangled Metal]

Years ago in had a hearing assessment through the NHS. I had various hospital choices ranging from 9 months to 4 months wait. Under a deal with the local private hospital I got in there under NHS auspices in 3 weeks and still got treated like a private patient when in there. I got given a barista style coffee but got shown in minutes after getting it. So the nurse taking me to the consultant carried my cup for me, can't make your patient lift a finger for themselves in private practice!!!

Anyway, my gp had to explain the funding structure before I'd take that option. Taking money from the NHS afterall. Turns out they had a price for so many patients per year. Above that figure the NHS ended up saving on each patient sent to them. Going there was cheaper and more efficient than sticking with a NHS hospital.

I doubt very much that deal got renewed once ended but private within the nhs can be very efficient and cost saving too.

[Oldjohnw]

When I worked around prisons you could get any information, including financial, for public sector establishments. Much of it was in the public domain. For example, you could get salary details or contract costs.

Then a prison would be made lean to make it attractive for privatisation: the process was called marrket testing. Given that the main costs of running a prison were salaries, staff had to go. (1/3 of staff had gone in the decade to 2010).

The moment it was made private almost nothing was available. Main governor would be the same individual but his salary was now secret. Even though every single penny, as before, came from the Ministry of Justice.

In due course, prisons started to fail because of lack of staff. The government is now, hopelessly, trying to recruit. So even though some individual private establishments work, overall the project has been a complete and expensive disaster. But lessons are not being learned.

It seems to me this is repeated everywhere.

[Ben@Forest]

There's probably no one size fits all in these examples. I know a fencing contractor, he also does fencing work for Network Rail. Working for an organisation like that incurs costs for him; safety, security, possibly additional public liability insurance, probably a mandatory training course for all staff (though I've done a few of those and only one has ever been difficult).

But he is paid a massive rate p/m for the fencing and he didn't quote that, they told him what the rate is. It's an absolute blinder for him but it's taxpayers money. Of course he does a good job and having good fencing is essential but it's way over the odds compared to a 'normal' job. And l guess that's why every government job goes over budget.

[reohn2]

...... the NCB being responsible for Aberfan.....

But the Aberfan slagheap was put there by private mine owners long before the mining industry was nationalised,as were the many,many other slagheaps in other mining areas which the cost fell upon the NCB(the country's taxpayers)to make safe after Aberfan,along with the many open mine shafts up and down the land which needed making safe when private mine owners walked away

That may be true but there had been repeated complaints to the NCB which they ignored. Poignantly one of the petitionss to sort the slag heap out had come from children at the school.

There's no denying that,but my point was that the problem,along with many,many others,was caused by private owners not giving a fig for the people and countryside where they made huge profits.

[Paulatic]

I was told at the time of privatisation there was some legislation already in place to clean up waterways. That was from a kayaking contact who worked as a troubleshooter for United utilities. The guy was never off duty often having to turn back just before putting paddle to water on a trip. Prior to that time vhere was no sign of public sector utilities making the necessary improvements / controls.

This kayaking contact, who has a way with sweeping generalisations, hasn’t been around that long then if he worked for UU. Was he really around in the fifties and sixties or does he remember it different to me.
As a child I grew up along the banks of the river Tees. In the fifties it was a soup of pollution. A number of years ago I took a pleasure boat trip up the tees with an uncle who is dead now. As we sailed up he could point out and name where every business had been and type of pollution they spat out. His first job was at Dorman Long and he described the toilet facilities which was basically a tin sheet spouting into the river.
As for no sign of improvement even as a youth in the sixties I could recognise things were getting cleaner. The reason in part being the Rivers (Prevention of Pollution) Acts 1951 to 1961, and the Control of Pollution Act 1974.
Admittedly progress then didn’t match later legislation but it’s very wrong to say no effort was being taken.

[Bonefishblues]

I was told at the time of privatisation there was some legislation already in place to clean up waterways. That was from a kayaking contact who worked as a troubleshooter for United utilities. The guy was never off duty often having to turn back just before putting paddle to water on a trip. Prior to that time vhere was no sign of public sector utilities making the necessary improvements / controls.

This kayaking contact, who has a way with sweeping generalisations, hasn’t been around that long then if he worked for UU. Was he really around in the fifties and sixties or does he remember it different to me.
As a child I grew up along the banks of the river Tees. In the fifties it was a soup of pollution. A number of years ago I took a pleasure boat trip up the tees with an uncle who is dead now. As we sailed up he could point out and name where every business had been and type of pollution they spat out. His first job was at Dorman Long and he described the toilet facilities which was basically a tin sheet spouting into the river.
As for no sign of improvement even as a youth in the sixties I could recognise things were getting cleaner. The reason in part being the Rivers (Prevention of Pollution) Acts 1951 to 1961, and the Control of Pollution Act 1974.
Admittedly progress then didn’t match later legislation but it’s very wrong to say no effort was being taken.

The issue is now much more centred around run off as opposed to discharges, which are rare. So water looks clean, but isn't. Feargal Sharkey is worth following on this.

[Oldjohnw]

The Good Law Project has now received the go-ahead to take HMG to court over failure to comply with government rules about issuing contracts.

https://goodlawproject.org/news/unpubli ... ermission/

[Jdsk]

Yes.

Please consider donating.

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

My Little Crony
https://sophieehill.shinyapps.io/my-little-crony/

Jonathan