Lack of competition leads to waste and low productivity

The areas of the private sector that achieve the highest levels  of efficiency are usually very driven by competition. The leaders of the businesses know if they cease the search to do better with less and give up the drive to innovate and change, their competitors will take their customers.

Advocates of nationalisation say that should  be more efficient and low cost because it removes the need for competing management teams, multiple head offices and advertising. Looking at past experience  shows this is just not true. Large nationalised monopolies offset the economies  of scale with the inefficiencies of monopoly provision.

When the U.K.electricity industry was privatised the nationalised management fought against creating competing generators, claiming it would be dearer and less productive. The  government split up the industry and created competition. In the first decade moving to a competitive system labour  productivity doubled and electricity  prices came down. The industry that had believed in fuel inefficient  coal power stations went for the dash for gas. The new power stations were 60-70% more fuel efficient, greener and cleaner.

Public sector trading bodies that charge the customers should be subject to competition.

119 Comments

  1. Lynn Atkinson
    December 16, 2024

    Our massive uncompetitive, unproductive State Sector has weighed Britain down to the point where we beat even the EU in productionless paid activity. The State knows it will never win so has to abolish competition. And it gerrymanders everything, for instance:
    ‘In January 2015, Cleverly was selected to be the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Braintree, His selection came after the initial selection process was quietly suspended by Conservative Campaign Headquarters, after the local party chose someone not on the approved candidates list and was told to “think again”.
    That is the root of our problem. We no longer choose who sits in Parliament. We don’t want anyone on any party’s Candidates list!

    1. Lemming
      December 16, 2024

      Nonsense. You people have learned nothing in 200 years. The Victorians realised that competition was wasteful. We don’t need multiple competing railways lines, or multiple competing water pipes or multiple competing electric pylons, and we don’t need multiple competing private health care suppliers. We need one supplier, properly regulated by the state

      1. IanT
        December 16, 2024

        You mean like in the Soviet Union Lemmng?
        You may have a point. The Soviets could certainly build walls very cheaply and the ‘Lada’ was a best seller – everybody had one.

        1. Mickey Taking
          December 16, 2024

          the Lada was a licensed Fiat 124.

          1. Lynn Atkinson
            December 17, 2024

            Says it all. Only Italians prefer to drive Fiats over cars.

      2. Berkshire alan
        December 16, 2024

        Leaking
        In theory yes, but in practice it simply has never happened here, too much political interference from people who have never run anything themselves.

      3. Lifelogic
        December 16, 2024

        Well almost nothing is ever run efficiently by the state, subcontracted efficiently or regulated properly by them. Have you not noticed this, are you very young perhaps?

        If you have one monopoly supplier you have no choice & so when it fails, or hugely over charges for dire service, makes you wait over year for a heart op or cancer treatment you just get no choice. Put up with it and shut up and perhaps just die while waiting the 6 hours late ambulance or 6 hours waiting in A&E.

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          December 16, 2024

          Almost! What was run efficiently by the State Sector, ever?

      4. Roy Grainger
        December 16, 2024

        We’ve got one regulated health care supplier and its patient outcomes are among the worst in the developed world. You have a very tenuous grasp of history – the Victorians didn’t “realise that competition was wasteful”, quite the opposite. The entire rail network and London tube network in Victorian times was built by competing private companies which weren’t brought under single state ownership until after WW-II. In the Victorian era there were also multiple competing private water companies. They were not nationalised till 1903. You’ve really embarrassed yourself by your excursion into history I’m afraid.

        1. Lifelogic
          December 16, 2024

          Indeed.

      5. Mike Wilson
        December 16, 2024

        It appears you have learned nothing and live in a fantasy world. No public sector service is efficient. Try phoning one of them. From your local council to HMRC – they don’t even answer their phones.

      6. Donna
        December 16, 2024

        We most definitely DO need private sector options and competition in Healthcare …. and also in Education.

        The State Sectors have failed and no amount of State Regulation will improve them.

      7. Mark B
        December 16, 2024

        I think the railways, water pipes (and sewage), electricity generation were all once created, supplied and maintained by PRIVATE individuals and companies, and most in the Victorian era. Even the British Empire was created, not by the State but, by private individuals (eg Cecil Rhodes) or companies (eg British East India Company). Only since when the State got involved did things go wrong.

        1. Mitchel
          December 16, 2024

          The state bailed out the East India Company- and frequently was drawn into adventures and wars to defend other joint stock charter trading companies elsewhere in the world during the 19th century as they sought new markets and monopoly positions against European competitors.

          Really interesting article from historian William Dalrymple(who specialises in the history of British involvement in Asia) in The Guardian,4/3/2015:”The East India Company:The original Corporate Raiders”,referencing his book:”The Anarchy:How a Corporation Replaced the Mughal Empire 1756-1803.”

          The similarities between then and today’s ‘too big to fail’ scream out at you!

          1. Lynn Atkinson
            December 16, 2024

            Ah – The Gruniad! Well that made me laugh.

          2. hefner
            December 16, 2024

            Mitchell, thanks for that.
            The article is really informative. BTW it is also available at apnakal.worldpress.com for those afraid of getting furuncles reading the Grauniad. At least the G is free and gives access to its articles up to (at least) 25 years ago.

          3. Lynn Atkinson
            December 17, 2024

            The Grunaid is of course, according to themselves, funded by ‘slave money’ and does not need to compete in the market. It can therefore spew out any rubbish and does.

      8. Original Richard
        December 16, 2024

        Lemming :

        Communism, really.

        Unfortunately it doesn’t work, which is why the Chinese have implemented their “one country two systems” idea. Communism at the top in total control and corporate fascism underneath to allow industry and the economy to prosper.

        1. Mitchel
          December 16, 2024

          As far as I can see “one country,two systems” applies to Hong Kong and Macau(and in due course,potentially, Taiwan).Can you provide a reference to its wider application?

          1. Original Richard
            December 16, 2024

            Mitchel :

            James Lindsay New Discourses podcasts.

          2. Lynn Atkinson
            December 16, 2024

            You mean it applies in China. There is no country called Hong Kong, Macau or, according the the Chinese (and they have a point) Taiwan.
            So China demands the wealth from these islands of capitalism to support the Communism it claims is ‘better’. Why? If communism is better what are the 3 newly returned territories clamouring for it?

          3. dixie
            December 16, 2024

            Special Economic Zones, there are four including Shenzen.

      9. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2024

        You have learned nothing at all! The British Victorians were the personification of Capitalism I.e unfettered competition.
        That’s why they achieved maybe than any other Generation – although The Greatest Generation is so called with all due respect for their massive achievement in saving the Capitalist world from the little Corporal, who, like you, despised ‘the English System’ (capitalism and democracy).

        1. Donna
          December 16, 2024

          Learned nothing at all ….. presumably in the State “Education” system.

      10. Chris S
        December 16, 2024

        Your chosen example proves how wrong you are :

        We have one state-run healthcare organisation which is grossly inefficient, costs us the same as those in Europe like Germany, but has worse outcomes.

      11. MBJ
        December 16, 2024

        Plus one.We need to keep public services out of private hands.The public needs to keep national democracy and power.If public services fail,put things right but don’t give power away.
        The competition in the private sector from my view has spoiled services and it’s employees flip much and blame others.This is called competition.
        We will be having the mafia next.

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          December 16, 2024

          You do know that the Mafia developed to protect the individual from t(e bullying State?
          That’s the job our MPs are supposed to do.
          The fasces is a symbol developed by the Etruscans, revived during the Italian Renaissance, and used in the late nineteenth century by Italian nationalists. A bundle of logs or sticks attached to an ax, the fasces was taken to represent the nationalist “togetherness” that fascist politics seeks to enforce. See the EU.
          I think it was Beneti who coined the phrase ‘fascist’ from this idea.

      12. Mark
        December 16, 2024

        The problem for railway lines and canals and toll roads was that they could only be built following an Act of Parliament sanctioning them. Each was approved separately, with some managing to maintain a route monopoly, and others finding a competitor being authorised nearby. Much of the rail route from London to Birmingham runs alongside the Grand Union Canal, killing its role for freight traffic.

        It was perhaps hard for Victorians to envisage how traffic might grow, but with hindsight it is easier to see that a competitive system can work to provide a system that better serves its customers. For example, the major oil and gas pipelines in the North Sea were built with capacity to take output from other nearby fields, and access was commercially negotiated. Compare offshore wind farms, individually linked to shore despite extensive state control over licensing of the operations and grid connection arrangements.

      13. Mickey Taking
        December 16, 2024

        Lemming. oh dear – do read up on some history. Rarely do I come across such ignorance.
        Virtually all railways were born by industrialists wishing to move raw materials quicker and cheaper than methods like horse-drawn. Hardly ever to transport people. Gradually they extended to more towns, and realised people became interested in moving by rail. Once they reached neighbouring railways they usually merged rather than continuing with likely loss making, becoming bigger systems and standardised to some degree on locos and carriages as they proved to be more efficient. Competition began between the larger railways, each trying to outdo each another, they would test speed, journey times, 1st, 2nd, 3rd classes of carriage, female only compartments. Even encouraging the birth of refreshment buildings on stations where travellers would change trains to go further afield. It was competition that drove development to be attractive and offering quality to consumers.

    2. formula57
      December 16, 2024

      @ Lynn Atkinson – had the voters of Braintree objected, they could have voted for another candidate of course – like the voters of Leyton who rejected Patrick Gordon-Walker in a 1965 by-election after the previous MP was made a peer to make way for him.

      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2024

        The voters trust the Conservative Association to field a Conservative and the Labour Association to field a Labour candidate.
        The Associations have failed the voters.

  2. Lifelogic
    December 16, 2024

    Lets have free and fair competition between different sources of energy too. Gas,Oil, Coal, wind, solar, hydro, nuclear rather than the current rigged some taxes and other hugely subsidised system. Free and fair competition between over taxed cars and trucks and hugely subsidised trains and buses. Also look at fair competition in housing, state and private education, banking


    1. Ian Wraggg
      December 16, 2024

      Yes when gas and electricity were privatised prices dropped and services improved. Now we have a soviet style energy market with the government dictating the type of generation which has lead us to the highest prices in the developed world and an unstable grid hear the latest wheeze by the Chuckle Brothers is to get rid of street lighting. Saving carbon emissions trumps road safety, personal safety and common sense.
      Something really must be done about these cowboys before there’s a revolution.
      It looks like we have to rely on the farmers to do the heavy lifting.

      1. Lifelogic
        December 16, 2024

        Yet the energy needed to provide a level of lighting has never been lower with modern technology.

        In 1800, a candle providing one hour’s light cost six hours’ work. In the 1880s, the same light from a kerosene lamp took 15 minutes’ work to pay for. In 1950, it was eight seconds. Today, it’s half a second.

        Matt Ridley.

        Not at all the same for heating or hot water alas.

      2. Mike Wilson
        December 16, 2024

        I’ve never quite understood that position. If Generator A builds a new efficient generator that can supply electricity cheaper than competitors, surely everyone will want to buy their electricity from them – but they won’t have the capacity to supply it. And why should they sell it cheaper than Generator B? Surely they would up their prices to make more profit. Wouldn’t all generators up their prices to the highest generator to maximise profit and return on investment? There seems to be very little difference between the prices on offer.

        Reply You can have a competitive system based on accepting the next lowest price when you need more power. Generators then have a trade off between running more often at lower prices or less often at higher prices.

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          December 16, 2024

          Why do you support a monopsony situation Mike? Why can’t there be multiple buyers too? They compete as well and set the price.

        2. Mike Wilson
          December 16, 2024

          That hasn’t happened in practice. All we have is the most expensive energy in the world.

  3. Lifelogic
    December 16, 2024

    Conservative MP Joy Morrissey has demanded answers from Labour’s Ed Miliband over allegations he failed to declare donations linked to a recent climate envoy appointment.

    Speaking to GB News, Morrissey called for clarity on the declaration of a ÂŁ4million donation to Labour from Quadrature Capital.

    Etc ed

    1. Lifelogic
      December 16, 2024

      So are this and the last government, plus all their “experts” [like the Classics Graduate new CEO of the Climate Change Committee, Chris Stark the last one (sort of a law degree), May’s advisor Lord Debden (Gummer a History Graduate) and ex Chair of the Climate Change Committee and Michael Gove’s school drop out advisor “expert” Greta Thunberg types] all totally deluded and genuinely think net zero is a sensible policy?

      Or are other “follow the money” forces perhaps at work?

      Have the recent governments ever thought of perhaps consulting a decent engineer and a physicist or two to help plan the UK energy systems in a sane way? Or at least some to advise them how to avoid getting everything so totally wrong on CO2, Climate and Energy Provision as they currently are doing.

      Why for example do they keep talking of “clean energy” when their is nothing remotely dirty about CO2 it is plant, tree & crop food it is a vital gas for nearly all life on earth.

      Miliband and this appalling government are destroying the economy, exporting jobs, freezing pensioners, and harming our defences.

    2. Mike Wilson
      December 16, 2024

      Etc ed

      Are you indicating that LifeLogic said something he’s already said a thousand times before? Surely not.

  4. agricola
    December 16, 2024

    You are absolutely correct in your comment. In terms of nationalised industries we are talking Energy, Water, Railways, and I think our postal service. The challenge is how do we make each service competitive when there is no real competition.

    Energy suffers too much taxation and insane heretical interference from government whose management skills are zero. First we suffer the heresy of not being able to enjoy the natural assets we have. The first commandment of climate change nett zero is to import world priced energy. This enables government to spuriously claim to free ourselves of the sin of using our own, and its mythical consequences. Having the most expensive energy in the World ensures that we destroy all heavy energy user industries, making us strategically highly vulnerable. They bring to the table, intermittent, tax subsidised electricity from windmills and solar farms, not having the brains to realise that our population largely goes abroad for its sunshine. They deny our own industry of excellence the incentive to provide clean reliable SMRs. When the expensive insanity of Rasputin joins Guy Fawkes in our history of treachery we may be able to evolve a viable energy policy. The we can decide how we get it to all end users competitively.

    Water is in need of a national grid to get it from where it falls to where it is needed. Currently international investors enjoy the benefits which first should have been spent on infrastructure. The business rules and plan needs to change.

    Railways exist because nobody asks the question as to whether there are better ways for people to get from A to B. Walking was replaced by the horse. The horse and canal by roads, and rail. Rail should give way to private air travel. You can already fly Birmingham to Alicante far cheaper than Manchester to London by rail. Ergo invest in airports.

    Sell the mail to an Amazon or like if you want a competetive service.

    Now having pointed out how miserable nationalisation is, and we agree, can we have your solution and business plan for all the above.

    1. Dave Andrews
      December 16, 2024

      Here’s one solution – mutualisation.
      Take the water industry. Nationalisation doesn’t work because nationalised industries are inefficient, and starved of investment because the government has other priorities on where it wants to spend money. Privatisation doesn’t work because the water company is just there to maximise bills to the customer, subject to constraints by the regulator, as the customers have nowhere else to go. As Lemming correctly points out above, you can’t have competing water networks.
      With mutualisation you become a part owner of your water company, and you with all your fellow customers decide how much you pay for the service and how much you want to invest in new infrastructure. Bills aren’t maximised and if the company fails to invest, you only have yourself to blame.

      1. agricola
        December 16, 2024

        Yes David, I was thinking in terms of John Lewis/Waitrose like companies to be the business model for the distribution and sale of energy. First get government, whose leech like qualities give us the most expensive energy in the World, completely out of the equasion. They contribute nothing, at best deserving 5% VAT at the end of it.

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          December 16, 2024

          You mean the companies which are now failing?

      2. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2024

        Just have a Regulator that does not go Native.

        1. Dave Andrews
          December 16, 2024

          Customer/owner is the best regulator.

          1. Lynn Atkinson
            December 17, 2024

            +1

        2. Mickey Taking
          December 16, 2024

          and has rigorous KPI ( key performance indicators – for those not familiar).

    2. Mark B
      December 16, 2024

      My solution for the various monopolies would be to turn them Mutual Provident Societies (ie Co-operatives) owned by the employees. That way they have a stake in making the business work.

      1. Mike Wilson
        December 16, 2024

        That way they have a stake in making the business work.

        But how? A share of the profits? Prices up? How could the business fail when it has a monopoly?

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          December 16, 2024

          They do, all the time. Look at Royal Mail and the BBC.

          1. Mickey Taking
            December 16, 2024

            and in the case of the BBC almost compulsory fees for hardly any use, and Government subsidy for doubtful reasons.

  5. Peter Wood
    December 16, 2024

    Good Morning,
    True competition works, no doubt. But check the record. How many electricity/gas retailers when broke in 2021/2. Leaving a small cartel charging too high ‘standing charges’. Why is Thames water on the cusp of bankruptcy? Why have most of the independent rail operators gone bust?
    The model used in each case for privatisation needs to be better thought out. Privatisation, as applied by past Tory governments is an example of political dogma being inappropriately applied; one size rarely fits all.

    1. Original Richard
      December 16, 2024

      PW : “But check the record. How many electricity/gas retailers when broke in 2021/2. Leaving a small cartel charging too high ‘standing charges”

      The failure of energy retailers was because the regulator, Ofgem, failed to regulate them properly.

      The “standing charges” are high because it is used to pay for Net Zero.

      1. Peter Wood
        December 16, 2024

        Yes, the regulators seem to be incompetent, Ofgem, Ofwat, Ofcom, ORR and… Common denominator? However, our host’s point is that free markets and competition gives the best service and price (agreed); IF those conditions applied to the areas covered by these regulators — they wouldn’t be needed. What we have are public sector bureaucrats trying coral profit motivated companies. Guess what, the private companies just pack up and go away if they can’t make a profit. The regulator can’t win. The model needs to be re-thought.

  6. Mark B
    December 16, 2024

    Good morning.

    The State is one big monopoly. It creates the all the laws offers the electorate poor service. For example. For the last 14 years the government has been unable to control MASS immigration despite repeated promises to do so. And at no point after an election am I able to switch supplier.

    How can this be fair ?

    1. formula57
      December 16, 2024

      @ Mark B – A switch of supplier is achieved by emigrating.

      1. Mark B
        December 16, 2024

        No ! I am staying here. If someone mis-sells a product I have recourse to consumer law to remidy my complait. Where is there similar to those promises made to ‘buy’ my vote ?

        Fraud is theft. It is gaining goods, services or monies by lying.

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          December 16, 2024

          +1

        2. Lifelogic
          December 16, 2024

          Gaining power and jobs by serial lying then doing the reverse (which is what MPs and political parties do all the time) is however not a crime it seems. What is a value of a democratic vote if the candidates do not do as they promise. Indeed they invariably do the complete reverse higher taxes, more low skilled immigration, poorer services, lower living standards


    2. MBJ
      December 16, 2024

      Will the private sector control immigration when they rely on cheap Labour.

      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2024

        That’s the Corporate sector, not the capitalist private sector. The difference is that Corporation have no ‘Homebase’ – they can and do move their headquarters for tax purposes and pay very little tax anywhere. The capitalist private sector live and work in their country and have to pay the extra taxes that unproductive illegal immigration generates.

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          December 16, 2024

          You can also distinguish between what we British call ‘Capitalism’ and fascist corporatism because the people running Corporations are functionaries with salaries. It’s not their own money at stake as it is in a capitalist enterprise where the owner does NOT draw a salary but backs himself and his ideas to produce a profit on which he lives.

  7. David Andrews
    December 16, 2024

    IIRC the CEGB calculated it’s costs using replacement values for it assets, increasing them hugely after the 1970s inflation. It also made no allowance for alternative means of generation, such as gas fired stations. Competition destroyed such thinking and revealed why innovation in better alternatives is essential to an economy if it is to thrive. We are not and will not get this from Starmer’s government. It’s every policy move adds costs and destroys the capital needed to finance innovation and growth. Complete and utter disaster looms so long as this government remains in power.

  8. Donna
    December 16, 2024

    Yes, competition is good. Which is why the Blue-Green/Red-Green/Yellow-Green Westminster Uni-Party has failed so spectacularly. Voluntarily shackled to the EU and huddling around their self-declared “centre ground” they have effectively denied the electorate the possibility of alternative policies and governmental competition.

    We supposedly have an adversarial political system. It is why we have HM Government and HM Official Opposition. For the last 20 years, there has effectively been NO OPPOSITION to the WEF and Blair’s NuLabour.

    Whitehall and Westminster are where our problems originate.

    1. Mark B
      December 16, 2024

      Correct !

      BREXIT was a shout for freedom from the EU yoke which forces centralism in politics. Centralism ‘works’ (loosely) on the continent because they have totally different electoral system and forces parties to cooperate and create coalitions. Of course, as we have seen, they do not create stable governments. In the UK we had stable governments beause of the adviserial system. But this has broken down because manifesto’s, thanks to the EU where the real power is, mean nothing.

    2. Original Richard
      December 16, 2024

      Donna :

      Correct.

    3. Ian B
      December 16, 2024

      @Donna Thank you

      Unfortunately they ‘don’t get it’ they are not there to serve you and your kind, in fact any kind. Those that empower and pay them can take a hike. Their masters are elsewhere, so they are fighting the country and its people to ensure ‘the great reset’ for the new master ruler.

      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2024

        “No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems.
        They are trying to solve their own problems – of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.”

        Thomas Sowell

  9. Linda Brown
    December 16, 2024

    I don’t think either works myself after experiencing both. I do think private enterprise should be introduced but with government having control overall (if we had any decent government that is) to stop what has happened in the water industry, for instance. Private companies in rail and water especially need watching and someone needs to have control over what they give themselves for salaries and pay shareholders. Thames Water are saying they will run out of money by March but have just given themselves large salary increases and bonuses and shareholders have had their snouts in the trough as well. This has to stop. If you do not do the job efficiently they have to be sacked or given no pay increases until they meet the standards required. Why is it no one is sacked these days? When I was in charge of people in the Civil Service they had three warnings to do better and then if they did not, they were recommended for sacking. Too many lawyers in charge now.

    1. Roy Grainger
      December 16, 2024

      “shareholders have had their snouts in the trough as well”. You shouldn’t fall into Labour’s trap by demonising shareholders – for infrastructure companies like that they are mostly pension funds, including I imagine your pension fund and those of millions of low-paid workers with workplace pension schemes. If “the shareholders” don’t get paid then it is you who suffers by having a lower pension.

    2. Donna
      December 16, 2024

      Telling Civil Servants that they are under-performing/incompetent and threatening to sack them isn’t good for their mental health. Their Line Managers have to be kind and encouraging – and spend a great deal of time negotiating and agreeing their development and performance plans.

      1. Mickey Taking
        December 16, 2024

        and no shouting at hopeless performance.

    3. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      If Government has control over capitalists, they become Corporatists.
      It’s one or the other.
      What experience have you had of Capitalism?

    4. Ian B
      December 16, 2024

      @Linda Brown – once something exists because of Taxpayer Money(Governments don’t have any of their own) logic dictates democratic control. Unfortunately Parliament wants the glory but not the responsibility, the so-called watch-dogs are just individuals unable to get real jobs so really on political mates to hand them out money.

      Infrastructure projects without direct competition should be run by private companies on a fixed term, fixed cost basis. The assets they get to control(manage) should remain the property of the User/Consumer/Customer, allowing then for the situation that if they screw up, go bust, engage in neglect of service – they the users can find another body to run the operation. As it is with the likes of Thames Water all the infrastructure, facilities etc are owned by banks and lenders whom they are paying massive interest rates and charges too – more than the mere supply facilities can support. Those entities(the lenders) want the Taxpayer to fork out for ineptitude and management failure, its convenient to forget it is the customer and the taxpayer that funded the infrastructure the management mortgaged and sold.

  10. Magelec
    December 16, 2024

    The reason the CEGB didn’t construct gas fired power stations was that the government of the day wouldn’t allow it. Nothing to do with lack or competition. It was all to do with the coal industry. The planning of the electricity system in the UK was excellent. It was, and is, politicians who think they know better.

    1. Peter Gardner
      December 16, 2024

      Coal and energy (and the railways) were nationalised industries, monopolies.

      1. Peter Gardner
        December 16, 2024

        PS and the coal mine workers union was extremely powerful.

  11. formula57
    December 16, 2024

    “Public sector trading bodies that charge the customers should be subject to competition” – agreed, hence for example why do we not have two passport issuing offices, able to set their own timetables, prices and procedures, and leave it to consumers to chose which to use?

    But then the NHS charges customers, just indirectly through taxation. Is there not scope for competition and user choice there too?

  12. Rod Evans
    December 16, 2024

    Good luck with that concept of Public Sector competition Sir John. I asked my turkey flock, who was looking forward to an early Christmas?…. there were no takers.

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      He who pays the Piper calls the tune.
      The turkeys will be on the table at Christmas.

  13. Bloke
    December 16, 2024

    Consumers need choice to choose better.
    Organisations without the spur of needing to compete are prone to become sloppy.

  14. Bryan Harris
    December 16, 2024

    The dogma associated with nationalised industries is far from an accurate picture, and yet it has crept into the socialist psyche as a fact, in a similar way that masks allegedly stop infection from covid which has been indoctrinated into so many.

    Yes, people are prone to accept brainwashing techniques where misinformation is repeated until it becomes a fact, especially when they want to agree with that idea.

    For whatever reason, nationalised industries just do not have the gumption to make things work better, more efficiently, because they know even when they fail they will be bailed out by taxpayers. Private industries do not have that luxury so must work harder to get things not just right but competitive.

    Large nationalised monopolies offset the economies of scale with the inefficiencies of monopoly provision.

    Says it all.

  15. Peter Gardner
    December 16, 2024

    This argument is very true when the market is a) big enough for there to be two or more suppliers and b) most customers can reach and use most suppliers if they wish to do so. It is quite easy in national level services to build obstacles to condition b), a particular case being the NHS. Having emigrated to Australia and experienced a health service that worled brilliantly eeven during the covid pandemic and recovered very quickly afterwards I find it hard to understand how anyone in UK could doubt the need for fundamental reform of the NHS. But reform was a sure fire vote loser until Covidd proved beyond all doubt it is ghastly, awful. But even with the Covid Enquiry there seems to be no attempt to do the most obvious thing: benchmark its performance against that of the the best performing countries during the pandemic, among which is Australia and several east Asian countries. It seems to me that nobody actually has the will and determination to do anything even though the public now seem to favour reforms. No doubt because reform would risk the entire public sector going on strike. Lord Hannan wrote in The Telegraph that the UK should import Australia’s system lock, stock and barrel. Certainly that is the scale and reach of reform that is needed but it is just too difficult in UK because there are so many vested interests resisting change and, in my view, the public would reject any suggestion they should pay for healthcare other than through taxation because, since it is free at the point of delivery, it is actually paid for by the minority who are net contributors to the state. So the majority would actually resist the type of reforms that are needed.
    The railway privatisation kept track in the hands of the state and franchisee train operators were given long term contracts to run trains excluvely on a particular region so competition is very much attenuated and intermittent, the freedom for the train companies to open new routes or to increase capacity on a route is very limited. In effect each train company operates as a monopoly for a long period of time so they suffer from the same shortfalls as any monopoly.

  16. hefner
    December 16, 2024

    transportenvironment.org 09/12/2024 ‘Mind the gap! Europe’s rail operators: A comparative ranking’
    Please check the report (44 pages) that can be downloaded from there. It checks 27 operators over eight key criteria including ticket prices, punctualities and amenities.
    Overall ranking: Avanti 19th, GWR 22th, Eurostar 27th.

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      Yes Britain is overtaxed and the staff are in strong and aggressive unions. Hardly capitalism.

    2. Sam
      December 16, 2024

      Comparing nationalised and very heavily subsidised EU rail companies with others who have to operate in a very different market isn’t sensible.
      The report was made by a rail pressure group who support state ownership of rail.
      They set a strange set of scoring criteria.
      Eurostar, for example, was down graded because they don’t run a night service, don’t have a lot of room for pedal bikes, don’t offer enough last minute cheap fares and were compared against others who run longer distance routes on a price per mile basis.
      Hefner, the Guardian and the Independent got the headlines they wanted.

  17. Ian B
    December 16, 2024

    With-in that you have entities (services/products) that are driven by, as in survive by, being Customer/Consumer driven that also generate profits and wealth. Profits and Wealth are not the work of the Devil, they are the ‘seed corn’ for tomorrow.
    Where Governments and State run operations fail is there is in them a god given belief, a religious fervour, that only they can do things. They do things on being ‘Not for Profit’, code for compulsory taxpayer funded, the future is someone else’s problem (the Taxpayers). The only ones that feel good from their outcomes is them their-selves, high paid high reward jobs where customer/consumer deliver is but a side show.
    To much vanity, self-gratification has crept into Parliament since Blair, so much so that it has become self-corrupting. Now it has become punishment of the people and the country

    1. Ian B
      December 16, 2024

      As was highlighted by @javelin yesterday the deluded religion that is the Socialist World Government of the WEF that is going about resetting the World in their image. There is no such thing a serving a people or a country – just self-serving hypocrites of the highest order. The UK has gone back to the days of the Norman Conquest, the them and us. Slaves were renamed surfs to make the conquerors feel good about themselves.
      The deluded fools that have destroyed our Democracy, all for personal entertainment and their personal new religion:
      – Kier Starmer
      – Rishi Sunak
      – Liz Truss
      – Boris Johnson
      – Theresa May
      – George Osborne
      – David Cameron
      – Gordon-Brown
      – Tony Blair

  18. William Long
    December 16, 2024

    Socialists are not interested in competition or efficiency; they are interested in control of everything we do.

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      And skimming the cream off the top – undeserved.

  19. Ian B
    December 16, 2024

    From the MsM more ego from those that have stolen our country.
    David Lammy, said that HTS, which now runs most of Syria, remained a banned terrorist organisation, but (is it just ‘He’) will send them ÂŁ50m of OUR taxpayer money
    What is the point of Parliament – when our government is just a Dictatorship of the worst kind:
    More is achievable when a government works with its people and doesn’t keep fighting them. I am meaning the UK here, they jump to sound-bites to appease a few extreme radicals in their cabal then impose the cost on the many.

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      Lammy confirms that they Government support terrorists and terroristm.
      We all know this – we saw how they policed pro-Palestinian demonstrations.

  20. Richard1
    December 16, 2024

    A good way to get productivity in the public sector would be to insist on 35 hours per week in the office from all white collar workers paid by the state. Many of the least productive would quit. No chance of that with Labour of course.

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      42 hours! And that is half of my weekly input.

  21. Original Richard
    December 16, 2024

    The mistake is thinking that our Uniparty Parliament wants to reduce waste and end low productivity. Nothing could be further from the truth. High wasteful spending is to provide a justification for high taxation and low productivity to justify more state employees.

    The real lack of competition is Parliament itself where there is no opposition to these policies and includes mass immigration and Net Zero, both designed to impoverish and control. There is no climate emergency as shown by the IPCC Working Group 1 (“The Science”) Table 12 in Chapter which shows no signal for climate change (storms, precipitation, droughts etc) other than some mild warming (0.14 degrees per decade according to UAH satellite data) and Shula & Ott have demonstrated both theoretically and experimentally that there is no greenhouse warming effect from CO2 or water vapour at the Earth’s surface.

  22. Ian B
    December 16, 2024

    Lammy appears to have egotistical form on this type of thing, he gave the Chagos Islands away, to a Country that has never owned them, stealing them from the UK and the Chagos people. No consultation, no rights, no right for the self-determination of the Chagos people( A UN requirement). Just fight the people of the UK, the Chagos Islands all to appease seemingly his the extremist fellow travellers.
    Then people want to suggest Government and the State should run hands-on the delivery of the fabric of Society, when the are against the very idea of even people living in a democracy

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      Lammy USA’s the Royal Prerogative. It must go!

      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2024

        Sorry, ‘uses’ – my supersmart computer knows what it wants me to have said.

        1. hefner
          December 16, 2024

          Turning off the AutoCorrect in your word processor should not be such a difficult task for someone who told us had been working with computers.

          1. Lynn Atkinson
            December 17, 2024

            The autocorrect helps because I’m not a typist. Like most IT people of my generation, it’s a two fingered operation. Also I have to look at the keyboard.
            What I don’t like is when the whole word is changed to a different one that is senseless in the context of the sentence. You would think that the test data would have ironed that out.

  23. hefner
    December 16, 2024

    A very interesting gov.uk 22/11/2024 ‘UK trade in numbers (web version)’ to be used in a few months/years to see what real impact the UK joining the CPTPP will have had.

    1. Martin in Bristol
      December 16, 2024

      Even the Labour government like this trade deal.
      They say ÂŁ2 billion a year economic boost long term.
      Are you so pro EU that you dislike this trade deal hefner?

      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 16, 2024

        Of course he is. He’s furious at Britain for abandoning the failing EU and wants us to suffer for escaping that obvious disaster – mostly run by womenđŸ«Š

  24. Ukret123
    December 16, 2024

    Service at A&E Friday night /Saturday morning existed in theory at a major regional hospital and best described as undesirable/ not fit for purpose NF4P.
    Due to the uncomplaining Brits’ stuff upper lip plus the feeling that if you do complain you will suffer more so “Do Not Complain, Bite your tongue, Count to 100 etc if you want or Go Home”.
    NF4P is prevalent in so many areas where monopolies by government given the top down arrogant “We invented the National Health service (but don’t know how to run it, least of all fix it)” .
    The buck stops with no one and they gloat :
    “You get it for free, so don’t complain” .
    Except we don’t – we do pay and well over the odds for this nonsense going on in all areas Roads, Rail, Energy, Vehicles, Housing etc.

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      Ah – but all the immigrants and much of the state sector get it free.
      You speak of John Bull who needs to kick up a rumpus by ceasing to pay! (Legally)

  25. forthurst
    December 16, 2024

    “Competition” in water supply leads to sewerage dumped in rivers. An example of an actual competitive industry is computer hardware where technological change has wrought massive reductions in costs making it universally available and left a trail of bankrupt suppliers whose technology became obsolete.

    Reply sewage dumped should lead to prosecution. The nationalised industry did it a lot but didn’t even record or report it.

  26. a-tracy
    December 16, 2024

    If a rail company, for example, can’t get their act together on weekends, why don’t you open up the rail lines to other companies on the weekends that they can’t get their staff to work and give them fewer slots? The government should then provide the public a choice of unreliable Avanti -v- say, Virgin.

    The rail unions aren’t powerful because they’re fantastic negotiators; they’re successful because we get one choice or none when they go on strike, so that holds too much power over us.

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      December 16, 2024

      One big reason why the railways (and busses) must never be allowed to be a monopoly supplier of long distance transport.

      1. a-tracy
        December 20, 2024

        I agree Lynn, people have forgotten what it was like to have monopoly public sector operators and their unions dictating what they are prepared to do. Can you imagine if retail was just one nationalised industry, they wouldn’t be able to afford to open on weekends, bank holidays, no-one would.

        I listen to people saying everyone should be as unionised as rail unions, they are ONLY successful because we have no choice, if and when we have a choice they will all be out of work and with no sympathy either, I don’t think they realise how hated they are becoming for ruining people’s travel plans on weekends and holidays.

  27. Mark
    December 16, 2024

    When I was a small boy it was quite common for young boys to claim they wanted to be a train driver when they grew up, perhaps motivated by having a train set as a toy, or seeing steam trains in action. Knowing grandparents would ignore these ideas. Now, grandparents would be well advised to push for a train driving career. It seems that with some extra for overtime it would pay rather better than being say a GP, and you don’t have to pay off a student loan either. The benefit of nationalisation…

    1. K
      December 16, 2024

      Apparently the new Hornby train set has a woman train driver pictured in the cab. It says on the box “This model will not work at night or weekends.”

      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 17, 2024

        😂 – so that’s why the wages rank in the top 1%! Evening out the inequality that God stupidly instigated.
        Now if only God was female 
.

    2. Mickey Taking
      December 16, 2024

      No! – we ought to be only a few years away from automated trains and redundant drivers.
      Bring it on I hear commuters shouting.

      1. Lynn Atkinson
        December 17, 2024

        Then you are in the hands of the computer programmers! And when they have a crash it’s all the lights out.

        1. a-tracy
          December 20, 2024

          I do think Nights and weekends trains (maybe starting with freight trains) will be run on automated driver trains because it is becoming apparent train drivers don’t want to do this work at a profitable cost.

          I supported HS2 if it connected in London to give us an alternative when the west coast rail line frequently cuts trains and services.

  28. Library Fan
    December 16, 2024

    For the poor ( moneywise ) old codgers who no longer can totter down to the library
    the RVS (WRVS minus the W)
    organise library books dellivered free by a volunteer.
    I think this is wonderful and an examplr of all that is good and beautiful

  29. Library Fan
    December 16, 2024

    Computers verifying posters is lazy. One has to jump through numerous barricades to post !
    Computers cannot distinguish between good and bad people.
    It’s funny really.

  30. local loon
    December 16, 2024

    Us, we.
    Some people, as long as they can cloak themselves in
    us, we and be in a group
    can’t SEE.
    SEEING
    isn’t being violent
    It’s quiet knowing of right from wrong
    a personal thing.

Comments are closed.