It's easy to be cynical about David Cameron's motives for timing the launch of policy initiatives. The difficulty comes in identifying the exact reason for this cynicism.
On Monday, we were treated to the latest relaunch of 'The Big Society'. I follow these things and even I have lost count of the number of times this initiative has been trailed in front of the media. Public services, we were told, are going to be opened up to charities, businesses and the mischievously entitled 'social enterprises'. Why launch this on Monday? Was it an attempt to deflect attention from the Murdoch scandal? The change in the Terrorist Threat Level would indicate that Number 10 was trying to co-ordinate an attempt to wrest the political initiative back from Ed Milliband (improving even more since my last blog) and to start setting the headlines again. Or perhaps Cameron realised that handing vital services over to private companies in the wake of the news that Southern Cross has gone bump would not be popular, and therefore tried to sneak the announcement out while everyone else was discussing just how far News International would sink.
Cameron's ideas about public services betray a worrying lack of judgement. The argument has been painted as a Public v Private debate, the truth is that the 'third sector', charities and voluntary groups, have always run services hand in hand with Local Authorities, the NHS and other arms of the public sector. The WRVS, for instance, have had a presence in hospitals for a long time, PTFA's are crucial to the running of any school and even I have contributed to the process, running a project which helped to take the heat off Youth Services in Stoke-on-Trent (as a regular reader of this blog will testify). The real difference here, and one which Cameron is ignoring for ideological reasons, is that these arrangements were not undertaken for profit. When companies become involved in the deliveries of vital public services, there are two great risks. Firstly, private industries often go out of business, unlike local authorities. Secondly, the very nature of these enterprises means that things are done for a profit, not for altruistic motives. So if, for instance, cleaners can be paid 15p an hour less, they will; if 10p can be shaved off the cost of an old persons meal, it will; if a corner can be cut to increase the smile on the face of a shareholder, it will. And while there are many companies who are thoroughly decent and straight, there are some who are not. Horror stories of dodgy care homes, nurseries and day centres who thought they could get away with ignoring health and safety abound.
Southern Cross collapsed because of an effort to maximise profits. The buildings they used were sold off to private landlords, the profits were used as dividends for shareholders and the buildings were rented back. The problem with this idea was that no-one ever thought that Southern Cross would be unable to pay their rent. When take up rates for their Care Homes dropped below 85% capacity, they were struggling. Who suffered? Not the people who had made big profits out of the sale of buildings, but the residents and their families who now face a hugely uncertain future.
Charities would not necessarily operate in this way and the so-called 'Big Society Bank' would be willing to lend them money. The problem is that Cameron was so feeble in his negotiations with the banks when setting up this fund that they will only lend at commercial rates. Charities will have to pay hefty interest on the money they borrow, which would eat into their income. Where does their income come from? That's right, it comes from you. So for every £1 you drop into a charity box, 10p could go towards paying bank interest, rewarding their Chief Executives with large bonuses. Nice. Why did Cameron not stand up to the financial institutions? Possibly because they paid £11.4 million into Conservative Party funds last year? Perish the thought.
I do not advocate all public services standing still. Yes, there is capacity for voluntary groups and charities to get involved. But pardon me for thinking that my children's health, education and future prospects are a little too precious to me for others to make a profit from.
***************************************************************************
Many thanks to those of you around the world who read this blog. I am very proud that I have readers in Romania, China, Singapore and other countries as well as the UK. If you would like to make contact with me, my email address is liamstubbs@hotmail.com I am more than willing to engage in conversation, but within respectful perameters!
You can also follow me on Twitter @LiamStubbs
No comments:
Post a Comment