It’s entirely true that Interserve has gone under – ‘K, perhaps is slipping below the waves – as a result of that mountain of debt. However, from that to conclude that the outsourcing of pubic services provision should stop is to be grossly ignorant of the matter at hand. For what we’re saying here is that the capitalists who funded those public services have just lost their capital. Meaning, equally, that taxpayers have had the use of that capital in the provision of public services without having had to pay for it.
No, really, that’s it. Someone out there has made a loss on the Interserve adventure. If someone has lost, someone must have gained. Interserve wasn’t charging the taxpayer enough for the services it delivered. That’s why it’s gone bust into a debt renegotiation. So, who gains from Interserve not charging enough? The taxpayer, obviously.
The bankers have just lost the thick end of £250 million. The shareholders in Interserve have lost, what, 97.5% of what they thought they had. Even, near everything they put in. Who hasn’t lost from this? The taxpayer. Because that capital, those loans, were consumed in the provision of public services without the taxpayer having to cough up for it.
Thus this reaction is just gross ignorance, isn’t it?
[perfectpullquote align=”full” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””] So, another outsourcing company has failed. So shall we just agree that outsourcing does not work any more? And that as a result the whole model of outsourcing to the private sector has failed with it? There is a way to supply public services. And that is to deliver them from the public sector. [/perfectpullquote]If the public sector provides those services then the taxpayer must pay the full cost of them. If a private company undercharges for providing them then that’s a transfer from the capitalist pigdogs to the taxpayer. This is then proof, this transfer, that taxpayers would be better off without it?
Ah well, but it’s only Richard Murphy so our task is, as ever, working out why he’s wrong, not whether. For, really, his complaint here is that the outsourcing companies haven’t been charging the taxpayer enough. Tant pis, eh?
What you are missing is that Spud would have confiscated the £250M from the capitalist shareholders to give to the government to spend as it saw fit. No need for the private sector to be involved in deciding what to do with their own money when the government can do it instead.
Not withstanding the whole central planning can’t know everything (enough) argument which Dick doesn’t subscribe to anyway.
You really don’t get it do you . Why Murphy is right and you are wrong is because this company was involved in the so-called public sector ; that is dealing with things that concern ordinary people . And Interserve screwed up and that will cost everyone something while the mess is sorted out by – goes what the public sector.Your great hero Smith would have understood this. You need to read him some more because he had a lot to say about conspiracies to defraud the public.