SF> Can't say that I'm a great follower of Government owned
SF> businesses particularly with the corruption and massive
SF> free handouts which would never be given to private ent.

AS> While I also believe that Governemnts, generally, would be well served
AS> to get out of running businesses, I don't for a moment think that
AS> government businesses have a monopoly on corruption and free handouts.

Oh sure, only a fool would claim that, particularly with some having
been caught out very spectacularly indeed, like the courier companys.

AS> There are just too many examples of sweetheart deals, the old
AS> boy's network, and plain out corruption and theft by major private
AS> sector figures to make such a proposition highly questionaable.

And some of the most flagrant attempts to shaft the customer too.

The robber barons werent called robber barons for nothing.

JG> However, privatisation should not be carried out
JG> without proper thought, on an ideological whim, or to
JG> pay for election promises made on environmental issues.

RS> It aint a whim, its a recognition that nothing else exposes
RS> an operation to real competition and achieve real efficiency.

AS> Privatisation per se does very little, if at all anything, to
AS> improve the efficiency and competitiveness of a Government business.

Sometimes it does, particularly when that privatised operation has
to compete directly with private industry. Most obviously with the
privatisation of Qantas for example. When they are told that the days
of going cap in hand to the guvmint for capital etc are over, and that
they will have to raise capital for aircraft purchase etc just like
everyone else does after they are privatised, they dont have any choice
but to improve the efficiency and competitiveness, otherwise they will
just get told to bugger off or charged exorbitant rates for the money.

An operation like the Commonwealth Bank may be able to get
away with considerable inefficiency when the government owner
doesnt demand a decent return on capital, and has to improve
substantially when privatised and compared with the others.

They may also find that they are reasonably competitive with the
disguised subsidy on stuff like sales taxes and interest rates while
they are a government operation, and they need to shake things up quite
a bit when they dont have that advantage when privatised, to survive.

AS> It's the increased competition which normally
AS> acompanies privatisation which is the major benefit.

Sometimes, sometimes not.

AS> Else, it would just involve the transfer of a monoploy
AS> from Govenment ownership to private ownership, which
AS> at the best of times is a horrific prospect.

True, but the practical reality is that most privatisations
we do today dont go that route, because of those problems.

And most countrys have some pretty stringent proscription
of private monopolys too. For a damned good reason.

Many of the government monopolys have some quite draconian
controls on competition with them that no country with any
sense keeps when they are privatised.
@EOT:

---