The Political Thread

[Old Tankie]

But surely in the example you've just given, it wouldn't be farmed out, would it?  If there's no cost saving, there's no point giving the job to the private sector.  Now, if the job was done for £42, instead of £45, and the 3 quid difference is re-invested in the health service, that would make sense.  Or am I missing something?

[The Legendary Shark]

Back-handers to ministers?

[Old Tankie]

Or some saintly public service employee!!!

[Matt Timson]

But surely in the example you've just given, it wouldn't be farmed out, would it?  If there's no cost saving, there's no point giving the job to the private sector.  Now, if the job was done for £42, instead of £45, and the 3 quid difference is re-invested in the health service, that would make sense.  Or am I missing something?

I'd be very surprised if the surplus 3 quid ended up anywhere near the NHS.  Far more likely that the NHS would be seen to need 3 quid less than it's already getting, I think.

[The Legendary Shark]

Or the prospective shareholders would need £3 more.

[Robin Low]

But surely in the example you've just given, it wouldn't be farmed out, would it?  If there's no cost saving, there's no point giving the job to the private sector.  Now, if the job was done for £42, instead of £45, and the 3 quid difference is re-invested in the health service, that would make sense.  Or am I missing something?

One thing you're missing is that it's not as simple as comparing two numbers. If the private sector can do something more cheaply, you have to ask how it's doing it more cheaply. What's it cutting back on, exactly?

Regards

Robin

[COMMANDO FORCES]

Or how much waste is there in the public sector?

[Proudhuff]

Or how much waste is there in the MOD?

fixed that for ya!

[COMMANDO FORCES]

I agree Proudhuff. Plus the amount of useless twats who are able to hide in certain departments and never do a days bloody work in their lives.
If I had my way..................better not go there!

[Proudhuff]

and relax! 

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

I reckon there's a bunch of TD's sitting in the Dail today discussing how, in these times of economic crisis, what Ireland needs is a bunch of maniacs that blow shit up when they don't get their way

[COMMANDO FORCES]

Just doing a YouGov poll at the moment and this question has come up

The Government is currently considering whether to allow private companies to take over parts of the NHS Blood and Transplant Service, such as the testing, processing and transport of blood.
Some say that this will make the NHS Blood and Transplant Service more cost effective and will save money for the rest of the NHS. Others say that as those who donate their blood do not get paid it would be wrong for a private company to make money from this service.

I think our Legendary Shark might want to answer!

[The Legendary Shark]

This is just making me hungry...

[Old Tankie]

Hopefully, Matt, the saved 3 quid would be pumped back into the Health Service but I do concede that I may be being very naive.  It's just that I don't go along with this mantra that public servants always do the job better than the evil private sector.

Robin, maybe the savings would come from the private sector firm not being over staffed and providing pensions schemes that they can afford.  Very different from the public sector pensions which have to be subsidised by private sector workers.

CF, where's that poll?  I feel the need to contribute!!

[Robin Low]

Just doing a YouGov poll at the moment and this question has come up

Some say that this will make the NHS Blood and Transplant Service more cost effective and will save money for the rest of the NHS.

And I'd quite to know who those "some" are and what evidence they have to support the idea that the private sector will be more cost effective. Given that the Blood and Transplant Service is a pretty specialised outfit, I'm wondering which part of the private sector has the knowledge-base and experience to attempt a better job.

Regards

Robin