Pushing for change: general election 2024

The outgoing prime minister, James Callaghan, discussing the outcome of the 1979 general election which he lost to the Conservatives led by Margaret Thatcher, said that about every 30 years or so, there is a public mood for a “sea change in public policy”. The sea change that is happening now in 2024 is in public perceptions of privatised public services.

Privatisation wave

What was happening in that sea change of 1979? A communally based, mixed economy of private and public businesses, gave way to laissez-faire ‘market-driven’ policies with the twist of denationalisation and outsourced public services. Publicly run corporations or services were seen by the advocates of ‘privatisation’ as overly bureaucratic, union-dominated organisations, unable to be as agile as their privately owned alternatives. There was some truth in this. For example, I cannot see anyone nowadays, wishing to be on a waiting list for a telephone to be installed from the only supplier, BT. Or accepting a single supplier of energy, instead of being able to choose between contracts, aided by Uswitch. But that is how it was 45 years ago when the state owned and operated nationwide monopoly operations for key utilities.

British Rail sandwich

There was, of course, a lot of exaggeration and false mythology about public corporations, for instance, the oft-quoted trope about the stale British Rail sandwich, which is still trotted out by right-wing advocates of more fundamental privatisation. In fact, the much-derided British railway sandwich was an advance on the previous catering provision, public or private. The boxed, sealed, refrigerated sandwich we buy from shops and catering establishments today, originates with Prue Leith and British Rail. Many would wish a return to the rail catering services of the past, compared to the non-existent or poor quality catering offered by the current franchised rail companies.

Cross-party strategy

If we take the Callaghan formula as a guide, we are at least 15 years overdue for a sea change, as both successive Labour and Conservative governments since 1979 have more or less continued to privatise and outsource, mainly because it became the only option, the status quo. It may have been a fixed policy within Westminster and Whitehall, but the recipients of all this efficiency have not necessarily agreed with this shibboleth. Sewage in our waterways, potholes, poor waste collection services, poor customer service in energy, telecommunications, and financial services, plus price gouging, profiteering, and unwarranted bonus payments for managers, have led to a general desire for change.

Limited transparency and accountability

If we also include the lack of candour leading to several appalling miscarriages of justice, in our hospitals, the Post Office, Grenfell Tower, the Hillsborough football ground disaster and, most of all, the contaminated blood scandal, the current government has an enormous burden of guilt and dissatisfaction to offset. It may not be its fault, or even be an indirect contributor to those scandals, but the general policy of secrecy and managerialism is still held to be appropriate for government and private organisations, unless found out and brought to public inquiry or into the law courts.

Disconnect

The Labour Party has tapped into that inchoate desire for change, having chosen CHANGE as the keyword for its election campaign. However, I am not at all convinced that it knows what changes to make or is prepared to be radical enough to implement them. Two obvious candidates that come to mind are the railways and the water industry.

A YouGov poll held in October 2022 gave a resounding level of support for renationalisation, even among Conservative voters, and the failings of the water and rail industries since then can only have increased support for renationalisation. The poll also supported the renationalisation of energy and buses, and that certainly is not on the cards. Yet, as we have seen with Thames Water, patience is fast running out from politicians who would prefer a ‘market solution’ to Thames Water’s financial problems.

Market options

If change and stability are Labour’s watchwords, it could still take charge of failing rail and water supply organisations and either nationalise them and/or encourage indigenous investment. The water industry is drowning in debt but is the author of its own financial engineering. Some argue for renationalisation but the counterargument is that it is better to attract the huge funds needed for water infrastructure from willing overseas investors. The option of some kind of state-aided recovery regime in the case of Thames Water will enrage voters and put into question the whole point of privatisation.

General election 2024: an alternative to Sid?

The original ‘Tell Sid’ project that urged the British public to buy shares in the state-owned companies that were being privatised (British Gas and BT) was about a share-owning society controlling public services but, since then, egregious financial practices, such as piling on debt to enable higher dividends and the huge pay-outs to CEOs, have damaged the credentials of privatisation. Calls to Bring Back Sid are worthy of interest, if only to displace rapacious foreign owners of large parts of our infrastructure and services. Such calls are to increase the citizen ownership of key utilities and transport via better use of the ISAs by which people can save, tax-free, for their pensions.

The “sea change” of privatisation brought by the Thatcher years of government has now run its course. Another sea-change is due at in this pivotal 2024 election.