Here’s my plea in favour of having an honest, unbiased discussion about the merits of public vs. private enterprise.  If you agree, you can scroll down this page to see what I think the outcome of such a debate could be.

_____________________

For the sake of the public good, we must put aside the simplistic argument that only private companies have the rigour needed to efficiently and effectively build and operate public facilities and services.  The age of uplifting the private sector against all reason must be declared dead (see Footnote 1). 

For each scathing example of public sector failure put forward by the pro-privatization people, I can offer an equally damning counter example of how private involvement in public facilities results in catastrophe.

In the end, I’ll win this showdown, because after hundreds of hours of research, I have failed to identify one factual, non-rhetorical example of a project where the public interest was fully protected once the private sector got involved.  My research findings are contained in this “smellsfishy” website.

What I’ve found instead is this:  when the private sector gets involved in public service delivery, service quality and maintenance standards plummet, accountability disappears, and user costs soar.  Meanwhile, the public continues to assume primary responsibility for environmental and regulatory risks.  For me, these outcomes are unacceptable, particularly when it comes to providing vital public services such as water and wastewater.

Some key questions in the public vs. private debate that I encourage people to start talking about include:  Which enterprises are best run using which model?   What does the public sector bring to an enterprise that the private sector can’t, and vice versa?  What can the public sector learn from the private sector, and vice versa? 

An honest discussion about the merits of each model would quickly reveal some of the inherent benefits and flaws.  For example, a fundamental reason why the private sector should not be involved in operating public services is because the private sector’s main objective is profit, whereas the public sector has multiple objectives, including fiscal accountability, environmental protection and public health and safety.  Even the most water-tight contract will not prevent private companies from trying to cut costs and corners in order to meet their raison d’etre.  We’re seeing the results of these kinds of cuts in hospitals where privatized cleaning services are costing the health care system millions of dollars due to vastly increased rates of infection.

Here’s my guestimate of the outcome of an honest discussion about PPPs:  We’d all agree that there are ways that the private sector can help the public sector do things better (public facilities often subcontract with the private sector - but this form of partnership is not properly acknowledged), just as there are ways that the public sector can help the private sector do things better (like provide access to quality, reliable utilities and services). 

Arriving at this conclusion would initially feel like a bit of a let down, as the animosity and fervour of the pro- vs. anti-privatization debate would still be coursing through our veins.  But this feeling would soon wear off, allowing the government to get back to its primary job of looking after the common good (see Footnote 2).

Want to join me in an honest debate?  Email me your thoughts, and also send them to Premier Gordon Campbell, honourary chair of the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships, and the man who - against all reason - is hell-bent on privatizing most of this province’s large public facilities and services.

Footnote 1: Virtually all of the arguments that have been used for decades to elevate the private sector to a godly realm have been completely debunked.  A 2007 study conducted for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities found that “…there is no evidence to suggest that public-private partnerships consistently cost less or provide better services than traditional public projects.”  Auditors General across the country are arriving at this same conclusion.

The only pro-privatization argument left is that the private sector can simply do things more efficiently.  Fortunately this argument also no longer holds water.  A 2006 Government of Canada discussion paper on public-private partnerships found that “There is no empirical evidence of the relative efficiency of the private sector.”

Footnote 2:  According to wikipedia: “The common good is a term that can refer to several different concepts. In the popular meaning, the common good describes a specific “good” that is shared and beneficial for all (or most) members of a given community.  However, there is no strict definition of the common good for each situation. The good that is common between person A and person B may not be the same as between person A and person C.  Thus the common good can often change, although there are some things such as the basic requirements for staying alive: food, water, and shelter - that are always good for all people.”