Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie2k9
It's still sort of pointless, nothing will change just a paint job on a train, fares won't fall, service will unlikely increase as the general points I refer to above are not in place so will we really benefit, reliability will be the same as will punctuality and so on.
|
I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding the point of tendering for state services. The point is that the service may be provided to the state at a lower cost than doing it themselves. This is not about competition (or any benefit) for the consumer, it's about trying to spend less tax money.
The reason the EU are pushing governments down that path is because there's no reason for a government to automatically exclude private companies from operating a service that is currently being operated by a semi state. This is not to say they should be forced to hire a private company over a semi-state, just that private companies should be considered equally.
Of course, where the consumer might benefit, is that the winning tender should feel under pressure to deliver a good service so they can retain the contract (or earn bonuses if KPIs are met). If the contract automatically goes to a semi-state, there's a risk that the company (from top to bottom) will be complacent about the service they're providing because there's no disincentive to being mediocre.