Privatisation - Hiding Behind the Language of Choice

Today we are faced with a continuation of Tory-style privatisation in public services. Primarily, examples can be found in health and education, portrayed by the government as an extension of ‘choice’. This extension of choice is privately funded, we are told, by the altruistic nature of business, which supposedly makes a little bit of profit but ultimately leaves everyone ‘better off’. It is claimed that competition and ‘the market’ would bring efficiency to the public sector but experience has often proved the opposite to be the case. The railway network is a classic case of the short term outlook of business at the expense of the long term public good.

The language of choice in the context of privatisation stretches back to when those in opposition to the consensus and state planning prevalent after the war wanted market forces to be dominant. They saw that certain consumers would pay more for exclusive services resulting in increasing profits. Private companies would be able to offer choice to those individuals who had the income to afford the services. One of the main exponents of this plan was former Tory Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Her policy to reduce the ‘burdens’ on the tax payer would free up the new consumer generation. These neo-liberal policies, which aim to open up markets to the involvement of private firms and undermine the power of trade unions, have been continued by the New Labour government – for example, by refusing to repeal any of the Tories’ anti-trade union legislation.

The choice that many people are presented with today is often to use a product or service provided solely by private monopolies, Stagecoach or Arriva running buses in cities and towns being prime examples. Where there is limited competition, such as in the case of the utilities, the consumer has to wade through vast amounts of complicated data to find the lowest price. The consumer then has to follow a number of complicated, lengthy procedures to change provider. As for health and education, the choice is more of a lottery, with a quality service being reliant on the area in which someone lives. Unsurprisingly, it is the hospitals and schools that provide services to working class districts that are the first to be closed or to appear at the bottom of the league tables. Those who can not afford to choose, are compelled to attend the nearest provider.

Health and education are in the government’s sights and much of the groundwork has already been carried out. There are already 500 examples of private finance initiative (PFI), worth over £36bn to the firms involved. The private sector is playing a much larger role than before and the government has admitted that ideally it is seeking to ‘blur’ the roles of independent sector services with those of the state. Schools and hospitals are constantly being encouraged to enter into public-private partnerships with business acting as a substitute to public investment.

The fight back has begun. There are constant local campaigns against the closures and cuts that are a by-product of being offered more ‘choice’, with the unions beginning to gain more momentum as they fight back, as their members seek to end the slide. Recent action by the fire-fighters (FBU), AUT, public sector workers (PCS), postal workers (CWU) were all examples of the working class biting back. A one day public sector strike is a real possibility for the future and could provide the opportunity for public sector workers to stand in solidarity together. The FBU has also voted to disaffiliate from the Labour Party and to withdraw financial support, depriving the Labour Party of £50,000 a year. This action was carried out because the fire-fighters recognised that the Labour Party had completely abandoned any idea of fighting for or with the working class.

New Labour does not offer any choice for workers - many can no longer see any difference at all between the modern Labour Party of today and the Conservatives. This was not always the case and whilst the Labour Party has more or less always had a pro-capitalist leadership, its membership was overwhelmingly working class. Not only that, but there was a certain amount of internal democracy that kept the party under control. The democratic structures and community groups, however, were systematically closed down and dismantled in the process leading up to the launch of New Labour. The removal of Clause Four of the constitution was one of the final actions before presenting the working class with a new party of big business that cannot be recovered for the working class.

It is time that a real choice is created by the majority of the population by forming a new mass workers’ party that is organised by the working class and that puts forward a socialist programme for the working class. A new mass worker’s party would involve the whole working class community fighting together under the same banner, including the Socialist Party and Socialist Students, and offering the community a choice to take control of the system away from the elite and into the hands of those who created the wealth. Linking the running of industry and all the public services to a genuine socialist economic plan - taking over the major companies and also running them under workers’ control and management – would enable us to deliver cheaper, high quality and efficient public services to all.