‘What
we are for is equally important as what we are against’, declared Dexter Whitfield in his
presentation ‘Capitalist dynamics reconfiguring the state: alternatives to
privatising public services’ to a packed audience at Nottingham University on
Wednesday, 16 September. Hence, when contesting privatisation of public
services, it is not enough simply to resist these processes. It is also
necessary to put forward concrete alternatives of how to organise and deliver
these services differently from within the public sector. In this post, I will
summarise some of the key points of the presentation, which was jointly
organised by the Bertrand Russel
Peace Foundation,
the local University and College Union association and
the Centre for the
Study of Social and Global Justice.
Privatising
public services and the capitalist crisis of overproduction
The
privatisation of public services, Dexter Whitfield made clear, is part of the
wider neo-liberal agenda around free trade, competition, the market,
deregulation, deconstructing democracy, reconfiguring the state and,
importantly, reducing the cost and power of labour. The current attack on trade
union rights in the UK through the government’s trade union bill (BBC, 15 September 2015) is a clear
example of the latter.
Equally
important, while austerity policies suggest that there is a lack of money and
hence the need to make cuts, $1.73 trillion dollar hoarded by private investors
are currently sloshing around the system in desperate search for new profitable
investment opportunities. Against the background of the continuing crisis and a
drastic increase in inequality, the public sector is opened up to this money as
investment opportunity.
Unsurprisingly,
the public sector is being transformed in the process of privatisation through
the use of Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs), Social Impact Bonds (see Whitfield 2015) and the
general opening up of public services for private investment with a guaranteed market
rate return. Individual choice mechanisms and new regulatory regimes transform
users into customers. Services such as Higher Education become increasingly
marketised, transformed into a commodity, which those people can buy, who can
afford to pay.
Importantly,
Dexter Whitfield made clear that re-organising the public sector is not about
who finds the best technical solution to service delivery. It is part of class
struggle over society’s wealth with people being dispossessed, depoliticised
and disempowered. Contesting privatisation is part and parcel of this struggle.
Contesting
privatisation: moving towards alternatives of service delivery.
Any
resistance to privatisation has to start with rejecting neo-liberalism and a
general opposition to free trade agreements. The current negotiations of a Transatlantic
Trade and Investment Partnership, for example, constitute a direct
threat to the public provision of services. Instead of privatisation, an
emphasis on a clean energy economy, industrial innovation, public investment
and a revived progressive taxation system have to be all part of an alternative
system. Key principles are social justice with a focus on eliminating
discrimination and inequalities across society as well as the re-assertion of
universal free health care and education.
Instead
of privatisation and the commissioning of services, we need public ownership
and re-municipalisation, which has already occurred in relation to water
services in cities around the world (Lobina,
Kishimoto and Petitjean 2014). Instead of fragmentation of the
education and health systems with schools and hospitals becoming individual
companies, we need to re-establish public networks in both sectors, able to
provide comprehensive services to the community.
And
yet, as Dexter Whitfield made clear, just to bring private providers ‘back in
house’, just to re-nationalise or re-municipalise services is not enough on its
own. It is important to organise and mobilise the workforce, but also community
and wider civil society as part of these struggles. The organisation and
delivery of services within the public sector needs to be democratised with a
strong emphasis on possibilities of participation in decision-making. When
developing alternatives to privatisation, for example, it is essential to draw
on the expertise of the workforce. Both users and workers should have the
opportunity to participate in the running of services. Finally, national trade
unions have to play a crucial role in supporting local struggles for
alternatives, as do transnational links with similar struggles in other
countries.
Considering
the powerful corporate interests involved, providing alternatives is difficult.
Nevertheless, it is not only possible, but ultimately also absolutely necessary
to ensure social justice!
Dexter
Whitfield is Director of the European Services Strategy Unit and author of Global Auction of Public Assets (2010), In Place of Austerity (2012) and Unmasking Austerity (2014) (Spokesman Books).
This post was first published on Ballots & Bullets on 21 September 2015.
Prof. Andreas Bieler
Professor of Political Economy
University of Nottingham/UK
Andreas.Bieler@nottingham.ac.uk
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments welcome!