I’m going to push back a little. Something being government owned, in of itself does not mean it will be run better. Sometimes it’s operated even more poorly.
What is prudent is appropriate incentives and penalties for how something is managed regardless of who runs it.
I agree with this. Being run by a democratically elected government (and the threat of losing votes that follows) is not a sufficient mechanism for ensuring quality operation and service.
A lack of profit incentive is a plus regardless though, IMO. Sadly the motive of the profit driven private services and their consequent lobbying seems to be diametrically opposed to the competent running of a public service
Profit incentive is dampened when there is sufficient competition and mobility in moving between service providers. Ergo the urge to drive up profits is tempered by the possibility of lost customers.
Unfortunately this is Australia so… oligopolies rule us.
I’m going to push back a little. Something being government owned, in of itself does not mean it will be run better. Sometimes it’s operated even more poorly.
What is prudent is appropriate incentives and penalties for how something is managed regardless of who runs it.
I agree with this. Being run by a democratically elected government (and the threat of losing votes that follows) is not a sufficient mechanism for ensuring quality operation and service.
A lack of profit incentive is a plus regardless though, IMO. Sadly the motive of the profit driven private services and their consequent lobbying seems to be diametrically opposed to the competent running of a public service
Profit incentive is dampened when there is sufficient competition and mobility in moving between service providers. Ergo the urge to drive up profits is tempered by the possibility of lost customers.
Unfortunately this is Australia so… oligopolies rule us.