Current Affairs The Conservative Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
Because of where the money goes.

Under public ownership, you pay your taxes, the Government spends it on people to do a job, and then those people pay taxes. The money usually stays within the system and there is usually good control on spending (ie: money is actually spent where its needed).

Under the British model of outsourcing, you pay your taxes, the Government hires a firm to do a job, they pay the minimum required to do the job and keep as much as possible for themselves. This means that the service is usually worse, the people providing the service are paid less (and therefore more likely to require help themselves from the state, like tax credits and housing benefit), and the money goes out of the system - either to foreign owners, to shareholders, into directors' bank accounts or just moved offshore.

The thing that baffles me about the British model of outsourcing is that our ruling class are supposedly educated in the Classics; what we are doing now is exactly what the Roman tax farmers used to do - and they used to provoke actual wars on a regular basis by doing it.

You make it sound like Governments are actually good at spending money well. When did that start?

As for the outsourcing, proves the point. They have a cartel of businesses that spread themselves so thinly to mop up the contracts, they are bound to come up short. Capita, G4S, this latest one.

Its the same side of the coin. Governments are hopeless at spending money.
 
When my partner started out in nursing five years ago you would normally have five patients to each nurse on the ward. Last weekend she was the only nurse on a ward with sixteen patients. It’s now at the point that she rarely ever gets to eat during her twelve hour shifts, and has stopped even bothering to make lunch to take in. The dermatology ward she is on is now totally full of regular hospital patients because there are so few beds.

It’s a disgrace.
 
When my partner started out in nursing five years ago you would normally have five patients to each nurse on the ward. Last weekend she was the only nurse on a ward with sixteen patients. It’s now at the point that she rarely ever gets to eat during her twelve hour shifts, and has stopped even bothering to make lunch to take in. The dermatology ward she is on is now totally full of regular hospital patients because there are so few beds.

It’s a disgrace.

Is that funding or management though? (I know there are winter pressures on beds btw)

My old man was in and out of the Bristol BRI the other month with a lung issue. Being the bloke he is, he made friends with the nurses, and they told him they prefer the 12 hour shifts cos they get to see patients "through" more often than the 8 hour ones.
 
Is that funding or management though? (I know there are winter pressures on beds btw)

My old man was in and out of the Bristol BRI the other month with a lung issue. Being the bloke he is, he made friends with the nurses, and they told him they prefer the 12 hour shifts cos they get to see patients "through" more often than the 8 hour ones.

I think it’s a combination of both.

Money doesn’t fix everything but the reality is that more money for more nurses would improve patient safety, and staff wellbeing.

She was telling me last week that she paged a doctor because one of her patients was having a suspected stroke. His response was that he was simply too busy to even get there within half an hour. Luckily it turned out the woman wasn’t having a stroke....
 
You make it sound like Governments are actually good at spending money well. When did that start?

As for the outsourcing, proves the point. They have a cartel of businesses that spread themselves so thinly to mop up the contracts, they are bound to come up short. Capita, G4S, this latest one.

Its the same side of the coin. Governments are hopeless at spending money.

They were never that great at it, but between 1945 and 1992 they were far better at it than they are now.
 
Carillion are building the Royal..

and, unfortunately, they got the gig and finished, the new main stand at the Pit. Now at least that would have been good to know the RS had to cough up a bit more to get someone else to finish the job.
 
Vox Political
politics for the people

Conservative policy made Carillion’s failure inevitable. Here’s how it happened






[Image: Reuters].

If this were a movie, it would be called Financial Crisis II: This Time It’s The Outsourcing Firms!


Not the catchiest of titles, This Writer has to admit, but it gets the point across, which is: Carillion went under because its bosses thought it was Too Big To Fail, just like the banks back in 2008.

They were wrong – but I would say this is only because Carillion is the only outsourcing firm to have collapsed – so far.

See, to private companies, government contracts must seem like the perfect scam; the work must be done, so the money will keep flowing. And let’s face it – the Conservatives worked really hard to keep Carillion afloat, even after the profit warnings started arriving.

This is because Tories are determined that private companies must be the best possible option for running public services – even when the evidence tells them the exact opposite.

The ideology held by both Tory government ministers and the company executives who sign contracts with them is that profits are to be privatised and losses nationalised – if anything goes wrong, public money will pay for it.

We see that in every aspect of the way Carillion and the Tories did business.

When people say Government should be run like a business always remember #Carillion and say governments should be run for the people not the 1%.

— Harry Leslie Smith (@Harryslaststand) January 15, 2018



For a start, according to Cabinet Office minister David Lidington, “rules” did not allow the government to consider all information about a company when awarding outsourcing contracts. Apparently this means that the government could not consider the signs of a company’s imminent financial collapse when deciding whether to award a contract to it, which is quite clearly commercial insanity. Who wrote these rules?

The government, of course.

But even when the rules called for caution, they appear to have been ignored. It was known that Carillion had a serious cashflow problem – there were three profit warnings in the last six months – but the Tories still gave contracts to it. The firm, which has debts of £1.5 billion, issued a profit warning in July, but days later it was given an HS2 rail contract worth £1.4 billion and a £158 million MoD deal. Carillion issued a second profit warning in September, and weeks later got a £62 million rail contract. On November 6, Carillion was awarded £320 million of work on Network Rail’s Midland Mainline improvement programme. On November 17, it issued a third profit warning. The Cabinet manual says firms that issue profit warnings are “high risk” and it is against policy to use them. But the contracts were still signed, because Tory policy is that private companies are better than public services – and they are happy to use public money to perpetuate the pretence.

Despite the warnings about #Carillion the Government pumped more and more of tax payers money into its coffers.
A classic case of a private company running out of other people's money.
A public enquiry has to happen!

— Workers In Wales (@WorkersInWales) January 15, 2018



Carillion had a poor record for completing work on time and on-budget because it was overstretched, but despite this poor record of achievement, it continued to win contracts with aggressive bidding that it could not support, we are told. And who loses out?

The public, of course.

Carillion doesn't complete anything on time or on budget. It's too overstretched and too aggressive when bidding for contracts.

— (((Frances Coppola))) (@Frances_Coppola)January 15, 2018



Knowing that it could gain lucrative contracts while providing a poor service and being in financial difficulty provides a huge amount of leeway for questionable behaviour, it seems.

So Carillion raised dividend payments to its shareholders in each of the company’s 16 years in business – for example in 2015 they received £80 million and in 2016, £82.5 million. It changed the rules to protect bosses’ bonuses, right before the company’s financial woes began to bite – a move the Institute of Directors has condemned as “highly inappropriate”, as it allowed top managers to benefit in spite of the collapse of the company for which they were responsible. At the same time, it ran up a £600 million deficit in the pension fund for 27,500 employees.

The company has been short-selling its own stock since 2013 (according to the Financial Times). This is when an investor borrows shares and immediately sells them, hoping he or she can scoop them up later at a lower price, return them to the lender and pocket the difference, an extremely risky and dubious practice.

According to @FT, Carillion have been shorting own stock since 2013. While their boss was advising gov on business responsibility. Mind boggles

— Andrew Baisley (@andrewbaisley) January 15, 2018



At the same time, the chairman of Carillion, Philip Green (not the same man who ran BHS into the ground), was an advisor to David Cameron and Theresa May on corporate responsibility. It seems nobody at the government stopped to think that the two might be mutually exclusive – that a director should not advise on corporate responsibility if his company was short-selling its own stock. But then again, it’s possible that nobody at the government knew. Or cared.

The chairman of #Carillion Philip Green was adviser to both David Cameron and Theresa May on corporate responsibility.
Just let that sink in.

— Tom Pride (@ThomasPride) January 15, 2018



Government may appoint so-called Crown Representatives to outsourcing companies if there are concerns about them. These people review their performance and assess possible risk for the state. But Cabinet Office records show that no Crown Representative had been appointed to Carillion as of September 2017, two months after the company’s first profit warning. Worse still, it seems that out of 35 “strategic suppliers” like Carillion, only 20 have Crown Representatives. It’s possible that the others aren’t considered to be under threat – but if Carillion wasn’t in September last year, this could be a gross misconception.

Shocking negligence by the Tories.

The Public Administration & Constitutional Affairs Committee has just been told that of 35 strategic suppliers (such as #Carillion) only 20 have Crown Representatives, who review performance & risk for the Gov. Will we see another Carillion?

— Jon Trickett (@jon_trickett) January 15, 2018



Note also that Carillion was exempt from the Freedom of Information Act, meaning the public had no way of finding out what this company was doing with public money. Obviously, neither the Tories nor their contractors want members of the public to see that their money is being funnelled into private bank accounts rather than going toward vital public works.

While the government – and David Lidington in particular – seems to be unconvincingly surprised at Carillion’s collapse, others certainly seem to have seen it coming. For example, Richard Howson, director of the company up to the point when its share price tumbled, who benefits from the protected executive payments brought in just before the crisis began, jumped ship last July and is now an executive director of a company working on the Hinkley ‘C’ nuclear power plant. Apparently it is perfectly permissible for an executive who ran one company into the ground to transfer to another, without any questions being asked about his competence or trustworthiness.

It seems hedge funds have profited hugely from Carillion’s failure, having read the signs of imminent collapse and bet on it.

Hedge funds are the winners out of Carillion’s collapse. They saw the demise coming and laid bets that it would happen and they have cleaned up. This is grotesque and no way to conduct public sector contracts.

— Andy McDonald MP (@AndyMcDonaldMP) January 15, 2018



And it seems shareholders in Carillion also happen to be shareholders in its competitors, whose value will rise as a result of the company going into liquidation. They won’t lose out.

The major shareholders in Carillion are also major shareholders in Carillion’s main competitors. The system never loses, just the workers and patients that could be impacted from any fallout.

— Tory Fibs (@ToryFibs) January 14, 2018



But the employees will. And so will the public who were relying on Carillion to honour its 450 government contracts.

What will happen to Carillion’s public service contracts and employees? It seems unlikely that a Tory government would bring them back in-house – so we must assume, for now, that they will be transferred to one of the firm’s competitors. That will boost the new contractor’s share prices, building up a nice bonus for its shareholders. But will this firm (or these firms) suffer the same fate?

What will be done to protect the public money that has been invested in Carillion? That’s our money and, as a nation, we should expect to see a return on it – but the Tory government uses our cash to prop up these useless outsourcing giants, so it seems more likely that it will all go to waste.

What is the Government’s contingency plan in case of Carillion’s failure? Ministers have claimed that one exists – but now their bluff has been called, will they do a ‘David Davis’ and admit they haven’t got one?

Finally, there is one very prominent and public way we can gauge the government’s reaction to the Carillion mess: Chris Grayling handed the firm a contract to work on the HS2 rail link, knowing that the company was in serious financial difficulty. As Justice Secretary, he had previously handed out contracts to run probation services to private companies that were completely unable to do so. The man is clearly incompetent and should be flushed out of the Cabinet forthwith.

And someone needs to ask why Chris Grayling is handing out massive HS2 contracts to Carillion, despite knowing even Wonga wouldn't lend them £50 if they went cap in hand? Is it because he's totally and utterly inept? The most useless Cabinet Minister in living memory.

— Rachael (@Rachael_Swindon) January 14, 2018



If he stays, we’ll know that the Tories couldn’t care less and will carry on funnelling our cash to the privateers, and letting us pay for their failures.

That’s not good enough for the Labour Party, whose members have scented blood and have demanded answers from the Tories.

The collapse of Carillion is a watershed moment. It is time to put an end to the rip-off privatisation policies that have done serious damage to our public services and fleeced taxpayers of billions of pounds.pic.twitter.com/Q9zjU7o3Mq

— Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) January 15, 2018



Carillion becoming another tragic case study in what happens when we privatise profits when things go well and nationalise risks so the taxpayer picks up the bill when things go wrong. Vulture capitalism underwritten by the taxpayer. And don’t forget hedge funds made millions too https://t.co/t804jqNf3c

— David Lammy (@DavidLammy) January 14, 2018



Shadow Business Secretary Rebecca Long Bailey had some strong words for the government in wake of the#Carillion Collapse! No more socialising debt and privatising profits – a root & branch investigation regarding why contracts were awarded despite 3 profit warnings #Forthemany pic.twitter.com/PlcY9Cs1kJ

— WeThePeople (@gaurangmorjaria) January 15, 2018



CARILLION: Shades of a British Enron. Wild overbidding, fast-and-loose & grossly overpaid management, taxpayers taken for a ride, AWOL auditors & pliant/ignorant ministers and officials. This is going to run & run!

— Andrew Adonis (@Andrew_Adonis) January 15, 2018



Carillion have continued to fail to pay off debts, meet deadlines on govt contracts, pay suppliers on time but at the same time paid out £80 million in dividends to shareholders. Greed over governance & as usual, workers & supply chain pay the pricehttps://t.co/0iIPmR0I0S

— Jo Stevens (@JoStevensLabour) January 15, 2018



What we see in the #Carillion collapse is the lethal combination of privatisation and limited liability. The shareholders take the profits – in spades – but pick up neither the debts nor the risk of collapsing services.

— GeorgeMonbiot (@GeorgeMonbiot) January 15, 2018



In their scramble to privatise public services, Tories have been throwing contracts worth billions at this conglomerate, knowing it was failing: ideology and incompetence. https://t.co/JZa3qmqiNX

— Cllr John Edwards (@JohnEdwards33) January 15, 2018



yes and look what is happening – company going to the wall… they take their bonus before they deal with the job they are paid to do….. not one penny of tax payers money should bail out these privatised companies. https://t.co/mAZl0GFewO

— Isobel #PCPEU (@Isobel_waby) January 15, 2018



Maybe JUST maybe the collapse of #Carillion – painful though it is for the workers caught up in it – will be the *tipping point* against the REMORSELESS neo-liberal drive to *privatise* public services .

— Clare Hepworth OBE (@Hepworthclare) January 15, 2018





The government's obsession with outsourcing + privatisation damages our justice sector. Carillion repeatedly failed to carry out basic prison maintenance. Labour had promised to look at bringing repairs back in-house. The government must now do that with the Carillion contracts.

— Richard Burgon MP (@RichardBurgon) January 15, 2018



Carillion is the latest example of the fact that privatisation is a broken model. The government must act quickly and bring these crucial public sector contracts back in-house. pic.twitter.com/si15gyNpdT

— Richard Burgon MP (@RichardBurgon) January 15, 2018



The next Labour Government will introduce provisions to allow local councils to bring their outsourced services back in-house. Never again should public services and the dedicated workforce be put in the position we now find ourselves with Carillion.pic.twitter.com/QyQqrEOCex

— Labour CLG (@LabourCLG) January 15, 2018



The People's Assembly – Carillion collapse highlights need for ending privatisation in the NHShttps://t.co/QFPEMv31fG

— leftlinks (@leftlinks) January 15, 2018



On #Carrillion senior Tory @bernardjenkin tells#r4today that ‘lessons must be learnt’. Indeeed they do.
The private sector running public services does not work and the tax payer (us) lose out in many ways.

— Dr David Wrigley (@DavidGWrigley) January 15, 2018



We now need urgent clarity from Govt on impact of Carillion news on those hospital trusts where Carillion contracted to provide facilities management such as meals & those hospitals in construction. We already have a winter crisis, patients & staff must not suffer even more

— Jonathan Ashworth (@JonAshworth) January 15, 2018
 
It's an utterly absurd situation but it's equally absurd to paint all private companies with the same brush as deservedly used on Carillion. From experience, there are well run public bodies and terribly run public bodies, and the same applies to private companies (and indeed charities). To suggest otherwise is letter political dogma get in the way of reality.
 
I think it's more damning for the current spiv Government on several fronts than anything else, whether that be 'may's advisor on corporate responsibility', the fact that a handful of companies have continually underbid for work (at the expense of the other companies) knowing that they can at a later date get more because they have friends in government, that people's pension contributions can still be used and abused...the list goes on Bruce. Nobody's talking about nationalising Unilever.

It's an utterly absurd situation but it's equally absurd to paint all private companies with the same brush as deservedly used on Carillion. From experience, there are well run public bodies and terribly run public bodies, and the same applies to private companies (and indeed charities). To suggest otherwise is letter political dogma get in the way of reality.
 
I think it's more damning for the current spiv Government on several fronts than anything else, whether that be 'may's advisor on corporate responsibility', the fact that a handful of companies have continually underbid for work (at the expense of the other companies) knowing that they can at a later date get more because they have friends in government, that people's pension contributions can still be used and abused...the list goes on Bruce. Nobody's talking about nationalising Unilever.

Of course. The state do have considerable power courtesy of their procurement of external companies. It's a shame when that procurement favours those who lobby best rather than those who really are the best for the job. Even when there isn't blatant spiv'ery involved, the public sector procurement process is far from ideal and very Kafka'esq at times. Attempts are being made to improve things, but as with so much in the public sector, the attempts are very slow and certainly much slower than the market as a whole.
 
Quite the omnishambles.

660,000 quid/year to the CEO who now clearly ran in into the ground, even after he left the firm.

600 million in pension debt (though they never missed a dividend payment).

And yet:

The faithful still see what they believe

Private companies do go bust, it’s the nature of the risk they take on.....they are however still far more efficient than the equivalent public body......
 
Because of where the money goes.

Under public ownership, you pay your taxes, the Government spends it on people to do a job, and then those people pay taxes. The money usually stays within the system and there is usually good control on spending (ie: money is actually spent where its needed).

Under the British model of outsourcing, you pay your taxes, the Government hires a firm to do a job, they pay the minimum required to do the job and keep as much as possible for themselves. This means that the service is usually worse, the people providing the service are paid less (and therefore more likely to require help themselves from the state, like tax credits and housing benefit), and the money goes out of the system - either to foreign owners, to shareholders, into directors' bank accounts or just moved offshore.

The thing that baffles me about the British model of outsourcing is that our ruling class are supposedly educated in the Classics; what we are doing now is exactly what the Roman tax farmers used to do - and they used to provoke actual wars on a regular basis by doing it.

Indeed. Many things should never be put into the private domain and should remain in the public sector, but that is partly due to the fact that ‘the service’ may be impossible to do competitively.......
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top