When we embarked on our PPP process, the key things were to upskill the HR team and to increase the pace at which they worked. When the deputy prime minister made his announcement, it was a very exciting time and we had to work quickly, but of course, it still hasnt happened four years later. Weve defined outputs, performance regimes, worked on our contracts, done organisational restructures and defined the key interface processes. We used the opportunity to bring in consultants Arthur Andersen it was great to work with them and there was a big skills transfer. I even put in an entire new LU board theres only me left from four years ago. But the other challenge has been with the trade unions. Theyre openly hostile to PPP and wont do anything collaborative to do with it. Weve got the partnership model on one side, old-fashioned conflict on the other and stuck in the middle is the PPP. The TUC has facilitated things but the unions are fundamentally opposed. They want public money for public services and it does have an appeal, its cheap money after all. The London Underground is like working in a goldfish bowl - theres a big PR side to people management and you cant be sensitive to whats written in the press or to what the trade unions say in meetings.
Andrew Foster, HR director, NHS
Theres no doubt we are getting a very large amount of investment in the NHS through PPP, principally in the form of PFI which has brought in a massive amount of capital and allowed much-needed modernisation of infrastructure. What it has also meant is a transfer of some staff groups to private employers. There has been opposition from unions. NHS staff see themselves as a big family, cleaners are just as much a part of the ward staff as nurses if they are working for two employers it causes an increase in tension, and we must understand and respect that. But the Government did announce recently an innovative scheme to second staff to private employers, while remaining NHS employees, and three pilot schemes are being set up. A potential downside though may be to reduce the attractiveness of this to potential employers. One of my four fundamental strategic objectives is to make the NHS a model employer, and I have to work with employees and unions who oppose the idea of PPP.
David Reynolds, professor of leadership and school effectiveness, University of Exeter
The thing is that if you look at it internationally, there are lots of systems in which private schools and private-enterprise run schools educate a higher proportion of children than here. And if you look at the US, the contribution of private-sector run schools is thought of generally as a productive thing. Everything depends on which parts of the private sector are involved. There is a definite variability of quality and there is less of a legislative straitjacket for the private sector it might have reliability, the ability to meet deadlines and be focused but from what I can see, the firms taking an interest in education are recruiting mostly from the public sector. There is also a lot of opposition to the private sector in education it could be that the not-for-profit sector might be more successful. And there are concerns in the profession about private-sector overselling of wares people have been sold a pup in terms of hardware and software and its been hard for them to see the benefits of it.
