Politics The madness of privatisation

[ferball]

Take the privatisation of electricity to review what works, what doesnt.

Selling the poles & wires when only one set goes past the house is a good example of crazy.

Competition between generators makes sense in theory, minimises gouging.
Then we need to get the power to the user & we battle to know who is responsible, see the renewables farms built & ready to go but it cant access the grid.

The idea anyone can buy power & retail it/maintain it is OK.

Its poles and wires related but don't forget on Black Saturday the Kilmore-Murrundindi fire complex only happened cos SPAusnet skimped on about $100 worth of maintainance in a few different places.

 

[Carringbush2010]

For those who were looking for work before the late 90s, was the Commonwealth Employment Service any good?

Soz for the late reply.

My experience is it was much more efficient purely because it was a much simpler system. ( sometime from 92 for memory)

• Jobs boards were office dividers with cards pinned to them. Of course everything was 'award' or 'junior' rates.
• As soon as you took a job card to the desk in the CES, that was proof enough of your 'job hunting'.
• Your resume was paper copy and you'd need to make copies if an interview was accepted from the prospective employer.

In short the CES was a broker if you will, sure you were allowed to 'cold call' on your own but largely this is how it worked. There wasn't so much scrutiny of your job seeking like it seems there is now (and has been for some time).

There were times that some jobs you were instructed to apply for to qualify for your welfare, so sometimes I took jobs that was a week, two weeks, a day. Still it was money in the pocket and you were still imbursed the difference in welfare (if there was any). So anything with a certain time period didn't mean your welfare was cancelled full stop.

I'd prefer this system to now, where centrelink is the job broker between the two parties instead of putting the responsibility mainly on the prospective employee. (if this is how it works now)

Certainly there were more jobs up for grabs compared to now, as a result of prosperous times for the country and private and public enterprise.

 

[Rotayjay]

Soz for the late reply.

My experience is it was much more efficient purely because it was a much simpler system. ( sometime from 92 for memory)

• Jobs boards were office dividers with cards pinned to them. Of course everything was 'award' or 'junior' rates.
• As soon as you took a job card to the desk in the CES, that was proof enough of your 'job hunting'.
• Your resume was paper copy and you'd need to make copies if an interview was accepted from the prospective employer.

In short the CES was a broker if you will, sure you were allowed to 'cold call' on your own but largely this is how it worked. There wasn't so much scrutiny of your job seeking like it seems there is now (and has been for some time).

There were times that some jobs you were instructed to apply for to qualify for your welfare, so sometimes I took jobs that was a week, two weeks, a day. Still it was money in the pocket and you were still imbursed the difference in welfare (if there was any). So anything with a certain time period didn't mean your welfare was cancelled full stop.

I'd prefer this system to now, where centrelink is the job broker between the two parties instead of putting the responsibility mainly on the prospective employee. (if this is how it works now)

Certainly there were more jobs up for grabs compared to now, as a result of prosperous times for the country and private and public enterprise.

Completely different system it sounds like

 

[Carringbush2010]

Completely different system it sounds like

Probably for the centrelink thread but I gather from reading that thread you are on your own to find work i:e you don't walk into centrelink log onto a pc and there's jobs you can apply for?

As for the privatization model itself, that is a by product of free enterprise i:e capitalism - like we are here. The alternatives are different society models like socialism or communism which in varying degrees is in opposition to free enterprise or entrepreneurship.

 

[Rotayjay]

The SA government has blamed the escape of a prisoner from the recently-privatised Adelaide Remand Centre on the quality, not the quantity, of staff. In the meantime, the government has refused to release the report on the escape (I wonder why!)

I don't believe it was the only cause, but that assertion about quality is not surprising either. I don't mean any disrespect to those who work in privatised entities, but those who actually care about delivering quality services work alongside fools who are poorly trained and don't give a damn. That is the kind of attitude that allows an inmate to rope clothes together and climb out of a high-security prison in the middle of the CBD, like a superhero comic book. What if he was a violent offender determined to 'get back' at his surviving victims?

Those are the consequences of privatisation. Would you trust a private business to provide the police force, the fire brigade or the Australian Defence Force? Would you gamble on that?

 

[Power Raid]

The SA government has blamed the escape of a prisoner from the recently-privatised Adelaide Remand Centre on the quality, not the quantity, of staff. In the meantime, the government has refused to release the report on the escape (I wonder why!)

I don't believe it was the only cause, but that assertion about quality is not surprising either. I don't mean any disrespect to those who work in privatised entities, but those who actually care about delivering quality services work alongside fools who are poorly trained and don't give a damn. That is the kind of attitude that allows an inmate to rope clothes together and climb out of a high-security prison in the middle of the CBD, like a superhero comic book. What if he was a violent offender determined to 'get back' at his surviving victims?

Those are the consequences of privatisation. Would you trust a private business to provide the police force, the fire brigade or the Australian Defence Force? Would you gamble on that?

Yes

The workers of government agencies are effectively "private businesses/ individuals" providing their labour. The equipment of these services are all privatised. So the only change is management systems.

The benefit of segregating operations form governance is the opportunity for better governance.

We've seen the ADF murder civilians in recent times, in Vietnam and no doubt since the very beginning. If government was separate from the ADF, criminal prosecution, proper investigations and change would be brought about instead of covering up.

Same said with prison guard and police brutality.

 

[Rotayjay]

Yes

The workers of government agencies are effectively "private businesses/ individuals" providing their labour. The equipment of these services are all privatised. So the only change is management systems.

The benefit of segregating operations form governance is the opportunity for better governance.

We've seen the ADF murder civilians in recent times, in Vietnam and no doubt since the very beginning. If government was separate from the ADF, criminal prosecution, proper investigations and change would be brought about instead of covering up.

Same said with prison guard and police brutality.

Perhaps my left-wing views have given me too much faith in government

 

[Power Raid]

Perhaps my left-wing views have given me too much faith in government

There is no doubt there are failings in both the private and public sectors. I just take the view and independent regulator and governance is superior to a model where the governance has a conflict of interest or vested interest in sweeping things under the carpet.

 

[00Stinger]

The problem with many government run organizations is that they are run vastly inferior to better private corporations both from an economic and efficiency perspective

Fix that issue rather than blaming governments from privatizing

 

[Kwality]

Yes

The workers of government agencies are effectively "private businesses/ individuals" providing their labour. The equipment of these services are all privatised. So the only change is management systems.

The benefit of segregating operations form governance is the opportunity for better governance.

We've seen the ADF murder civilians in recent times, in Vietnam and no doubt since the very beginning. If government was separate from the ADF, criminal prosecution, proper investigations and change would be brought about instead of covering up.

Same said with prison guard and police brutality.

If only it was as simple as Govt is good/private enterprise is bad?

Is that being taught in our education system?

 

[Kwality]

The problem with many government run organizations is that they are run vastly inferior to better private corporations both from an economic and efficiency perspective

Fix that issue rather than blaming governments from privatizing

Even address why privatisation is an attractive option? Try to put politics to one side.

 

[00Stinger]

Even address why privatisation is an attractive option? Try to put politics to one side.

Privatization is an attractive option as governments can get a quick influx of cash without raising taxes or cutting government funding. Also allows the private company who purchases it to do the dirty work in trimming the fat especially when it comes to staff layoffs. Hence allowing the government to not be the bad guys in essence

 

[Kwality]

Privatization is an attractive option as governments can get a quick influx of cash without raising taxes or cutting government funding. Also allows the private company who purchases it to do the dirty work in trimming the fat especially when it comes to staff layoffs. Hence allowing the government to not be the bad guys in essence

Govts tend to claim they would pay down debt.

 

[00Stinger]

Govts tend to claim they would pay down debt.

And the only way to do it without pissing people off is to privatize

People pay less attention to that than they do taxes being raised and government funding being cut

It's a no win situation really

 

[Kwality]

And the only way to do it without pissing people off is to privatize

People pay less attention to that than they do taxes being raised and government funding being cut

It's a no win situation really

Not spending more than you make ?

 

[Rotayjay]

Privatization is an attractive option as governments can get a quick influx of cash without raising taxes or cutting government funding. Also allows the private company who purchases it to do the dirty work in trimming the fat especially when it comes to staff layoffs. Hence allowing the government to not be the bad guys in essence

All cynical reasons for gutless politicians

 

[Kwality]

All cynical reasons for gutless politicians

Reflects the hip pocket nerve of the general public.
Would expect their grandchildren to pay for their lifestyle, but the next generation, no worries.

Shorten offered tax increases, who?

 

[Power Raid]

Privatization is an attractive option as governments can get a quick influx of cash without raising taxes or cutting government funding. Also allows the private company who purchases it to do the dirty work in trimming the fat especially when it comes to staff layoffs. Hence allowing the government to not be the bad guys in essence

agree

one of the biggest threats to democracy and the economy is state government unions. they have a lot of power and prevent change within government organisations (sometimes a positive as well as a negative).

Obviously sacking staff is almost impossible and yes it is handed to private enterprise for this reason. Hey, even a simple government decision needs to be outsourced to EY or PWC, so government can say "don't blame us, it wasn't our idea".

 

[00Stinger]

Not spending more than you make ?

So cutting public funding to reduce expenditure or increasing taxes to increase revenue?



Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk

 

[00Stinger]

All cynical reasons for gutless politicians

Give me your business plan then

Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk

 

[Kwality]

So cutting public funding to reduce expenditure or increasing taxes to increase revenue?



Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk

Not increasing the deficit year on year, aka expecting your grandkids to pick up the tab

 

[Caesar]

Hey, even a simple government decision needs to be outsourced to EY or PWC

Or even a real consulting firm

 

[Rob]

The SA government has blamed the escape of a prisoner from the recently-privatised Adelaide Remand Centre on the quality, not the quantity, of staff. In the meantime, the government has refused to release the report on the escape (I wonder why!)

I don't believe it was the only cause, but that assertion about quality is not surprising either. I don't mean any disrespect to those who work in privatised entities, but those who actually care about delivering quality services work alongside fools who are poorly trained and don't give a damn. That is the kind of attitude that allows an inmate to rope clothes together and climb out of a high-security prison in the middle of the CBD, like a superhero comic book. What if he was a violent offender determined to 'get back' at his surviving victims?

Those are the consequences of privatisation. Would you trust a private business to provide the police force, the fire brigade or the Australian Defence Force? Would you gamble on that?

Personally no, but i'm not naive enough to think that those services aren't capable of mega * ups simply because they're government controlled.

A lot of the arguments (both ways) are based on ideology and personal agendas rather than actual evidence of the point they're trying to make. Would the same mistakes have been made at the Adelaide Remand Centre if it remained in state control? Maybe. You are unlikely to have evidence that it wouldn't have. Look at robodebt or the Brereton report - both happened within government controlled entities. I don't think either are evidence that privatisation of those services would have done any better though.

 

[Power Raid]

Personally no, but i'm not naive enough to think that those services aren't capable of mega fu** ups simply because they're government controlled.

A lot of the arguments (both ways) are based on ideology and personal agendas rather than actual evidence of the point they're trying to make. Would the same mistakes have been made at the Adelaide Remand Centre if it remained in state control? Maybe. You are unlikely to have evidence that it wouldn't have. Look at robodebt or the Brereton report - both happened within government controlled entities. I don't think either are evidence that privatisation of those services would have done any better though.

I feel F ups happen in both. The question is, who governs? The operator or should that function be separate?

 

[00Stinger]

Not increasing the deficit year on year, aka expecting your grandkids to pick up the tab

And without increasing taxes, cutting expenses or selling assets how would you suggest to make this possible?

Liberals like to say labor increase taxes which people don't like. Then Labor say the Liberals will cut spending on essential services. That leaves only one option left which is selling off assets