Carillion

jura they are all on the Corbyn thread constantly repeating themselves

I agree M0nica and it may have been a deliberate strategy not to trigger external investigation by diversifying in the way it has.

The Business Secretary has asked for an investigation by the Official Receiver to be broadened and fast-tracked. The conduct of directors in charge at the time of company's failure and previous directors will be examined.

It won't make any difference. They probably haven't broken the law.

Private Eye makes for depressing reading about this kind of thing because it's been writing about it for so long.

So, where are our Cons GN colleagues here- have they all put their tin hats and gone to hide?

Private Eye reporting that Capita, Serco and G4S May be going the same way.

Surely Carillion is/was a Limited company? I thought that meant their were rules and audits that accompanied that protection.

Sounds like the Trump school of finance

The whole situation was summed up by Anthony Hilton in the i today

It's the consequence of the relentless application of neo-liberal political philosophy that for years has elevated financial engineering above real engineering; off balance sheet finance for paying for things openly; and lauded the private sector above the public sector.

It has fostered the belief that there is no financial challenge that cannot be solved by a deal, a sleight of hand, a willingness to screw suppliers and a taste for creative accounting.

The collapse of Carillion is an indictment of management, but one in which government, Whitehall, City bankers and even investors are also complicit.

If you can get a copy of the i,, it is well worth reading the full article, and other commentary. It is on page 4

A monopoly is defined by what share of the market you hold. Generally, I think, it is 40% or more. Diversification doesn't mean you have a monopoly. With Carillion it has less than 40% share of the market, but the industries it has diversified into are closely related; building government facilities, owning some of them, providing services but doing these things for other non-government organisations as well. The problem is that they have a customer (the public sector) who are too heavily dependent on one firm.

I could cry for the small businesses who are owed thousands of pounds that they will never see.

At least in the nationalised industries the state always paid their bills...

I could cry for them, too gillybob. There is too much protection for huge businesses and not enough for the SMEs that are the lifeblood of our nation, of any nation really...

How do you stop a private company expanding? I doubt there was any issue involving the Monopolies Commission or whatever it's called now. I don't know anything about the laws surrounding business expansion. I wonder what will happen to the Canadian contracts?

It seems Carillion built GCHQ in the early 2000’s -not sure who owns or runs it now. On Newsnight yesterday it gave the impression that they owned it - but maybe I got it wrong.

I worry about Capita too - they have fingers in many pies.

Carillion took an average of 120 days to pay their tiered suppliers, most of whom are small businesses. Listening to the FSB this morning many of these SME’s will be finished now . Carillion mostly got paid up front and paid their employees but hung onto the money rather than pay their tiered suppliers. I could cry for the small businesses who are owed thousands of pounds that they will never see. I’ve been there and we were forced to sell everything we owned ( house, car, caravan, pensions all gone ) in order to pay our bills and stay in business . I wouldn’t do it again.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-42689717

Why does a company like Carillion run libraries in London, and thousands of hospital beds?
Who allowed that to happen?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42699020

A history of it happening to other big building firms.

Probably a strong element of 'copinage et pots de vin sous la table' (giving jobs to your boys and bribes - basically fraud).

mary nothing would surprise me

I know someone whose Russian is perfect. He could listen in.
The only problem is that he's a bit deaf now.

Don5 be silly dj - they should contract it out- I expect the Russians would be interested?

whitewave I think you mean Carillion had the contract for GCHQ - whether they actually ‘ran’ it ie as in making sure it functioned effectively and efficiently is probably another unknown.?

I presume the government is going to take that inhouse!

Who is saying that re/nationalising everything is the answer gilly? I’m sure plenty of us believe a far more moderate solution - some things, vital public services and utilities should be in public ownership such as buses ( that privatisation went well), gas, electricity and water( ditto plus many of the companies are owned by foreign governments) railways. There is a real propensity on here amongst the coalition of the anti-left to totally exaggerate the positions that the left espouse in their posts. No one is saying that they know everything about everything - that’s a totally unacceptable and inaccurate post to make - but some of us on here know a great deal about many things and make solid and useful contributions. As for the ‘ordinary workers’ there are two categories here - those who were contracted by Carillion to the public sector - eg school dinner ladies and cleaners whose pat the Govt has guaranteed and those in the private sector who are jobless and wage less from tomorrow. IMO if the former jobs matter so much ( as they do) then why on Earth was it acceptable to contract them out? There is an answer to all this that is somewhere in the middle as most answers are. But whatever, the Government has seriously got this wrong and all the sneering at those of us who believe this doesn’t change that fact. Gung ho capitalism doesn’t work ( and neither does wholesale privatisation) . What I expect a government to be able to ensure is that vital public services are provided, vital buildings like schools and hospitals are built without all the risks involved that handing all this over to the private sector entails and especially without proper due diligence and on going oversight.

Blimey Carillion ran GCHQ

Anyone listening to Paul mason on R4?

What a lot of moderate common sense.

And they say Labour would make a mess of things and be very expensive the fiasco with the banks should have made it clear the Cons are Con artists for sure.

I have never professed to know the answers to this very complex situation. Unlike some who seem to know everything about....... well everything. Obviously there are various issues at fault. The fact that Carillion was allowed to get so big, the fact that it bid for and won contracts that they couldn’t afford to fulfill etc. I despair for the ordinary workers who’s jobs will be in the balance along with all of the smaller companies who will suffer and possibly go down with them as a result . I still say that re/nationalising everything is not the answer.