CaRT raging success or dismal failure?

[MtB]

Just now, Chewbacka said:

The labour government introduced the public-private partnership for putting new school and hospital buildings into the private sector then buying then over a long term.  A bit of a disaster.  Not sure I would want to extend that approach within the public sector.

 

That's completely different from Cuthound's point. School and hospital buildings do not become obsolete and old technology after ten years. 

[Chewbacka]

Just now, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

That's completely different from Cuthound's point. School and hospital buildings do not become obsolete and old technology after ten years. 

True, but public bodies are not known for their negotiating skills, and I would be most annoyed if after leasing hi tech kit the tax payer ended up paying a lot more.

one think for certain is the leasing company is going to make a good profit on any leasing deals, which can only be paid for by the tax payer.

[MtB]

6 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

one think for certain is the leasing company is going to make a good profit on any leasing deals, which can only be paid for by the tax payer.

 

You ol' cynic, you.

 

My own limited experiences of contracts awarded by public bodies is the price struck is usually far lower than the same service sold to private enterprise.

 

So low in fact it is hardly worth entering into the contract. This was 40 year ago however, so maybe things have changed. 

[cuthound]

1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

You ol' cynic, you.

 

My own limited experiences of contracts awarded by public bodies is the price struck is usually far lower than the same service sold to private enterprise.

 

So low in fact it is hardly worth entering into the contract. This was 40 year ago however, so maybe things have changed. 

 

My experience of contracts with public bodies (from the contractors side - two contracts with the NHS to provide combined power and heating and one with a local authority to provide district heating) is that they don't really know what they want, and thus keep changing their minds and asking for extras when the contact has been let.

 

Although the initial contract is let at a very competitive price,  the contractor doesn't have to charge competitive prices for the extras, (unless the specification writer had the foresight to ask for agreed labour rates per trade and materials at cost plus which public bodies dont seem routinely to). 

 

This results in extras being charged at truly eye watering rates and the additional work prevents the contract from being completed on time.

 

The main problem is that public bodies usually promote from within, rather than actively seeking those from outside industry with the relevant skills.

Edited August 11, 2019 by cuthound
Spillung

[cuthound]

1 hour ago, Chewbacka said:

The labour government introduced the public-private partnership for putting new school and hospital buildings into the private sector then buying then over a long term.  A bit of a disaster.  Not sure I would want to extend that approach within the public sector.

 

Whilst I agree the finances of PPI are widely touted as a disaster, I used to live near and frequently work in London. 

 

From the perspective of a service user, the crumbling dingy tube network and old decrepit hospitals were transformed into modern, light, buildings, more suited to the 21st century than the 19th.

[Chewbacka]

1 hour ago, cuthound said:

 

Whilst I agree the finances of PPI are widely touted as a disaster, I used to live near and frequently work in London. 

 

From the perspective of a service user, the crumbling dingy tube network and old decrepit hospitals were transformed into modern, light, buildings, more suited to the 21st century than the 19th.

But that could have been done without grossly overpaying and leaving money short for future projects 

[cuthound]

1 minute ago, Chewbacka said:

But that could have been done without grossly overpaying and leaving money short for future projects 

 

True, but it hadn't during the long tenure of the previous government.

[Jerra]

Haing just read the title is there not a possibility CRT are somewhere between a raging success and a dismall failure?

[cuthound]

22 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Haing just read the title is there not a possibility CRT are somewhere between a raging success and a dismall failure?

 

Ain't that the truth.

[Onionman]

In my experience very few things (if any) can be categorised as "raging success " or "dismal failure".  A black/white comparison rarely, if ever, suits reality. Most organisations, people and activities fall somewhere in the middle. Life's shaded.

[Mike Todd]

10 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

You ol' cynic, you.

 

My own limited experiences of contracts awarded by public bodies is the price struck is usually far lower than the same service sold to private enterprise.

 

So low in fact it is hardly worth entering into the contract. This was 40 year ago however, so maybe things have changed. 

And when it us no longer profitable, bearing in mind cancellation costs, they walk away, something that a public body finds much harder.

[Steilsteven]

17 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

And when it us no longer profitable, bearing in mind cancellation costs, they walk away, something that a public body finds much harder.

Public bodies were invented to provide services, not to make a profit, just like charities really.

 

Keith

[Mike Todd]

2 hours ago, Steilsteven said:

Public bodies were invented to provide services, not to make a profit, just like charities really.

 

Keith

No, not like charities. As with a limited company, if a charity cannot balance the books it goes bust and exits the market.