Privitization by Stealth

galactus

I've just paid up for private waste collection. It was a lot cheaper than getting the Council to collect.

So then:

* I used to pay taxes for waste collection and now...I pay a private firm.
* The private firm don't employ the "pay by weight" method (so most won't bother)

What was the point of this whole "pay by weight" episode?

Effectively, to my mind, Waste Management has been privatised (by stealth).

You may argue that people still have a choice (to go with Council collection). Economics put the lie to this.

None of this has been managed correctly by the government, local councils or civil service. Gombeen men all.

I don't condone it but I can understand how people, financially stretched to the limit, would resort to illegal dumping.

At least Maggie Thatcher had the honesty to say that she was going to privatize a sector.

Stabshauptmann

The ESB is also the victum of this stealth approach.
Ireland had the cheapest rates of electricity in europe
The government wanted to "open up the market"
Nobody wants to compete with the ESB because they're too damn good
ESB forced by government to raise prices above competitors
Competitors under cut ESB (surprise)
ESB loses market share and must raise prices
Cycle continues
Soon we will have lost a great asset and a key part of our attractiveness as a site for locating industry

The governemnt and right wing think tanks now shout about the ESB and overpricing and how it needs to be privitised. :rolleyes:

Its a shame, a real shame.


Aerlingus, a fine airline, it provides a level of service not demanded my the market, thus very hard to be profitable. After much state aid it becomes profitable, whats the first thing we should do? Privitise it apparently and put the profits in the hands of a very select few - what ever we do lets not repay the governemt, maintain employment and give the public the service they deserve.

Government can sometimes change market out comes for the better, deregulation is effective when done properly, ppl should compete with the ESB but the ESB should not have to roll over and die.
Taxis were deregulated without destroying existing business.

Privitisation can work when its appropriate. TSB was a sound company, did a usefull job but was no longer providing an essential service. It wasnt simply axed, it was allowed to be incorporated into the finance market in a fair and equitable way.

Sand

At least Maggie Thatcher had the honesty to say that she was going to privatize a sector.

Its all down to the nature of politics, lobby groups and man of the moment policies. Theres no single overall philosophy behind most if any of the governments policy areas - short term demands change, budgets change, ministers change, parties change etc etc - so you basically wind up with a bunch of people each fighting for a turn to take the wheel.

There was a good quote about never dismiss an action as being malevolent when plain out incompetence would suffice to explain it.

uncivilservant

galactus wrote:

None of this has been managed correctly by the government, local councils or civil service. Gombeen men all.

The civil service had nothing to do with this one.

DadaKopf

What was the point of this whole "pay by weight" episode?

To encourage people to recycle by penalising people who pollute the environment. It was not intended as a source of extra revenue.

I've just paid up for private waste collection. It was a lot cheaper than getting the Council to collect.

It may be cheaper and less hassle for you but can it be guarunteed that your waste being disposed of responsibly?

NewDubliner

Watch out for Civil Service departments that state that they're going to 'concentrate on the core business' or 'maximise internal resources through efficient use of external contractors'.

Captain Trips

NewDubliner wrote:

Watch out for Civil Service departments that state that they're going to 'concentrate on the core business' or 'maximise internal resources through efficient use of external contractors'.

I think they might instead head to here: http://www.lonsteins.com/management_speak.cgi to think up new bull**** management speak.

We review globalization among focused dot-com

galactus

DadaKopf wrote:

To encourage people to recycle by penalising people who pollute the environment. It was not intended as a source of extra revenue.

I'm aware of that. However private contractors won't chastise you for putting recyclables in with non-recyclables. Hence there is a temptation to dump everything in the bin.

DadaKopf wrote:

It may be cheaper and less hassle for you but can it be guarunteed that your waste being disposed of responsibly?

Yes, I checked the firm out as best I could. They've been in the business for years and waste goes to the landfill.

oscarBravo

galactus wrote:

* The private firm don't employ the "pay by weight" method (so most won't bother)

What was the point of this whole "pay by weight" episode?

As I understand it, all private waste collection firms will be required to introduce "pay by weight" in the next year or so.

galactus wrote:

I don't condone it but I can understand how people, financially stretched to the limit, would resort to illegal dumping.

I can't.

pwd

People stretched financially to the limit are eligible for a waiver from the bin charges.

seedot

uncivilservant wrote:

The civil service had nothing to do with this one.

Are the city managers not civil servants? Honest question.

People stretched financially to the limit are eligible for a waiver from the bin charges.

But in Cork there was a court case which ruled waivers illegal where the service has been privatised. In Dub Laoighaire / Rathdown the waiver only covers the flat fee not the cost of actually having your bins collected (lift and pay by weight charges). In Mt Brown in the south inner city in Dublin the city council introduced non-collection of untagged bags before they issued the waiver tags - leading to piles of bags in the street as people, unaware, put their bags out as usual safe in the knowledge they were entitled to a waiver.

Roisin Dubh

Necromancer wrote:

The ESB is also the victum of this stealth approach.
Ireland had the cheapest rates of electricity in europe
The government wanted to "open up the market"
Nobody wants to compete with the ESB because they're too damn good
ESB forced by government to raise prices above competitors
Competitors under cut ESB (surprise)
ESB loses market share and must raise prices
Cycle continues
Soon we will have lost a great asset and a key part of our attractiveness as a site for locating industry

The governemnt and right wing think tanks now shout about the ESB and overpricing and how it needs to be privitised. :rolleyes:

Its a shame, a real shame.


Aerlingus, a fine airline, it provides a level of service not demanded my the market, thus very hard to be profitable. After much state aid it becomes profitable, whats the first thing we should do? Privitise it apparently and put the profits in the hands of a very select few - what ever we do lets not repay the governemt, maintain employment and give the public the service they deserve.

Government can sometimes change market out comes for the better, deregulation is effective when done properly, ppl should compete with the ESB but the ESB should not have to roll over and die.
Taxis were deregulated without destroying existing business.

Privitisation can work when its appropriate. TSB was a sound company, did a usefull job but was no longer providing an essential service. It wasnt simply axed, it was allowed to be incorporated into the finance market in a fair and equitable way.

Well on the ESB point, I would argue that the short term pain is needed so that we can have long term gain and lower prices in the long run. For this to happen, competitors need to be allowed to erode some of ESB's dominance. In future, when this has happenedm, they will no longer be subject to punishments for so-called predatory pricing.