I loved this letter in the Guardian today:
I was interested to read Philip Green's proposals for "more centralised procurement" by government (Report, 11 October). In 1989 I became the last director of the Crown Suppliers; my task was to close it down. This was an organisation that carried out many of the very activities which Green now identifies as best done centrally. The Crown Suppliers bought or commissioned the purchase of furniture, office equipment, floor coverings and related goods for all government departments. Many of the products were of standard designs so as to achieve increased economy of scale. When the Crown Suppliers was closed, responsibility for these matters was devolved to individual departments. There may have been some co-operation between departments subsequently, but clearly Green feels there is much still to be gained.
In parallel, there was an organisation, the Property Services Agency, which provided buildings for government use either by renting facilities or commissioning new build. It was also responsible for maintenance. In both organisations there were professional staff to secure best outcomes, balancing first costs, costs in use, and durability. Both organisations, under many different titles, have worthy histories. Plus ?ßa change.
Robert Gomme
London
So who was it who created the current mess in government purchasing? The Tories! And why? No doubt to boost private sector profits.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Aha, its all the Tories fault!
And meanwhile the Labour Party just smiled and waved for 13 years – probably also to boost private sector profits?
All this still doesn’t excuse the utter incompetence of those given the responsibility of spending (taxpayers money) in the various departments.
@JayPee
Oh go one
Publish that long list of private sector enterprises that are 100% efficient
Please!
Subtle difference being that the public sector is effectively the servant of the people and draw their salary and “performance bonuses” from tax revenues. The same cannot be said of the private sector.
Being the private sector, their level of efficiency is really the concern of their shareholders and other stakeholders. Do you honestly believe that trying to compare the failure of civil servants to manage our money, yes our money not theirs, with an underperforming inefficient private enterprise makes their failure any less reprehensible.
@JayPee
I see them as the same
Most companies have pensioner shareholders – and are therefore widely accountable
And all companies therefore have a duty of care – so should be just as careful as the public sector
But what you forget – and it is reprehensible of you to do so (your language) is that all the people you are so keen to criticise are human beings – and as fallible as you
Your position in this respect is utterly untenable – unless of course you’re perfect – and I won’t believe it if you say you are
@JayPee
“Subtle difference being that the public sector is effectively the servant of the people and draw their salary and “performance bonuses” from tax revenues. The same cannot be said of the private sector.”
Hmm.I would argue that many in the private sector, especially those like Sir Philip who embrace the tax avoidance industry, are indeed drawing their salaries and performance bonuses from tax revenues – those they haven’t paid. And don’t ge tme started on where the bankers get their “remuneration” from.
I work in public sector procurement for a large local authority.
I have never met anybody who has blamed our current problems on the end of the Crown Suppliers. Not a single one.
I doubt it was difficult for Philip Green to find the inefficiencies, excesses and waste that he has — the expression ‘shooting fish in a barrel’ comes to mind. Whilst the private sector is not perfect, from my experience (having worked in both), the problems aren’t nearly as bad as in the public sector. Some of the comparative lack of commercial acumen and amateurishness in managing contracts is mind boggling.
I agree that the public sector could quite easily save lots of money without cutting a single teacher, nurse, street cleaner, care worker, police officer or soldier.
And the worst offender in my experience: NHS/Dept of Health. Considered a bit of a laughing stock amongst even other public sector bodies, at least on the commercial side.
The 400lb gorilla in the room that prevents the public sector from using commercial acumen (if it had it): the insane Public Contracts Regulations 2006. A hangover from the last government, but really, blame mainly falls at the feet of Europe, not the national government on this one.
Surely it doesn’t matter who closed it down?
If it was wrong to do so let’s not have political posturing over a decision that was made when the current PM was at school. Let’s just do the right thing and re-establish it now?
@Adrian
No doubt this is why the government wants to get rid of 150 PCTs and replace them with 500 new doctor led quangos each with its own buying policy – in the name of competition
Let’s be clear – it is competition dogma – mad, right wing dogma – that created this waste
I don’t agree with this ‘private sector bad’ ‘public sector good’ world view. Life is more complex than that. The fact is that if you are a survivor in a business that needs to make a profit to continue then then your skills for maintaining efficiency will be honed in the heat of battle and will be based upon life or death business situations. If however there is nothing that directly challenges your survival, as is often the case in the public sector (and yes obviously departments get cut budgets are changed and so forth but not with the same cause and effect driven urgency) you just will not have the same skills. This is nothing to do with left wing or right wing, it’s a birds and the bees fact. The LVCR issue covered elsewhere in this blog, is an example of a disaster that to a great extent is the result of the public sectors total ignorance of how private sector internet retail operates. It is a screw up that has arisen due to public sector decision makers making decisions that have a direct effect on private sector businesses the dynamics of which the public sector decision makers have completely failed to understand. It seems obvious to me that anyone alive and well in private sector retail is likely to have a keen understanding of any commercial issue because if they didn’t they wouldn’t be alive in private sector retail…they’d be dead.
If however there is nothing that directly challenges your survival, as is often the case in the public sector (and yes obviously departments get cut budgets are changed and so forth but not with the same cause and effect driven urgency) you just will not have the same skills
What you forget, it often services provided are those that the private sector wouldn’t provide, because if they did, there first thought would be how much money can we make, and little regard to the customer. Look at power companies, who have a monopoly, very little competition, and whose profits are escalating on the back of the poor. And Bankers? Their profits were high due to some shaddy practices that eventually came undone. Giving mortgages to people without checking whether these could be sustained? And gambling not their money, but the depositors money. Keeping shareholders happy with increased profits, without any due regard to sensible practice.
Money is not evil, but it certainly influences a lot of people.
@Col Ah yes I quite agree. But that’s another issue, that’s moral behaviour. Plenty of examples of immoral behaviour in the public sector as well, classic example MPs expenses…