Former Lancastrian

As many of you might have read the UK Passport office is having a little problem with issuing or renewing passports as their appears to be a bit of a back log.
Theresa May the Minister initially refuted these claims saying all was well and there was no back log. One week later she issued a grovelling apology saying she was wrong.
The standard 3 week turn around time is now several weeks/months for some.
Many who have booked holidays are now having to cancel their vacations or travel arrangements ( dumbasses for booking without a valid passport IMHO ).

So what has led to this fiasco is it the nearly 208 thousand new UK citizens applying for their passports or that the Govt closed down the overseas offices who used to do this and everything is now done in the UK and the Govt laid off a bunch of employees who used to work in the Passport office.

I hear many will be saying privatize this as the private sector could do it cheaper and more efficiently. Are you really sure they could? Remember the Govt provides services and is a revenue neutral entity i.e. its not supposed to make a profit but the fees collected cover the service provided.
Do you really want passport issuance handed over to a private company who chances are will employ minimum or low wage wage earners so they can maximize their profits.
Do you really want an offshore company and its workers issuing UK passports?

NobodySpecial

>Do you really want an offshore company and its workers issuing UK passports?

Why not just let the Americans do it?
The NSA would know you had booked a holiday on the internet and automatically send you a passport. They have all your details anyway so you don't need to fill in any forms .

Alan2005

I'm fairly confident that a private company could issue passports at a significantly reduced cost compared to now. I'm not saying it should be privatised, but I don't think your point above is valid. Sure its revenue neutral, but I bet there's a lot of unnecessary waste and bureaucracy - it is the government after all.

MarkG

'Revenue neutral' just means they collect a big enough fee to cover the amount of money they spend. It has nothing to do with efficiency.

I think my last passport cost around $300. Does anyone think a company couldn't issue me one for $100? It's not as though they had to do much in the way of checks, since I sent in my previous passport to prove who I am.

One of my acquaintances had to go for an 'interview' because he didn't have a previous passport. That apparently involved about five people in a room asking him whether he was a terrorist.

Former Lancastrian

True all Governments waste a fair amount of money but when was the last time you watched any business news report or read any 1st, 2nd or 3rd quarter reports where any Government Agency/Dept announced a profit of X amount or earnings were down unlike the banks or other companies.
Contractors love bidding on Govt jobs as they can charge a lot more for their services as opposed to bidding on a private sector project hence some of the stories about Govts paying X amount for a toilet. Govts can't just nip out to Rona and pick up a toilet they have to tender it out.
Lets be honest companies are out to make a profit. Govts have to provide services for its citizens.
This is why there is always a battle when talking about the differences between the public and private sectors.

Alan2005

The market punishes inefficiency though, governments generally reward it.

BristolUK

By laying off the workers and giving big bonuses or golden handshakes to those who messed up.

With occasional knighthoods.

Alan2005

Knighthoods are the government.

Besides, private companies don't have maxmize efficiency, but being more efficient than the competition is rewarded with increased profits all else being equal.

Former Lancastrian

Im betting 1 or 2 bankers have had the sword placed on their shoulders followed by the Arise Sir whoever. How efficient where they in 2008?

Alan2005

Not very. But who bailed them out?

Former Lancastrian

Taxpayers.

Alan2005

Exactly. The banks were incompetent, bur rather than let them go bankrupt like they should, the government steps in. Thus rewarding shitty business practices.

AlmostThere12

Definitely not privatised as leaves open to worse passport fraud.

As with all Government departments, way to many levels of management and not enough staff to do the actual job that's needed. All they need is to keep them as a Government department but have them overhauled by someone like Richard Branson so they run correctly and efficiently. This goes for all Government departments.

Former Lancastrian

But had they had gone bankrupt then thousands would have been without jobs same as the auto industry workers. Kenney actually wanted to scrap the TFW programme and shut it down completely.
Both sectors have very good employers/employees who are treated fairly and both have bad ones.
The Govt does have a disadvantage in that its wage structure doesn't always attract the best and brightest hence the better benefit packages.
I had to smile at this article regarding the Canadian Govt laying off lawyers

The federal justice department plans to cut 65 lawyers and 15 managers over the next three years in a bid to save $52 million, iPolitics has learned.
MacKay said the AJC is hoping the cuts don’t lead to more outsourcing legal services to expensive private firms.
The announcement also comes in the middle of Public Service Week, when the government celebrates its employees, he noted wryly.
“It is going to greatly outweigh any free hot dog and pop we got this week from the office celebration.”

Alan2005

No they wouldnt. Now you are simply believing the lies that were told at the time. Iceland is doing OK now you'll notice.

Governments waste (in that they are generally ineffcient, not that what they do has no value) money. Not sure why you think this is even worthy of debate.

Fwiw, privatising the passport office seems like more trouble than it's worth given you'd need to pay more government workers to give oversight anyway.