The Tories call it "co-operatives".
Labour call it "mutualisation".
Is anyone else reeling from over- jarganisation?
Both proposals, one of those wonderful examples ofLabservativism, seemed to work on the principle that they will woo voters by giving them the opportunity to own public services.
Now, theoretically people have the right to "own" companies floated on the stock market. they just buy the shares.
However, the practicalities of the situation of far from being the simple.
Companies are run by the people and the most shares, generally very large, very rich, very middle-class corporations who sit as directors on a vast array of boards and do little for the benefit of the company except, for example, sell Cadburys to Kraft
when it benefits them.
The majority of shareholders would have had very very little input on what actually happened to Cadburys, and we can infer from this that the Labservative proposals would end up exactly the same way.
Another great analogy is that of the "Academy". If a group of people wish to run the school, then they must submit their plans to the local council and have assessed. Rather like tendering for the contract, the people that run is on the least money and cause the least disruption are likely to be awarded the contract.
And rather like my great bugbear, out-contracted services will continue to grow and public services will stop being about people, stopped being accountable and transparent and be run by upper-middle-class corporations that scrimp on expenses and quality of services.
Whatever happened to public services being run by public services for the public?"