Commission on Taxation and Welfare public consultation extended to 17th January

Sophrosyne said:
The main difference between public and private providers is payment.

On the one hand, private operators must be profitable, else they go out of business.
Click to expand...
And there you have it. To be profitable, they must be efficient, customer focused and innovative. Public providers tend to be none of these! And they don't have to worry about going out of business. The taxpayer is always available for a mugging to cover their costs.
 
Last edited:
Sophrosyne said:
Yes, you pay a fee for certain services but that does not cover the full cost of the service provision.
Click to expand...
Yes, you'd still have to pay for your skips.
Sophrosyne said:
Just as a bin collection fee does not cover the full cost of waste management and private school fees do not cover the provision of teachers and special needs assistants and grants for capital expenditure provided by the State.
Click to expand...
But Private Schools are, in effect, subsidising the State since without them the State would have to cover the full cost. The State spends around €7000-€8000 a year educating each child in the public system. Does anyone really think there isn't room for improvement there? We shouldn't spend less but we should be looking for better returns.

Sophrosyne said:
The main difference between public and private providers is payment.
Click to expand...
No, the main difference is revenue sources. The private provider has a limit on what revenue it can access. The public provider doesn't and if the revenue isn't there to cover their operating costs they can just stop providing the service. The private provider has to provide the service no matter what or else they go bust.
Sophrosyne said:
On the one hand, private operators must be profitable, else they go out of business. They do not have a social obligation so if you can't pay you don't get.
Click to expand...
They have whatever social obligation that is stipulated in the service contract they sign with the State.
Sophrosyne said:
Neither will they give you a bus pass, a subsidy for your utility bills, relief for your health expenses or children's allowance.
Click to expand...
No, but the State currently does all that for privately delivered services.
Good examples of the State perpetuating waste and inefficiency.
Sophrosyne said:
I'm not suggesting that there is no room for lateral thinking, innovation, research & development, etc., in the provision of public goods & services. But this has to be based on a realistic understanding of population-wide services costs.
Click to expand...
Good public administration built the Roman Empire as much as their Legions did. Lack of good public administration is the single biggest failing in this country and disproportionately impacts the poor and vulnerable.
 
This public/private distinction is pretty tedious. There are very efficient public sector bodies and very bad ones.

There are private companies that are not very efficient too. I mean it's been plain to me since I was a child that Dunnes Stores is poorly run and is probably not very profitable. Yet still it lives on!

People should focus on how to make bad public sector bodies like the good ones rather than just tarring them all.
 
Of course there are well structured public sector bodies, Revenue, the CAO, the Passport Office spring to mind. At a State level I suspect actual Departments are well run. That doesn't detract from the poor value for money we get in healthcare, education, local authorities, and generally where the State interacts with private industries. The medical and legal industries are most notable in that regard where they provide very poor value for money.
 
We were discussing a situation where there were no taxes and no State services; everything was delivered entirely by the private sector.

Individuals would have to pay to access those services regardless of their income or do without.

At present, people pay tax for public services not based on the cost of those services but rather on a proportion of their income.

Because of this, people sometimes lose the connection between the taxes they pay and the cost of goods & services they expect to receive. They might see it were everything privatised.

For instance, in 2018 taxpayer units in the 10,000 to 50,000 income deciles (73.92%) paid just 17.39% of the total income tax & USC paid.

The public services they receive is dependent on the tax and USC paid by the taxpayer units in the €50,000+ income deciles.
 
Sophrosyne said:
We were discussing a situation where there were no taxes and no State services; everything was delivered entirely by the private sector.
Click to expand...
Were we? I certainly wasn't. There's no scenario where that would work.
There is a scenario where the State regulates and funds but doesn't run lots of services. Think of private bus operators, private waste collectors, private schools and colleges, private hospitals, all primary care. Unfortunately the State, as in people who work for the State, have should staggering levels of consistent incompetence in that area.
Yep, when people say to me that they get nothing back for the taxes they pay I ask them if they have kids and if so do they pay the €7,000-€8,000 a year it costs to educate them? I ask them if their poo goes away when they flush the toilet. I ask them if the street lights come on when it gets dark. I ask them if there are streets outside their house, if there is a fire service if their house goes on fire, if there is a hospital when they get sick, if there is a police force if they get burgled etc.
Yep, rich people pay most of the tax and the squeezed middle all get more back than they pay in.
That's a given and that's the case just about everywhere. What this is about is the appropriate and efficient raising and spending of public money. In that context the Commission on Taxation and Welfare is window dressing and the same old same old will be under a slightly different wrapping.
 
Interestingly I know someone who is a supplier to both Dunnes and Applegreen (run by ex Dunnes execs) and he has said they drive very hard deals and are tough to deal with on pricing. If they can afford to pay a 10% pay rise, they must be doing ok.

My experience of dealing with both public and private sector bodies as a supplier is that private sector are more focused on the bottom line and may have a more short term focus, especially for US companies who declare results every quarter. Public sector bodies are often less focused on the bottom line and more focussed on ensuring they don't end up on the front of the Irish times. The attitude of "spend the budget otherwise we won't get it next year" also exists in place. In fairness, some are very good and very easy to deal with but there are also far too many contractors these days in public bodies who are more interested in justifying their existence then anything else.
 
Monday is the deadline for this.

There are many interesting comments being raised against some of my suggestions. People should make submissions on these.

Brendan
 
I made a submission.

I concentrated on:

Climate change – Ireland’s obligation, taxation & supports, production of green energy, etc.,

Corporate taxes – Variety of issues including the Inclusive Framework Agreement.

Pandemic – exposed weaknesses which might affect management of future emergencies, health or otherwise.
 
That was tried in Eastern Europe already with enforced Communism, a dismal failure it was too. For some reason "Big government" and "Big State" is back in fashion again only amplified by the Covid restrictions and interventions. This is probably the case because the millenials have no memory of Communism in Europe
 
As well as emailing my submission, I also filled in the Questionnaire.

It was quite well designed, but one would need a lot of time to think about all the questions.

Brendan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register