Reform, and the death of the Tory Party

[All uphill]

I worked for a public body late in my working life after 30 years in the private and voluntary sectors.

I was horrified at the inefficiencies, and when it was pointed out that tackling those inefficiencies head on would be career ending I tackled them anyway and got a generous redundancy.

My point is that it isn't easy/possible to change ossified organisational structures that have huge internal resistance to change.

 

[BoldonLad]

But spending on infrastructure improvements / maintenance is generally investment as well. The longer you leave critical infrastructure without spending money on it the more it costs in the long run. We are already probably beyond the watershed on many roads for example where relatively cheap maintenance is no longer an option and large sections of road need resurfacing or full reconstruction as budgets for things like patching work or clearing drains were cut.

Yes, I would agree with all that, but, Government spending is not 100% infrastructure is it? Even when it is, is the expenditure effectively managed? (by any party) I am thinking HS2, NHS Computer projects, I am sure if I spent more that 5 seconds on it, I could think of more.

 

[Pross]

Yes, I would agree with all that, but, Government spending is not 100% infrastructure is it? Even when it is, is the expenditure effectively managed? (by any party) I am thinking HS2, NHS Computer projects, I am sure if I spent more that 5 seconds on it, I could think of more.

It almost certainly isn't efficiently managed but governments have been promising to save money through efficiency improvements for as long as I can remember and they never achieve it. For whatever reason, things that work in the private sector don't seem to help in the public sector so even when they bring in people with big business experience it fails. However, the main reason government expenditure is increasing is that so much money is going on repaying the existing debt. Successive governments have talked tough but always end up over-spending and kicking the can down the road. One thing is for sure, Reform won't fix it as their politicians are generally lazy and even more self-serving than the others and fixing the problem will take hard graft. All they'll do is enrich their friends and theppeople pulling their strings, anyone thinking they're worth a try as they given up on the rest is going to be massively disappointed.

I haven't got a clue what the solution is but it certainly isn't a Farage led government.

 

[BoldonLad]

It almost certainly isn't efficiently managed but governments have been promising to save money through efficiency improvements for as long as I can remember and they never achieve it. For whatever reason, things that work in the private sector don't seem to help in the public sector so even when they bring in people with big business experience it fails. However, the main reason government expenditure is increasing is that so much money is going on repaying the existing debt. Successive governments have talked tough but always end up over-spending and kicking the can down the road. One thing is for sure, Reform won't fix it as their politicians are generally lazy and even more self-serving than the others and fixing the problem will take hard graft. All they'll do is enrich their friends and theppeople pulling their strings, anyone thinking they're worth a try as they given up on the rest is going to be massively disappointed.

I haven't got a clue what the solution is but it certainly isn't a Farage led government.

I would agree 100%

 

[icowden]

For whatever reason, things that work in the private sector don't seem to help in the public sector so even when they bring in people with big business experience it fails.

It's usually because the Government has stuck it's oversized oar in.

Lets take NPFiT.

In Scotland, the Scottish Parliament decided they would procure once software solution that would run across all hospitals etc, so that records could easily be shared.

In England, the Government decided that just getting a single software solution would be poor value, and a much *better* way of doing it would be to divide England into 5 "clusters" with each one being managed by a different Local Service Provider. This would keep prices down by ensuring competition and provide much needed redundant backup should an implementation fail.

Some elements were very successful - the National Providers - NHS Care Records Service, Patient Demographic Spine, Choose and Book, NHS Mail.

Other elements of the programme were dismal failures. Fujitsu (the Post Office Guys remember?) failed and pulled out. Accenture failed and pulled out. The 5th cluster didn't even get started. The clusters weren't working so they were disolved in favour of 10 SHAs. Much of the £12 billion spent wasn't on software or infrastructure, it was on management consultants. In the midlands the Community Health Record was supplied by TPP, but in the South and London by Servelec, some places were supplied by Civica and others by Emis. You had multiple different providers all being various levels of difficult in adapting their software to be compliant with the National systems.

A single procurement of a bespoke system to cover all English health providers would have been better and considerably cheaper.

By 2015, for Community Health, London and the South actually had a good system. They were all on Servelec Rio and could exchange records with each other. The new Government scrapped NPFiT and also ended all contracts. Every Trust then had to go though rounds of expensive procurement to buy new software, or take over the licenses for the existing software and also procure a new infrastructure provider. So instead of all data residing in a large datalake managed by BT, every trust now had to have their own. No more information sharing - loads of cost in buying or upgrading data centres, and lots of project work for the likes of me.

In a personal sense it was brilliant and kept me in work for many years. In a National sense it was a huge amount of money spaffed down the toilet which could have been far better spent if the Government were not obsessed with the free market and competition.

 

[All uphill]

In a personal sense it was brilliant and kept me in work for many years. In a National sense it was a huge amount of money spaffed down the toilet which could have been far better spent if the Government were not obsessed with the free market and competition.

I'm no fan of trying to establish competition within natural monopolies, but I shudder at the thought of state industries in the UK.

Remember the 1960s?
Industries starved of investment, ossified, inflexible, serving the interests of permanent staff over customers, chronically bad management. Thames Water is also like that, but it is an exception. I don't remember one well run state industry back in the 1960s.

 

[briantrumpet]

On one hand he accepts it has been a growing issue for years, on the other he criticises Labour for not sorting it out within a year but overlooks that the Tories also failed to do so in the previous 14 years. It's completely bizarre.

NFS 😉

 

[briantrumpet]

I'm no fan of trying to establish competition within natural monopolies, but I shudder at the thought of state industries in the UK.

Remember the 1960s?
Industries starved of investment, ossified, inflexible, serving the interests of permanent staff over customers, chronically bad management. Thames Water is also like that, but it is an exception. I don't remember one well run state industry back in the 1960s.

I think those of us of a certain age remember it very well (British Rail, British Leyland, British Telecom etc), and even Denis Healey admitted that at the time Labour couldn't deal with the unions and restrictive working practices/strikes, as they were their main finders/sponsors, and (retrospectively) admitted that 'someone like Thatcher' was needed (apologies, I've never been able to source where I'm sure I heard him admit that).

This kind of loss of working days to strikes wasn't sustainable.

 

[monkers]

I think those of us of a certain age remember it very well (British Rail, British Leyland, British Telecom etc), and even Denis Healey admitted that at the time Labour couldn't deal with the unions and restrictive working practices/strikes, as they were their main finders/sponsors, and (retrospectively) admitted that 'someone like Thatcher' was needed (apologies, I've never been able to source where I'm sure I heard him admit that).

This kind of loss of working days to strikes wasn't sustainable.

View attachment 10243

Consequences of Tory governments who raked in the North Sea oil and gas revenues, but still left ordinary people wanting?

‘'Why is everything so sh1t? Our wages are sh1t, our rivers are swimming in sh1t, and most politicians, they are full of it too.’' Zack Polanski.

 

[BoldonLad]

I'm no fan of trying to establish competition within natural monopolies, but I shudder at the thought of state industries in the UK.

Remember the 1960s?
Industries starved of investment, ossified, inflexible, serving the interests of permanent staff over customers, chronically bad management. Thames Water is also like that, but it is an exception. I don't remember one well run state industry back in the 1960s.

I think those of us of a certain age remember it very well (British Rail, British Leyland, British Telecom etc), and even Denis Healey admitted that at the time Labour couldn't deal with the unions and restrictive working practices/strikes, as they were their main finders/sponsors, and (retrospectively) admitted that 'someone like Thatcher' was needed (apologies, I've never been able to source where I'm sure I heard him admit that).

This kind of loss of working days to strikes wasn't sustainable.

View attachment 10243

Are yes, the halcyon days of the 1960s and 1970s, I remember it well, until I remove the rose tinted spectacles.

There were a few good things, but, the workplace and economy were not among them.

 

[briantrumpet]

Are yes, the halcyon days of the 1960s and 1970s, I remember it well, until I remove the rose tinted spectacles.

There were a few good things, but, the workplace and economy were not among them.

Maybe flares were one of the better things.

Nah, they were daft as well.

 

[Psamathe]

For whatever reason, things that work in the private sector don't seem to help in the public sector so even when they bring in people with big business experience it fails.

Mahybe because business's only focus is operating for profit in the interests of the shareholders whereas Government is in service provision. Service provision is very different from profit for shareholders eg some services might not be cost effective but are an absolute necessity in a society.

UK needs to be a society, not an economy.

 

[All uphill]

I think those of us of a certain age remember it very well (British Rail, British Leyland, British Telecom etc), and even Denis Healey admitted that at the time Labour couldn't deal with the unions and restrictive working practices/strikes, as they were their main finders/sponsors, and (retrospectively) admitted that 'someone like Thatcher' was needed (apologies, I've never been able to source where I'm sure I heard him admit that).

This kind of loss of working days to strikes wasn't sustainable.

View attachment 10243

I think it's important that we remind ourselves of how it really was.

My least worst model is regulated capitalism, but that's increasingly difficult when multi-national companies become bigger than many countries.

 

[BoldonLad]

Maybe flares were one of the better things.

Nah, they were daft as well.

I was thinking more of music, stiletto heels and mini-skirts to be honest, but, I had to think of my blood pressure.

 

[Pross]

Mahybe because business's only focus is operating for profit in the interests of the shareholders whereas Government is in service provision. Service provision is very different from profit for shareholders eg some services might not be cost effective but are an absolute necessity in a society.

UK needs to be a society, not an economy.

But delivering those services as efficiently as possible should also be a priority as it allows the money to go further and do more. It's been a long time since I worked in the public sector but back then, despite being a kid really, I could see a lot of waste and inefficiency. It may have improved, I suspect not.