Where will the cuts fall

Thrugelmir

Generali wrote: »

As the UK doesn't seem to be building an empire, history tells us that if the debt continues to rise then default is the most likely next step.

And financial history is littered with such examples. More than people seem to realise.

Generali

Thrugelmir wrote: »

And financial history is littered with such examples. More than people seem to realise.

Indeed. Most industrialised countries defaulted in the 1930s for example. Greece has spent more of the past 150 years in default than out of it:eek:.

michaels

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Central Government could learn a lot from the outsourcing providers. Arguably the work could then be retained in house. Rather than contracting out.

In the prisons, the govt ran 'competitions' to see who would run some prisons. The existing public sector management/staff were allowed to bid and generally somehow managed to offer to go from 'business as usual' costing double digit percent more than the private sector bids to very close to the private sector bids.

In the light of this rather than going through the time and expense of competing all the prisons (which then comes with all the contractual issues of a private supplier), the cost reductions identified in the bidding process in the public sector bids were turned into a new operating model and rolled out through out the estate, resulting in the large savings per prisoner being demanded by the treasury being met ahead of schedule.

BobQ

michaels wrote: »

In the prisons, the govt ran 'competitions' to see who would run some prisons. The existing public sector management/staff were allowed to bid and generally somehow managed to offer to go from 'business as usual' costing double digit percent more than the private sector bids to very close to the private sector bids.

In the light of this rather than going through the time and expense of competing all the prisons (which then comes with all the contractual issues of a private supplier), the cost reductions identified in the bidding process in the public sector bids were turned into a new operating model and rolled out through out the estate, resulting in the large savings per prisoner being demanded by the treasury being met ahead of schedule.

Such a policy might work once but what private firm would be willing to incur expensive bid costs for future competitions if they were just being used to baseline public sector costs? Also how could public sector policy of fair competition be sustained if it issued invitations to tender without much likelihood of a contract being placed unless you significantly undercut an in house bid?

Generali

BobQ wrote: »

Such a policy might work once but what private firm would be willing to incur expensive bid costs for future competitions if they were just being used to baseline public sector costs? Also how could public sector policy of fair competition be sustained if it issued invitations to tender without much likelihood of a contract being placed unless you significantly undercut an in house bid?

What you say is true but doesn't match what michaels is saying.

You can't set up a bidding process which guarantees an outcome for one of the bidders. I think this is a great idea as it keeps the bidders honest. I have heard several Government suppliers say that they load Government bids to make them higher than they would otherwise be in the knowledge that everyone is doing the same thing. This is a way of stopping that.

Tromking

michaels wrote: »

In the prisons, the govt ran 'competitions' to see who would run some prisons. The existing public sector management/staff were allowed to bid and generally somehow managed to offer to go from 'business as usual' costing double digit percent more than the private sector bids to very close to the private sector bids.

In the light of this rather than going through the time and expense of competing all the prisons (which then comes with all the contractual issues of a private supplier), the cost reductions identified in the bidding process in the public sector bids were turned into a new operating model and rolled out through out the estate, resulting in the large savings per prisoner being demanded by the treasury being met ahead of schedule.

You fail to mention that most prisons in England and Wales are now providing a total basket case service of course.
Any idiot can reduce the head count of frontline staff and boast that large savings per prisoner are being made.

Generali

Tromking wrote: »

You fail to mention that most prisons in England and Wales are now providing a total basket case service of course.

On what basis?

Tromking

Generali wrote: »

On what basis?

I think this covers it.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/justice-committee/news/report-prisons-planning-and-policies/

Generali

Tromking wrote: »

I think this covers it.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/justice-committee/news/report-prisons-planning-and-policies/

It doesn't seem that damning TBH apart from the increased suicides. That's more a reflection of all societies that I have seen that treat mental illness as a criminal rather than a health problem.

Tromking

Generali wrote: »

It doesn't seem that damning TBH apart from the increased suicides. That's more a reflection of all societies that I have seen that treat mental illness as a criminal rather than a health problem.

I would politely suggest that you have not scrutinised the select committees findings close enough. You can take it or leave it, our prisons are in crisis.