Carillion

Lemon, that was said in parliament yesterday. You should try listening to it occasionally.

I'm not sure any of the contracts would specify that there has to be a 'better service' nightowl - I have no idea who would have specific service targets pre PFI, measures against those targets and then the same for post PFI. Is that the sort of thing you mean?

I asked this on an earlier thread but received no replies. I’d really like to know of any industry or service that was previously in public ownership that is operating better now it has been privatised. I don’t mean is more profitable for its shareholders I mean providing a better service to its customers/ the public. Genuinely interested.

Good article Jen.

"Make no mistake: this is an ideological obsession of this Government."

The problem is that the Tories have been led by the nose by the same ideological obsessions since Thatcher and have been destroying the country every time they lied their way into power.

It’s not a crisis of capitalism at all,

I'm sure we'd all be very interested to know what makes you assert this so confidently lemon.

That’s the trouble with ideaology, the right wing want it all outsourced and the left wing want it all nationalised.
There is a centre way.

Where is that taken from, the Morning Star or jackofkent blog?
It’s not a crisis of capitalism at all, and nationalising everything in sight is not the answer either.
Some things can be outsourced and others brought ‘in house’ there is no reason that both cannot be done.

"The ugly side of privatisation and outsourcing has been laid bare by the collapse of Carillion. While fat cat executives have taken action to protect their pensions and pay, the workers have been shafted. With a day’s notice, workers were told to not bother to turn up to work. These are workers with mortgages and families to feed, and the platitudes from this Government will not comfort them.

Make no mistake: this is an ideological obsession of this Government. We have got to the farcical point where Oxfordshire County Council is forced to put firefighters on standby to deliver food in our schools. Private capital has seen all the benefits, and the state has taken the burden of the collapse again. It is estimated that subcontractors will receive only 1p of every pound owed to them. They also have families to feed and bills to pay. What do the Government have to offer them? Nothing. They are obsessed and determined to push ahead with the privatisation and outsourcing of the £1.2 billion HS2 contract. There has been more privatisation and outsourcing in Ministry of Defence contracts, and in school projects. When will they ever learn? We privatised the reward and we nationalised failure. It is the absolute reverse of socialism.

This is a crisis of capitalism. Workers are treated with utter disdain in the pursuit of capital accumulation. This is an ideological issue. Outsourcing, not just by Carillion, has brought our state to its knees. Southern Rail, schools: it is time that this experiment was brought to an end. The smoke and mirrors of PFI and outsourcing are no longer there."

Is Lloyd Russell-Moyle your MP, whitewave?
He's good.

Not to do with Carillion, but big business.

The public won against Murdoch.

www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/23/rupert-murdoch-sky-bid-blocked-21st-century-fox-cma

Watchdog orders DWP to publish secret reports on Atos and Capita PIP failings bit.ly/2F404YD

This may prove interesting. I wonder if they will be redacted?

No, I've had it hanging around for a while and found time to read it this afternoon. I think it's pertinent to the Carillion affair and to the general problems with corporations, wealth inequalities, unproductive 'investment' and lots more.

Have you read it and digested it yet Maizie or is it just homework for me?

Sorry - have been watching TV. Didn't know I needed to provide a written report by a deadline!

So something he suggested in 2003 was agreed this year and then not implemented.

It takes years to change public policy, as you ought to know, Primrose. I'm part of a group that has been campaigning to change something in education since 1989 at least. We actually got a 'result' in 2006 and official implementation in 2012.

Anyway, enough of fighting with dj. What about my Limited Liability paper?

So something he suggested in 2003 was agreed this year and then not implemented.
I'm less easily impressed, but I'm sure everyone who reads 'International Tax Revue' will find it highly exciting.

www.internationaltaxreview.com/Article/3773447/Global-Tax-50-2017.html

Just some blogger?
9th most influential person on tax.
Anybody would think he had done something to you personally, Primrose.

I've given it a quick scan read and yes, it's an interesting paper. Thanks for that Maizie, I will try and digest the contents and think it through.

Actually, if you've an hour to spare the whole paper I linked to above is well worth reading.

The author is a Professor of Corporate Law at Bristol Uni.

Richard Murphy is not the originator of the idea of changing the parameters of limited liability:

"Limited liability, shareholder rights and the problem of corporate irresponsibility"
Paddy Ireland
Cambridge Journal of Economics, Volume 34, Issue 5, 1 September 2010, Pages 837–856, doi.org/10.1093/cje/ben040

Recognition of these manipulations and of the particular forms of corporate irresponsibility they have generated has recently led some commentators to call for the abandonment of limited liability, either in general (Campbell and Griffin, 2006) or in the specific context of parent-subsidiary relations (Blumberg, 1986; Muchlinski, 2007) and/or non-contractual corporate liabilities (Hansmann and Kraakman, 1991).

academic.oup.com/cje/article/34/5/837/1700679

sorry, that is the wrong link
I don';t know how that happened.

The link was this from gillybob's post:
^I refuse to believe that we are the exception .

This 'It isn't necessary to endure hardship to know what is right.' - absolutely and totally.
You're not gillybob

Small business owners in the main have pride in their business, what they have built up and know all their workforce personally and therefore value them.

Bosses of larger businesses can be remote and detached from what is going on and what is happening with their workforce, unfortunately ricocheting right down the supply chain.

There would be more chance of me being taken to task over missing a payment of £100 to HMRC

Well, there you go! It's a ridiculous situation...

I'm not suggesting that SMEs need to be 'kept in check'; it's the large companies that appear to need better regulation.

SMEs clearly need more protection. Your own example surely shows us that large companies are more of a problem, gillybob

There would be more chance of me being taken to task over missing a payment of £100 to HMRC than there would be of Carillion bosses missing payments of £100,000 or more .

The problem is that most small business owners are extremely conscientious and we really don’t need additional legislation to “keep us in check”. My DH and I always put our employees, customers and creditors first and often go months without wages when things are tight. We gave been very close to the edge on two occasions ( both caused by bigger companies going bust) when to be honest we should have pulled the plug and walked away but we’re not those kind of people . I refuse to believe that we are the exception .