I am reposting the following report which shows that Corporations are gaining control of our public services at an alarming rate for several reasons. These are:- 1) It seems to tie in with the lead article in the local newspaper of 26/1/99 headed up:- "STAFF CUTS ON CARDS FOR COUNCIL" I would appreciate feedback on my comments as well as on the report itself. This article reports on tentative plans of the Palmerston North City Council (New Zealand), which may be included in the upcoming Draft Annual Plan. A radical review of the Council's long-term financial strategy is necessary, or so it is claimed, because of escalating local body costs. Main points of the article are - staff cutbacks, a leaner organisation, user pays water charges and possible private sector involvement in the provision of services. 2) I am seeking feedback and comment from as many list members as possible on a number of issues the newspaper article raises so as to assist in formulating 'battle' strategy well in advance of the call for public consultation and submissions on the proposals. Issues raised in the article are:- a) COSTS. According to the City Manager the existing financial strategy is politically and publically unacceptable, because gross rates will rise by 45% and debt is expected to nearly double within 10 years. Under the new strategy, "while rates and user charges would be paid separately, they collectively would remain very similar to what the rate demand is today". I find this an amazing statement. On the face of it, and judging by the "Cupe Privatization Report"attached, this seems a fallacious argument. If the 'leaner organisation' is achieved and ratepayers get very little for their 'rate dollar' while most services including water, rubbish collection, road maintenance, (you name it), is contracted out to private providers, we are likely to end up paying far more than we do today, if only for the simple reason that private providers are there to make a profit, which must come from somewhere - the long-suffering ratepayers. b) EFFICIENCY. Further efficiency gains can be achieved over the next three years by introducing improvements to "internal processes", the article claims. c) QUALITY AND SAFETY. The article emphasises that levels of service will not be reduced and neither would the Council reduce its commitment to its current 10 year capital programme. Again, I would take that statement with a 'grain of salt' as it seems that privatizing public utilities does compromise levels of service as was shown by the problems experienced by Auckland in the delivery of electricity early in 1998 and the problem with water supply only a few weeks ago. d) STAFF CUTS. Then there is the important issue of job losses. According to the City Manager, staff losses are yet to be calculated as they will depend on what efficiencies can be achieved internally. This fails to take into account the fact that the Council has been going through endless restructuring and drives towards greater efficiency ever since the New Right agenda began to be implemented in the early 1980's. One has to ask - Just how efficient can an organisation become and is there ever an end to it? One thing is certain, if Palmerston North follows the pattern of elsewhere, greater use will be made of part-time and casual labbour as well as a general contracting out of work that used to be performed by the Council. Maybe this a part of what is meant by "efficiency gains" but I am not so sure. I would appreciate as much comment and feedback on these issues as possible. Cheers Ross Swanston At 01:39 PM 1/25/99 -0500, you wrote: >Last week CUPE released a wide-ranging annual report on privatization. > >The full text of the report can be found at the website of the Canadian >Union of Public Employees, www.cupe.ca > >Below is a brief summary of the report and information on how to order a copy. > >> CUPE Releases Major Report on Privatization >> >>_Workers' Summary_ >> >> Going public about privatization >> >> It's a hostile takeover that would inflame any shareholder's meeting. >> Corporations are gaining control of our public services at an unprecedented >> pace. >> >> CUPE's Annual Report on Privatization documents for the first time the >> depth and breadth of the corporate takeover that's happening in our >> hospitals, schools, municipal services, community centres, social services >> and utilities. When the dots are connected, a clear picture emerges of the >> threat to good jobs, public safety, quality and accessibility. >> >> Pillaging the public purse >> >> Contrary to the seductive patter pitching privatization, selling off public >> services doesn't save the public treasury money. Deals struck with >> corporations leave governments and taxpayers to assume the risk for many >> ventures and pick up the pieces when a venture fails. Privatized services >> continue to draw on the public purse. But instead of supporting well-run, >> efficient services, tax dollars now subsidize the profit margins of >> multinational corporations. >> >> Facilities and infrastructure built with public dollars are sold at fire >> sale prices to privateers. Taxpayers pay to lease facilities they once >> owned and may eventually buy back. Higher private sector borrowing costs, >> inflated consulting fees, lengthy tendering processes, costly monitoring of >> private contractors, new user fees and many other hidden costs add up to a >> much higher price tag for the public. Recent examples such as leased >> schools in Nova Scotia, the New Brunswick toll highway and welfare reform >> in Ontario show going private is far more costly. >> >> Compromising quality and safety >> >> Whether it's a healthy community water supply, a clean and safe school or a >> nutritious hospital meal, privatization threatens the quality of services >> Canadians rely on. Privateers cut corners and jobs to keep their costs to a >> minimum. This poses a significant danger to public health and safety. >> >> The push to privatize health care services continues unabated, despite >> overwhelming evidence of the failure of private health care in the United >> States. Schools poorly cleaned by contract custodians are becoming health >> and safety hazards for students and teachers. Polls show Canadians oppose >> private water by a margin of five to one. Privately-operated water >> treatment facilities are cutting staff to the bone and lowering standards, >> creating the conditions for sewage spills and polluted drinking water. >> >> It's a similar story around the world - whether it's the failure of private >> hydro in New Zealand, skyrocketing water costs in England or polluted water >> supplies in Australia and South Africa. Safety and quality are on the >> chopping block in the handover of services. >> >> Access denied, accountability deferred >> >> Privatized services usually spell limited access for users - whether it's >> through new user fees, pared-down hours of service or the closing of a >> local service. Rural communities in particular will suffer as services are >> carved up to suit the logic of corporate profitability rather than >> community need. >> >> Communities are losing control of the services that sustain them, as global >> headquarters replace local offices and authorities. Lines of accountability >> are blurred as politicians pass the buck to private operators, shielded >> from access to information requirements. Less responsive services are the >> result when ownership and service delivery shifts from local to >> transnational hands. >> >> Disappearing jobs >> >> The public sector has for decades been a source of decent jobs, especially >> for women, Aboriginal workers and minorities. These jobs are being >> eliminated as services are privatized, leaving many with little ability to >> support their families and contribute to the economy. In a recent poll, >> Canadians ranked "good jobs in the local economy" as the most important >> aspect of keeping services public. >> >> Operators of privatized services target wages to cut costs and boost >> profits. The jobs that replace public sector work in a privatized service - >> when those jobs are replaced at all - are low-paying, insecure jobs with >> few benefits. Work is often part-time or casual. Disappearing services and >> jobs force already-stressed families to shoulder new burdens. Most often it >> is women who must juggle this additional unpaid work. >> >> Public Works! >> >> CUPE has launched a major campaign to support publicly funded and delivered >> services. Canadians across the country want the network of public services >> that keeps our communities healthy and vital to be strengthened. Opinion >> polls show that three quarters of Canadians have grave concerns about >> privatization and public private partnerships. An overwhelming number of >> Canadians also support public delivery, funding and ownership of services. >> >> CUPE's Public Works! campaign targets key areas of concern in all ten >> provinces. CUPE is also organizing nationally to save Medicare, prevent the >> privatization of water and wastewater services and oppose the export of >> water for profit. >> >> CUPE's six-point plan to strengthen public services calls on governments at >> all levels to assure adequate funding, require not-for-profit public sector >> delivery, improve access, enhance accountability, respect workers and >> strengthen democratic control of our public services. >> >> You will find an online version of CUPE's 1999 Report on Privatization >here >> >> If you would like a hardcopy version mailed to you please contact: Robert >> Fox, CUPE's Director of Communications at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> http://www.cupe.ca >> The Canadian Union of Public Employees >> Web Editor: Marc Bélanger, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Administrative Assistant: Lise Gray, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Copyright CUPE 1998 >> Site Design: Julia Dudley Marketing & Communications, >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >
