Suffolk council plans to outsource virtually all services

chocsessential

bendix wrote: »

Let me guess. You work in a public library in Suffolk . . .

No, ha ha. I am self employed but I care about public services.

carolt

bendix wrote: »

Yes. Ummmm. Because profit is . . . ummmm . . bad.

What, you think profit for private companies, where it's the taxpayers funding it, is good?

Of course profit is bad if it comes from the pockets of taxpayers, for services they previously got from the state for lower cost.

ALIBOBSY

Orpheo wrote: »

it is a pity that we are constantly bombarded with letters asking for "voluntary contributions" £5 for this book, £3 for that book, £8 towards materials for tech, and so on.

To be fair I don't know of any state schools where this doesn't happen either. Or you get the school using private companies to raise cash in state schools- vanity poetry collections-"your childs entry has been selected"-along with all in the school lol, "only £25 for a lovely book of peoms as a memory for your child bla bla".

Or bread making lessons with Warburtons-yes really.

Or disney films and ads on the smart boards.

Plus brochure after brochure of books etc to buy where the school gets a slice of the pie.

ali x

Really2

carolt wrote: »

Of course profit is bad if it comes from the pockets of taxpayers, for services they previously got from the state for lower cost.

If the cost was lower why would they want to outsource it? The idea is to save money not increase costs.

There is nothing to stop the council brining it back in house should they think they can do it cheaper after a contract as ended.

Nothing wrong with competition, if it is truly cheaper to keep it in house they will keep it in house or separate of the service and get them to tender.
I am sure we have all seen "council name" Services Ltd.

carolt

Really2 wrote: »

If the cost was lower why would they want to outsource it? The idea is to save money not increase costs.

There is nothing to stop the council brining it back in house should they think they can do it cheaper after a contract as ended.

Gosh, you're naive.

The aim is not lower costs - the aim is to remove 'big govt' - it's right wing dogma in action.

Plus an opportunity for Tory councillors and their mates/family to make big bucks at our expense.


Should keep Private Eye busy, anyway.

ALIBOBSY

Re librairies I did see a snippet on a prgramme a while ago where some council had effectively sold off the librairies and they had a private company running them at a profit. basically along side the library itself they had a cafe/coffee shop and bookshop/newsagents.

Seemed reasonable to me for something which much though I love reading and our local library is to be honest not an essential service.

ali x

Really2

carolt wrote: »

Gosh, you're naive.

The aim is not lower costs - the aim is to remove 'big govt' - it's right wing dogma in action.

Oh cool, I thought we had a massive deficit that was set to increase for the next 4 years and council pensions in ££££££billions of debt.

Thank goodness for that, the country problems were me just being naive.:j

I will tell my wife later as she works for LG and is currently at risk of redundancy. It will save her doing the interview for her own job.

Generali

carolt wrote: »

Gosh, you're naive.

The aim is not lower costs - the aim is to remove 'big govt' - it's right wing dogma in action.

Oh dear. If this is just the spiteful, dogmatic, 'hate the working classes' stuff that the Tories are going to do then I dread to think what is going to happen to reverse the 'innumerate fck up' that is forever the preserve of British Labour Governments and the duty of the Tories to resolve.

Degenerate

blueboy43 wrote: »

In the context of education, public schools don't seem to have done a bad job considering profit motive was not the objective.

Still, as some are only 1400 years old, its early days.

Yep, and they're so efficient they really get the cost per head down to an affordable level. I don't know why we don't just have tax funded grants to send all kids to independent schools.

Generali

Degenerate wrote: »

Yep, and they're so efficient they really get the cost per head down to an affordable level. I don't know why we don't just have tax funded grants to send all kids to independent schools.

Why not provide education privately with the state transferring funds from rich to poor to allow the poor to be able to pay the fees?