Government departments run as companies?

bubonicus

Hi,

in the current economic climate would a country benifit from running it's departments as companies. Would it give more transparency and an easier model to control those departments.

for example, if the police was a company, It would be easier to manage wages, etc...

just curious, I thought I would ask here to see if it would a viable political model.

So what would be the pros and cons of running countries governments as companies, not just as a model, but as actual registered companies?

Dannyboy83

I believe this is how the British Labour party tried to run their police force.

I think it was a success, despite a lot of juggling.
One of the main problems was that the top dogs set targets, and then the figures were manipulated to meet the targets.

I don't think there is need for massive reform in the police services.

The HSE is a different matter though.

NESF posted a very interesting article the other day about the Dutch Health Services, let me try find it........


*Here we are:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_Netherlands

==
BTW, the Irish police generally get good reviews.
Certainly with CAB and the revenue on board, they were very progressive and their international reputation has improved considerably according to a recent interview on Pat Kenny Radioshow.

The HSE however, for the amount of money spent on them, are a bureaucratic, logistical and financial fcuk up.

Considering we were the 5th richest country in the world last year (hey, who knew it was an overdraft), it certainly begars belief that we have the current mess.

NewDubliner

bubonicus wrote: »

in the current economic climate would a country benifit from running it's departments as companies. Would it give more transparency and an easier model to control those departments.

Be careful what you wish for - Companies are run for the benefit of their shareholders, not their customers. Except, that is for Anglo Irish, which was run for the benefit of its directors and senior managers.

thebigcheese22

Theres some things in life that just can't be run as a business because there would be too much vested interest, including education, health, policing.

Is your question that we should privatise a lot of social services or just make state-run firms more efficient? I'd agree with the latter but disagree vehemently with the former.

yoshytoshy

A bi-annual contract for the managing of the health service ,would be good.
The best offer gets the contract and if the contract is within budget at the end of term ,the contract is kept for another two years.

A special private team ,who delegates the work and sets down targets.

Daroxtar

Running the health service would be a complete disaster. Patients needs would be assessed on a profit generating basis.
"how are you today mr. murphy? you're fine? sht , hang on a minute. now there you go. ooops,you seem to have caught MRSA. that'll be another 5k thanks."
And we all know that there's no profit made from curing something when you can just keep "treating" it and charging loads.
Come to think of it, when you see how consultants treat private patients in a public hospital and take into account the apparent price fixing and overcharging carry on that goes with having health insurance here, maybe it already is being run like a company

silverharp

Daroxtar wrote: »

Come to think of it, when you see how consultants treat private patients in a public hospital and take into account the apparent price fixing and overcharging carry on that goes with having health insurance here, maybe it already is being run like a company

No I'd say its been run like an over regulated monoply.

nesf

thebigcheese22 wrote: »

Theres some things in life that just can't be run as a business because there would be too much vested interest, including education, health, policing.

The Dutch example shows that it is not necessary to have an entirely public health service and not end up with the mess that is the US health system. I don't think we can just take your point above as a given.

Dannyboy83

NewDubliner wrote: »

Be careful what you wish for - Companies are run for the benefit of their shareholders, not their customers. Except, that is for Anglo Irish, which was run for the benefit of its directors and senior managers.

PMSL - thats signature material:D

lostexpectation

where do people get this idea that companies are efficient?

nice_guy80

most companies go out of business and fold within two years of establishment

NewDubliner

lostexpectation wrote: »

where do people get this idea that companies are efficient?

The PDs.

glaston

thebigcheese22 wrote: »

Theres some things in life that just can't be run as a business because there would be too much vested interest, including education, health, policing.

Eh? Are the best schools and colleges not run as businesses?

nice_guy80

depends on what your idea of a 'good' school is??

most school rely on parent's voluntary contributions to keep them going.