Sean Madden, PhD candidate in Law at the University of Birmingham, argues YES
The UK’s experiment in privatisation has been an ideologically-driven failure; one which lies in the decision to atomise and install the profit motive into industries where economies of scale prevail.
Rail, water, communications, health, and energy are examples of such sectors. As natural monopolies, they do not lend themselves to a competitive marketplace by virtue of the massive financial and infrastructural costs to their implementation, but concomitantly, because of their vital role in public welfare and economic wellbeing. For brevity, it has two primary consequences.
Firstly, the absence of meaningful competition within, or for, the market leaves little element of consumer choice. This is clear in the case of transport franchising, where higher and more complex fares and lower levels of punctuality combine with difficulty of access for those living outside of urban centres, with no alternative available. Increasingly, energy follows a similar pattern.
Secondly, the primacy of profit, and shareholder value, leading prices to ever-increase whilst services suffer. This is evident in the low quality of UK broadband, poor maintenance of water infrastructure that leaks billions of litres per year, outmoded and poorly-maintained rail infrastructure, an overreliance on fossil fuels due to the risk of ‘stranded assets’, and, in healthcare, a rise in treatable mortality rates.
An estimated £8 billion, annually, would be saved through the removal of dividends, and renationalisation would likely pay for itself within a decade. Moreover, reinjection of those funds into the economy, through lower bills and fares, would reveal the effects of fiscal multiplication.
This, really, is the crucial point: Public services are, and always have been, a means to an end. By enabling people to work, socialise, travel, eat, and live comfortably, they facilitate the operation of the economy. The notion they should operate at a profit is a disruptive and damaging fallacy.
David Atherton, Chairman of Freedom2Choose and journalist, argues NO
It seems in the times of outrageous inflationary energy and fuel prices, the panacea for some is to nationalise key industries. We’ll ignore government overspending and failing to frack, but Transport Secretary Grant Shapps is looking to renationalise Network Rail via a bill introduced in May 2022.
We appear to have learnt nothing from history. In 1977, when the British Rail was looking to rejuvenate their tarnished image, the CEO Sir Peter Parker went to Allen Brady and Marsh’s advertising offices to be greeted by a rude receptionist, a room full of overflowing ashtrays, filthy teacups and newspapers strewn over the floor. Kept waiting for 20 minutes, he was just about to leave when in came Peter Marsh who said, “You’ve just experienced how the public perceive British Rail.”
The privatisation of the rail companies in 1995 saw passenger miles double to 2019, from 18 billion miles to 40 billion. In the 1960s and 1970s, it took six months for the GPO, forerunner of BT, to install a telephone. My followers on Twitter said in their free market America it took one to two weeks.
Nationalised car manufacturer British Leyland and the British motorcycle industry forced to compete with free market Japanese companies declined to oblivion.
Government ownership will lead to NHS-levels of bureaucracy, incompetence, and overspending. A self-serving deity, consumers will pay more for a far worse service.
This is best summed when I tweeted:
“From our “world beating” NHS. Went for my 3rd jab, previously having had 2 Pfizer ones. They were only using Moderna vaccines. [What] is happening?” Health Secretary Sajid Javid arrogantly replied: “So what? How about you show some respect for the NHS.”
Name me one government or nationalised service that is or was competent?
