They're still at it
 

Anyone remember the 90s with Group 4 getting the contract for transporting prisoners to court and letting a bunch of them escape within a few days? And then doing it again. How we all laughed.

They're still at it, except now they're called G4S and their inefficiencies have expanded with their work.

G4S staff suspended from Brook House immigration centre over abuse claims
On the same page are other recent stories about G4S.
Ofsted rules jail inadequate; High levels of violence at child jail; Fined 100 times for breaching prison contracts...
And still the government uses them.

Acccording to wiki they've been surrounded in controversy countless times. Managers getting bonuses when investigation after investigation reveals them to be poorlyy run and all the rest of it.

Actually, they are probably run very well if the purpose is to fleece the government for as much money as you can, while providing sub-standard work in return, thus increasing the profit margins for a few and then winning another contract and doing the same thing over and over...

G4s and A4e must be in competition with each other as to which one is the biggest disgrace. :nod:

Re: They're still at it
 

I think they also messed up the Olympics staffing? Have never understood why UK governments continually rely on them.

Re: They're still at it
 

When I was a prison officer, I remember our training P.O. mentioning during basic training that, as more private prisons were likely to come (the first one had opened a year or two prior IIRC), they would be lots of debates in the press as to how good/bad their staff would be. On the issues of escapes from outside the prison while in custody (trips to Court, hospitals, etc.) he said, “they couldn’t possibly be any worse that those experienced by us.”

I suggest you have a look at HM Prisons Inspectorate reports and then decide whether private, or public, prisons come out on top.

Re: They're still at it
 

That's rather a lot to plough through. I couldn't help but notice the high number of private contractors involved.

Not wishing to sound like Trump in saying there will be faults on both sides. But I have no doubt that problems on the government side are likely to relate to underfunding (something I quickly noticed in some of those reports) while those on the private side will likely result from a similar underfunding - or maybe under cutting would be more accurate - because such corner cutting wins them the contracts in the first place. They appear to offer a cheaper alternative because they don't do it properly.

I'm fairly sure that that Public managers don't pay themselves bonuses despite reports criticising them. They don't control pay levels!

You might also note that I included A4e the controversial training agency with it's bogus training courses that don't actually happen and such like. I can state with some certainty that before training was privatised, no bogus courses were held since there was no money to be obtained under false pretenses.

Here are some details I came across earlier of G4S practices.
And then there's
There are loads of examples of things like this with private providers doing what used to be done in house.

This is not as simple as wondering whether private prisons are better or worse than public ones, this is scandalous behaviour from G4S no matter what they turn their grubby hands to.

Re: They're still at it
 

There are shitty employees that work for both the private, and the public sector. There are shitty managers in each. As a result, scandalous behaviour will occur.

The difference between the two is that, if the government doesn’t want to, the private sector’s contract will not be renewed, or they can be sued for breach of contract. That doesn’t happen in the public sector.

Re: They're still at it
 

That's true. In theory. Just a shame they don't put it into practice despite all the failings.

You may not remember but we had a similar debate a few years ago concerning the 18 training providers the government was using. Not one of them had met their contracted targets. Did they lose their contracts or suffer penalties? Not at the time, no.

I did a bit of googling to see if anything happened after but it's too time consuming.

Funnily enough, while looking, I discovered that A4e had pulled out of a contract for training/education in prisons because they weren't making the profit they hoped.

Second time they did that apparently. Just scrap their agreement. With no comeback. Yet they still get contracts. It stinks, quite honestly.

I'm going to stop thinking about it. It's just making me angry.

Re: They're still at it
 

Precisely this. Although I advocate free markets, I recognise that there can be market failures, and the monopolistic nature of G4S is a good example. At least when a government department is failing, politicians can be held to account and pressured to make improvements. When it's outsourced, there's a kind of stalemate as the politicians say, we put it tender, this was the best option as chosen by an independent apolitical panel, what can we do. Next stop, NHS, if we're not careful.

Re: They're still at it
 

One thing that puzzles me about Canada. (not only one thing, really, but...)

I've had to make adjustments. Moral/Political ones I mean. We have an equivalent to the NHS but only as far as hospital discharge. Then you're on your own with the cost of equipment/treatment/prescriptions. Even crutches to be paid for.

Taxes pay for education but at the beginning of every school year you get a school supplies list that might come to $50 or $60 per child. So you're supplying paper, folders, scissors and all the rest of it rather than the school.

Free school meals.

Certain employee rights.

Just some of a ton of examples that are different here but that would be taken for granted in the UK.

And because those things in the UK never existed here, nobody misses them or even thinks it could be possible.

I, like much of the UK, would have been out marching if there was a sniff of anything like that happening over there.

But here, I just have to accept that it's the norm for Canada.

So here's what puzzles me:
The gov of NB has just taken responsibility for Extra Mural and tele-care from the two health authorities and given it to an outside organisation (the head of whom is a former Premier of NB, but I'm sure that's just coincidence).

The weird thing is it's apparently not going to save any money and might actually cost more with up front costs. (er, so why do it?)

It seems there are to be a series of targets to be met, with bonuses. (but nothing about penalties for failing?)

It's all a bit odd and rather sounds as if it might actually cost more if the bonuses come into play. But if they do it better then perhaps it's worth it.

But the real puzzle is that in a country where this is traditionally more widespread than in the UK, everyone connected to the change is denying it's privatisation.

Why would they want to deny that? The responsibility for hospital catering has just gone to an outside company but they were all okay with that being called for what it is.

Re: They're still at it
 

I suppose if there is a mixture of providers (public/private) from the start, then complaints of "privatisation" are going to be far less controversial. In reality, the NHS already has significant private participation (Virgin Care, for example) but the public are in a state of denial that it's still a wholly public enterprise. You may have seen Stephen Hawkings letter's to Ceremy Junt (health secratery) this week, sounding the warning bell.

Re: They're still at it
 

:nod:

I'm willing to bet that the current NB minister for health will be working for the former NB Premier's company in a couple of years. :thumbdown:

Re: They're still at it
 

Because their employees don't get a pension plan.

Re: They're still at it
 

Now sources have confirmed that a Home Office worker has also been suspended while allegations relating to his previous employment for G4S at the facility are investigated.

:rolleyes:

Snouts in the trough.

Re: They're still at it
 

The man in charge is rewarded with some paid time off.
Head of scandal-hit G4S detention centres is put on administrative leave

Funny thing...after some bad reports on one of the centres, things had apparently improved since a previous director was removed from his post (but not the payroll) after some problems. This was noted in a March 2017 report.
That didn't last long then.

And 'the man in charge' has previously had to quit following an earlier scandal.

I expect he'll get another post.

Re: They're still at it
 

If your blood doesn't boil when you read this article you must have ice in your veins.

Ten scandals since 2010

A bit...

Re: They're still at it
 

MoJ seizes control of Birmingham prison from G4S

At last