What exactly should the government be running?

[stockGURU]

I have a confession to make. I'm in my late thirties and I am a completely and utterly disillusioned lefty. In my late teens and early twenties I was full of idealism and hoped for a more equal and egalitarian society. Year by year, step by step, I slowly and methodically got that silly idealism knocked out of me and a good dose of reality knocked into me. I realised that in the history of western civilisation there has never been anything even vaguely resembling a fair, or egalitarian society and that history alone should demonstrate that such a thing will never be a reality, other than in people's imaginations.

So what does that have the thread title? Well, being a lefty I was also a big supporter of the public sector. Public health, public education, I wanted private enterprise out of it and big government in. Let the government run it for the benefit all all Australians I very foolishly thought. After all, isn't that what government is for? My youthful naivety makes me chuckle now but at the time I was dead serious and very passionate about it.

Like any good lefty I defended public education and public health against all criticism, valid or not. I railed against the evils of private enterprise and that it was up to representatives of the Australian people to care for the health of and educate Australians. I made excuses for the under funding and under staffing of Queensland Health, blaming it on the conservatives even though nothing changed when Labor was in power. I even made excuses for the system that allowed Dr. Jayant Patel to tear through the town of Bundaberg with a scalpel leaving too many dead and disfigured in his wake, thinking it had to be better than the alternative.

Things started to change dramatically when I started seeing a girl who worked in the Queensland public health system in project management. I started to hear stories of horrific waste. Money pissed away on wholely unnecessary airfares, accommodation, catering, more than one person doing the same job, expensive projects with no point or purpose but simply to justify someone's position or for political reasons and the system being unable to get rid of terribly incompetent people that shouldn't have ever been there in the first place. Basically, everyone within the system knows its government money, that there is very little accountability unless it all goes pear shaped, and they all just want to rort the system for all it's worth.

You can't escape human nature, can you? And I guess it's that realisation that made me question the role of the government in managing almost anything. We have a failed, politically correct public education system that turns out kids who can't spell or construct a reasonable sentence but can mindlessly parrot partisan propaganda about the lefty cause of the moment such as global warming or whaling.

So what do you think government is good at managing and what do you think it should manage? Can private enterprise do most things better and more cost effectively? Is it possible for the public sector to ever escape the terrible waste and bureaucracy that is it's trademark?

What exactly, in your opinion, should the government be running? Given their track record (and I am talking about both major political parties) I'm not sure they should be running much of anything.

 

[jersey10]

The first thing we need to get rid of is 3 levels of government.

 

[Smurf1976]

I've worked in both the public and the private sectors.

In general, I'd say the best value when the taxpayer is footing the bill comes from those "breakaway" government entities that politicians struggle to control. Accountable only to themselves, they actually end up doing a decent job simply because their very survival in that form depends on it. One major stuff up and it's game over and back to direct political control.

In contrast, a private operator doing work funded by government will milk the taxpayer for everything they can get. I've seen that just so many times that I take it as a given now. Get a contractor in and they'll do the minimum whilst charging the maximum. In most cases consultants will just try and pass the work straight back to remaining government employees and then charge a fortune for a bit of report writing. That's the worst possible outcome - high cost and rotten service.

So I don't think there's any magic answer. The health system would work a lot better though with doctors (yes, DOCTORS) in charge at the top and the Minister being politely told what to do and say. It used to work quite well that way in other departments I can think of with knowledgeable people in charge and the Minister really only repeating what they were told word for word, not actually making any real decisions. That this approach went out of fashion is where it all went wrong in my opinion.

 

[saiter]

What exactly, in your opinion, should the government be running? Given their track record (and I am talking about both major political parties) I'm not sure they should be running much of anything.

Would be better if the people just voted on all the big things (whether we should go to war, whether the nation needs a stimulus plan, better internet, better industry support) and then let the government take care of smaller things (I'm not sure what these would be )? Even then, this system would be flawed because it assumes that everyone knows what they're voting for and is up to date on everything concerning the nation. For this to happen, the people would have to absorb a HUGE amount of information and still find time for everything else.

 

[stockGURU]

Before people accuse me of just complaining and not offering any solutions I do have a couple of ideas.

I would like to see some things funded by the government but managed by private enterprise. Those companies who are successful at whatever they are paid by the government to do would get to continue doing it. Those who failed would get replaced.

By saying I am a disillusioned lefty in no way implies that I consider myself to be right wing. If anything I have become a moderate, a pragmatist, a rejector of dogma and ideology and a big believer in finding out the best, most effective solution to a problem.

 

[Glen48]

I refuse to vote in any election in the mistaken belief if enough of us don't vote the pollies might starting to ask us what we want.
I heard in the Public Hospitals they put new band aids etc on a table each time a new victims is admitted and throw the old ones out at one stage they were giving them to the RSPCA
I see David Hamell's ( Ex qld Pollie) son is now running messages for some minister that's the way it works here in QLD.
11 servants/paper pushers for every DR.

 

[Julia]

Before people accuse me of just complaining and not offering any solutions I do have a couple of ideas.

I would like to see some things funded by the government but managed by private enterprise. Those companies who are successful at whatever they are paid by the government to do would get to continue doing it. Those who failed would get replaced.

Stockguru, I like this idea. Are you suggesting that the companies would tender for the work, offering a set price for a given period of providing the service?

If we apply this principle to the health system, how do you think it would work?
Private health management companies managing the hospitals, employing staff etc? I can't see why it wouldn't be just as good if applied to the now very wasteful and incompetent public system as it seems to be with the private hospitals.

There is much complaining about how costs have gone up when e.g. electricity has been privatised. This seems on the surface to be companies increasing their profit margins. How could this be avoided if a system such as you're suggesting were to apply to health?

Thanks for raising an interesting and very valid topic.

 

[Bill M]

The Federal Government should always run the military. The Public Hospitals should be run by them too.

The way the NSW Government has ruined our Public Hospitals is just a joke. The sooner the Feds take over the better.

When I here case after case of women miscarrying in Public Hospital toilets it just makes me sick to the stomach that we have to live in such 3rd world conditions.

Good accountable management can make this work. No use throwing money at incompetent useless State Governments, they can never seem to get it right.

Maybe private enterprise can run our Government Hospitals, it doesn't matter but we must have constant accountability.

 

[stockGURU]

Stockguru, I like this idea. Are you suggesting that the companies would tender for the work, offering a set price for a given period of providing the service?

If we apply this principle to the health system, how do you think it would work?
Private health management companies managing the hospitals, employing staff etc? I can't see why it wouldn't be just as good if applied to the now very wasteful and incompetent public system as it seems to be with the private hospitals.

There is much complaining about how costs have gone up when e.g. electricity has been privatised. This seems on the surface to be companies increasing their profit margins. How could this be avoided if a system such as you're suggesting were to apply to health?

Thanks for raising an interesting and very valid topic.

Hi Julia,

Thanks for your support.

Yes, there would be a tendering process similar to what already exists in both the public and private sectors. Companies would tender to supply medical services of one form or another to the state government. I expect that this would be done in several divisions. For example one company would tender to supply nursing staff, whether this would be statewide or by district I don't really know.

I assume there would then be a few levels of upper management who would of course be government officials (read: bureaucrats) with whom the buck would ultimately stop. These individuals would co-ordinate and tie everything together at this upper management level.

Anyway, that's just my initial thoughts based on my very limited knowledge. Would be interested in anyone else's views.

 

[equitycreditloan]

If you are looking for egalitarianism, you're wishing for a utopia. I think the system of governance is never a problem, it's the people holding the reins of the government machinery that spells a huge difference. They personify the entire government and it's machineries. Don't you think it's people who run the government we should be especially be wary of?

 

[Happy]

..

Things started to change dramatically when I started seeing a girl who worked in the Queensland public health system in project management. I started to hear stories of horrific waste. Money pissed away on wholely unnecessary airfares, accommodation, catering, more than one person doing the same job, expensive projects with no point or purpose but simply to justify someone's position or for political reasons and the system being unable to get rid of terribly incompetent people that shouldn't have ever been there in the first place. Basically, everyone within the system knows its government money, that there is very little accountability unless it all goes pear shaped, and they all just want to rort the system for all it's worth.

You can't escape human nature, can you? And I guess it's that realisation that made me question the role of the government in managing almost anything.

..

We could probably find solution for the problem looking at what your girlfriend knew and was unable/unwilling to stick her head up.

If we could have some way to stop >Patels & Co< and all the rorters much sooner we could do well.

Government is people and if people behave inappropriately, should be replaced ASAP.

 

[Calliope]

It was all explained in Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister why govt. departments should not be running enterprises where is no accountability to the taxpayer. And there is no point in setting up boards to oversight these enterprises. The members are handpicked by the Minister.

It is a worry that the a large proportion of the infrastructure stimulus package will be lost in waste and graft and mismanagement. And many people will get on the gravy train and become rich.

What can we do about it?:dunno:

 

[beerwm]

LAYOFFS!!! - enforced by efficient management

wasnt 4 out of 5 people in QLD Health Admin staff?

My brother works in at a Council doing accounting, and he does nothing, loads of slackers, hardly anywork, and they are hiring.

LAYOFFS!!!

sure you might say, but soo many people will lose jobs?
WRONG

the money saved will go towards tax-cuts/IMPORTANT government projects creating jobs.

Does a business go into debt or cut costs for-most?
why should the government be any different.

 

[Smurf1976]

There is much complaining about how costs have gone up when e.g. electricity has been privatised. This seems on the surface to be companies increasing their profit margins.

In the specific case of electricity there has also been a big loss of efficiency in power station dispatch. That is, low cost plants operating at low output whilst much higher cost plants run flat out to meet demand. This is done specifically to force costs (and hence prices) up and happens daily.

It's not public versus private ownership that does this, indeed overall I can see some definite benefits in private ownership. It's the forcing of competition in what is a natural monopoly industry that has directly lowered generation dispatch efficiency.

A single owner of the system, especially a privately owned one, would be looking to keep costs to the minimum rather than ratchet them up at every opportunity.

 

[Smurf1976]

Stockguru, I like this idea. Are you suggesting that the companies would tender for the work, offering a set price for a given period of providing the service?

This has been tried with various things in Tassie.

The downside is that the contractor will do only what is necessary and profitable for the duration of their contract.

So if they are fixing physical infrastructure (for example) they'll fix them only well enough to last the duration of the contract. There's no incentive for them to spend more and do a proper job of it that will last much longer.

Also they'll only invest according to the duration of the contract. One item of machinery (for example) might be cheapest over its 20 year life. But if another works out more profitable over only a (say) 5 year period then that's what they'll buy. Trouble is, society as a whole is doing things the expensive way with this approach.

Another very real risk is that the contractor becomes entrenched and dominant in the industry. I've seen that go as far as the contractor putting company stickers and other ID on the property they have been engaged to maintain. They act as though they own it all, and they might as well once the contract comes up for renewal and there's no rival big enough to replace them.

I'm not sure about the other states, but this approach has been very common in Tassie for years now and I wouldn't say it's any better than other methods. Anecdotally, there seems to be a bit of a move against it now for the above reasons - too many things literally falling apart.

 

[Julia]

Smurf, what about if it were applied more to the provision of labour, e.g. medical and nursing staff for our hospitals?

At present, at least in Qld, there are more bureaucrats than healthcare staff in the health system. That's just nuts. Doctors should be running health.

 

[white_crane]

At present, at least in Qld, there are more bureaucrats than healthcare staff in the health system. That's just nuts. Doctors should be running health.

Not just qld health. I work in another state department, it's the same.

Yes, there is a lot of wasting of resources. Some of this is attributable to the attitude of the workers - they're not paying for it, so they don't take reasonable care of equipment, they rort the system for all they can get, productivity isn't a word in their vocabulary etc.. Some is also attributable to government policy - paperwork!!!, everything must be recorded and produced in triplicate, they want to see reports about every little detail before funding will be given etc..

Add to this infighting, internal politics, jobs for the mates, left arm doesn't know what the right arm is doing, oneupmanship....the list goes on and on and on.

There are genuine people who care about what they do and want to see results, but they get impeded at every turn. It gets downright infuriating. I think many times people simply give up and become what they said they would never be. And so it perpetuates.

Privatise everything, the government (no matter which party) is bunch of useless f*&(wits anyway.

 

[Julia]

Not just qld health. I work in another state department, it's the same.

Yes, there is a lot of wasting of resources. Some of this is attributable to the attitude of the workers - they're not paying for it, so they don't take reasonable care of equipment, they rort the system for all they can get, productivity isn't a word in their vocabulary etc.. Some is also attributable to government policy - paperwork!!!, everything must be recorded and produced in triplicate, they want to see reports about every little detail before funding will be given etc..

Add to this infighting, internal politics, jobs for the mates, left arm doesn't know what the right arm is doing, oneupmanship....the list goes on and on and on.

There are genuine people who care about what they do and want to see results, but they get impeded at every turn. It gets downright infuriating. I think many times people simply give up and become what they said they would never be. And so it perpetuates.

Privatise everything, the government (no matter which party) is bunch of useless f*&(wits anyway.

Thanks for the insights, White Crane.
Do you think it would be possible to change this culture within the public service? i.e. if a different attitude and some inspiration came from the top would most employees respond? I believe that most people will feel better about themselves and their jobs if they feel they are making a genuine effort towards a worthwhile end.

I look at and listen to Stephen Robertson, Qld Minister of Health, and can absolutely understand how all that you say would be the case. I can't think of any other government minister so devoid of personality and so wrapped up in petty carping and excuse mongering.

 

[white_crane]

Thanks for the insights, White Crane.
Do you think it would be possible to change this culture within the public service? i.e. if a different attitude and some inspiration came from the top would most employees respond? I believe that most people will feel better about themselves and their jobs if they feel they are making a genuine effort towards a worthwhile end.

I look at and listen to Stephen Robertson, Qld Minister of Health, and can absolutely understand how all that you say would be the case. I can't think of any other government minister so devoid of personality and so wrapped up in petty carping and excuse mongering.

Most definitely. If there was some responsible, strong but fair leadership coming from the top, I think that most employees would respond. I believe that there would still be a minority of people who simply wouldn't care and would continue to push for all they could get, but on the whole things would improve dramatically.

We need to cut down on the beauracracy - reduce the number of pen pushers and increase the number of people 'on the ground', get some commonsense and workable policies in place, make employees feel valued, make them feel like they have a voice and that their opinions matter, give them goals to work towards, treat all workers fairly - everyone plays by the same rules, reduce the gap between management and field staff (that whole us and them mentality) and get management to stand behind their employees when warranted.

But also make them responsible - give them reasonable consequences for inappropriate attitudes, help them realise that the government is not an endless pit of money and give them credit for excellent work.

Ideally, the end result would be to increase efficiency, reduce wastage, increase productivity, improve communication, develop strong teamwork and increase employee satisfaction - both job and self.

And I believe that it can be done.

 

[Trevor_S]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25046598-7583,00.html

Governments in general are not good at delivering public infrastructure.