The post you are reporting:
"That is the way to maintain quality and achieve billions of pounds worth of savings. That isn't to say the private sector should do everything - but take school dinners - is it really necessary for three quarters of all our schools to be worrying about catering?"
What about nutrition? Not seen as a high priority so far in the quasi-private education sector.
"Providers from all sectors need to understand the Government's vision for public service markets so that they can invest in the new delivery models, technology innovations and supply chains, which will deliver the savings and transform the way the public access key services."
i.e. Promise us loads of dosh so we can spend now and some time later...way down the line...eventually savings will be made. Just like PFI short term savings verses long term payment.
"A selection of results in services already partially open shows the potential scale of the opportunity:..."
Here's just one...
"£240 million potential savings from fully opening up the prisons estate"
I can see why they did not write, "fully opening up the prisons", but what is their meaning of 'estate'?
There is one certain way of increasing costs and ratcheting-up the need for more and more of this and that...Privatise it.
What is so attractive in reducing prison populations if the more prisoners there are the more money is to be made?
Do none at the CBI have ideas for manufacturing etc.?
Typically, private sector efficiencies lead to under-manning by way of throwing skilled personnel on the scrap heap where they can, at each and every opportunity, be addressed as the root of all our problems.
And finally...
"Ensuring providers from the public, private and voluntary sectors can compete on a level playing-field, and their performance is judged on equal terms, means in the end the best provider will provide."
So, the wages of the public and private sectors must be in line with that of the volunteer? They nearly had me there.