(PAUL ELLIS/AFP/Getty Images)
The collapse
into administration of the construction
and out sourcing business Carillion, has caused waves across the political and business
establishment. Tens of thousands of employees will lose their jobs and
pensions, small businesses will go bust through non payment of debts and
shareholders and taxpayers will lose money. Carillion employees will hardly
have been cheered to hear that the government had set up a Jobcentre plus
helpline, to help them find new work.
The company
had 450 government contracts ranging from HS2 to providing school lunches,
building hospitals, roads and maintaining 50,000 homes on military bases. They
also had several private construction contracts in the middle-east.
The
political fall out might lead to resignations from the government, who have
plenty of questions to answer on why they kept giving contracts to a company
that was known to be struggling financially? The government may also reflect on
the irony of Carillion’s chairman, Philip Green, advising them on corporate
responsibility. There
might also be a re-think on whole practise of Private Finance Initiative (PFI) deals
and the out sourcing of public services.
The government has said that there will be an investigation, where the conduct of directors in
charge at the time of company's failure and previous directors will be
examined. The Business secretary, Greg Clarke said ‘any evidence of misconduct
will be taken very seriously.’ We heard similar noises after the 2008 financial
crisis, but nothing really materialised. Whether it will be different this time
we will have to wait and see, but I am sceptical.
The first
thing that springs to mind, is what was going on with the accounting and
auditing (by KPMG) of Carillion, that made it justifiable to be paying out big
dividends as recently as last year, to shareholders and bonuses to senior
managers, who are no doubt shareholders too?
The company
issued the first of three warnings on its lack of financial health in July of
last year, why was this not acted on, by the management and indeed the
government? Why were they allowed to pay £83 million in share dividends last
year, when their pension deficit was £580 million?
The 2008 financial crash was taken very
seriously in Iceland,
where politicians resigned from their posts, including the prime minister, and
directors of the banks involved were imprisoned, which was made possible by the
Iceland Parliament enacting new legislation to enable this. Will this happen in
the UK over the Carillion affair? I somehow doubt it.
The whole
area of PFI’s, Public Private Partnerships (PPP’s) and the outsourcing of
public services to private contractors needs to be ended. An idea that
originally originated in the US and was first introduced to the UK by the Tory
government led by John Major in the 1990’s. The first scheme in the UK was the
Isle of Skye road bridge, which has since been taken into public ownership by
the Scottish government, after the Scottish Parliament was first established in
1999.
The new
Labour UK government, elected in 1997, picked the PFI ball up and ran with it,
signing hundreds of deals for the construction of new hospitals and schools,
which had the advantage of the spending not being counted against public sector
borrowing, but in the long run the taxpayer has paid considerably more than
would have been the case with conventional government contracting. It has been
quite accurately compared to buying a house on your credit card, with extortionate
fees payable for usually 25 years, whether or not the facility is needed or
used.
Out sourcing
of public services goes back even further to the days of the Thatcher Tory
government, and almost always leads to worse pay and conditions for workers,
and not necessarily good quality services - think of the railways! These
companies tend to avoid paying UK taxes too, by off shoring their headquarters in
tax havens. And as we have seen with the Carillion case, the nature of these
deals is that the profits are privatised but the risks are nationalised. So
much for the entrepreneurial private sector, then.
Although
there will always be government contracts for building infrastructure, these
type of deals are terrible for UK tax payers and service users alike. These
PFI/PPP and outsourcing service provisions should to be dispensed with, and provided
without excessive profits for these private companies, and the risks to the
public purse. We will likely get better, and value for money public services
into the bargain, but I wouldn’t hold your breath. The current system is
effectively a corporate welfare state.
Do you not get it yet? Gross income over £100,000 = INNOCENT – Gross income below £100,000 CULPABLE.
ReplyDelete