Politicians’ Private Profit from NHS Sell-Off 139


A truly horrible example of how corporate interests own our politicians and control government policy. Private health providers have donated £16,285,437 trousered by the coalition parties who are privatising NHS services to them. Fantastic work by Eoin Clarke.

When I tell audiences that corporate interests control politicians, they want to agree but, having seen any establishment-critical analysis labeled “conspiracy theory”, some are often worried that I am going to start fantasising about the Illuminati, or at best am postulating an academic construct. I am not. I am talking about very real business deals and very real sums of money getting behind the politicians’ career-promotion, party funding and thus personal financial interest.

So as the NHS is ruined by “marketisation” and billions of taxpayers money go into private pockets as profit for NHS “providers”, you know that Cameron and Clegg have been bought, simple as that.

The same dynamic was true of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. 2,000 US troops have now died in Afghanistan, but very real profits indeed have been made, amounting to hundreds of billions, by arms manufacturers, military contractors like Halliburton and companies owned by the Karimov family, and of course the private mercenary hired killers like Aegis. There are thousands of people who made millions out of the wars and some who made hundreds of millions. They are not the ones who did any of the dying. They give a lot of money to, and mingle a lot with, politicians.

This business report from the BBC was given toltally without irony:

Work to re-equip UK and US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan has helped profits to soar at defence group BAE Systems.

The UK’s largest defence firm, BAE made a pre-tax profit of ’657m ($1.4bn), compared with ’378m a year earlier.

BAE said the “high tempo” of UK and US military operations was increasing demand for land systems to support armed forces overseas. BAE, which is facing an anti-corruption probe by US authorities, saw its half-year revenues rise by 10%. The firm said its sales had benefited from its US operations, which achieved organic sales growth of 12% during the period.

Overall sales at BAE’s Land & Armaments business, which includes everything from tanks to munitions, rose 43%.

And that is before you get to the oil companies waiting to come in and hoover up the profit from “liberated” assets. I repeat, this is not an academic construct. While I was Ambassador in Uzbekistan, I learnt the hard way the industrial scale torture, repression and state compulsion of child labour were of no importance compared to the vested interests of the powerful.

The sad truth is, of course, that New Labour were no better. As they look well placed to come back to power, you are going to see some of those private donations heading their way shortly. They massively forwarded the “market driven” model of NHS privatisation, and of course presided over the Great Banking Pozni Scheme while Mandelson, Bliar and Brown hovered around the rich soliciting donations. They also received very large donations from BAE, who made billions from the Iraq War, while Blair intervened to prevent BAE executives facing criminal bribery charges as this was “against the national interest”.

The mainstream parties are bought and sold, merely a collection of alternative parcels of rogues. The politicians are, virtually without exception, sickening examples of self-seeking, profiteering and aggrandisement. What astonishes me is that many people apparently think bringing back the first lot of war criminals will make things better.

My suspicion is that the percentage splits between parties by pollsters are an illusion, and a large majority are sick of all of them. Society had not yet found a way to express that, but it will.


139 thoughts on “Politicians’ Private Profit from NHS Sell-Off

1 2 3 5
  • Jay

    Who are pulling the strings Craig.

    I believe being a Liberal we are seem as the ultimate diplomats, but please the money system surely is the root od this.

    Until you finger it we are chasing our tails incessantly.

  • Clark

    Well said Craig. The financial influences are right out there in public view, but the corporate media look the other way, and thereby direct their readers to look away, too.

    I’m quite disturbed by the number of good hearted people who, instead of seeing this easily documented corruption and pointing it out to others, make a big fuss about secret global conspiracies that would be utterly impenetrable even if they were true, which is impossible to verify in any case.

    When we clean the kitchen, we start with the most easily identified mess first. We do the washing up before bleaching the sink. Ignoring the dirty dishes all over the work surface while worrying that our sponge might have been secretly designed to release a toxic chemical doesn’t make much sense.

  • Lilian El-Doufani

    Yup, we hate and distrust them all. Please would someone give us an alternative.

  • Wasp_Box

    Christ, it’s very depressing. This is the kind of thing that should be plastered across the front pages of “serious” newspapers… fat chance.

    I think you are right that there are a lot of people who are starting to get very angry about this corrupt, dishonourable behaviour. I’m one of them.

  • Yoav

    The private sector’s greed knows no bounds. When everything in the public sector has been privatised and every penny of profit extracted from the public purse, I wonder what they will do to keep the cash flowing? Starting ripping off each other, maybe?

  • anon

    I am probably just being terribly naive here (happens sometimes) but I really like Ed Milliband unlike his brother. Just felt the need to say that…

    Thought he was very impressive on BBC TMS a few weeks ago when he got to meet his childhood hero Geoffrey Boycott.

    Certainly not the first choice of the rich and powerful.

  • Simon Wood

    Superb (and succinct) appraisal of the malaise affecting so many ‘democracies’. One poster above me asked for an alternative to this horrific state of affairs. The only thing I can think of is direct democracy, which takes politicians out of the equation and requires people to vote directly (via secured internet or computer systems) on legislation and policy, which themselves are formulated by committees of ‘experts’ in the appropriate fields. It is eminently workable and actually functions fine in Switzerland, a successful semi-direct democracy. Sadly, it is dogged by the erroneous idea that it is ‘mob rule’ when it absolutely is not. Anyway, it should at least be debated as a serious alternative to the hellish state of affairs we have now. I discuss this in a FREE book I wrote at http://www.99998271.com/ and blog on this (and human rights) at http://99998271.blogspot.jp/ for anyone who is interested.

    Not spamming here…I do all this for free and would really like people to realize there ARE viable alternatives out there, and also that almost everything you have heard about direct democracy is probably wrong.

    Thanks again to Craig for his excellent comments. I’ll be tweeting some quotes from here for sure.

  • MJ

    “My suspicion is that the percentage splits between parties by pollsters are an illusion, and a large majority are sick of all of them. Society had not yet found a way to express that, but it will”

    Since all three main parties are now essentially the same, I think it would be a good idea if they were required to merge into a single party, called the Neocon Bankster Party or somesuch. A new Peasant Party could then emerge to represent the rest of us. By delineating the true battlelines I believe this would at least bring some clarity as we plummet towards the new feudalism that appears to be our destiny.

  • John Goss

    I hope you’re right about society finding a way to express its dissatisfaction with what’s politically on offer. Most of us are fed up to the eye-teeth with politicians of all persuasions. And they are certainly all bought, Ed Milliband too. If the Zionists do not fully own him yet they will if he shows any signs of coming to power.

    But the prime example of how it works is Tony Blair – the war-criminal. They got him to prosecute an unholy war (even more dead yesterday in Iraq) and reward him with grossly indecent money which is laundered through J P Morgan.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Blair

  • Clydebuilt

    What was behind BBC Scotland’s attack on the Scottish NHS

    http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/5962-what-was-behind-bbc-scotlands-attack-on-the-scottish-nhs

    Last week BBC Scotland spent a day comparing the Scottish NHS with its English counterpart.

    In a rather bizarre series of broadcasts last Thursday, both on radio and TV, the corporation spent the day informing Scottish listeners and viewers of the benefits of the English NHS.

    What was BBC Scotland doing not just reporting on the English NHS, but apparently trumpeting reforms being pushed through by the UK government?

    It was a puzzle until Newsnet Scotland came across a little known report that had been compiled by a respected freelance journalist.

    The report by Oliver Huitson gave a clue as to the reasons the reforms were given such an uncritical high profile.

    The report, which should be read to be appreciated, begged the question: Was BBC Scotland pushing English NHS reforms at the behest of its London controllers?

    Huitson’s investigation didn’t look at BBC Scotland, more’s the pity, instead it focused on the UK BBC’s reporting of matters relating to the English NHS – especially these very reforms.

    According to Mr Huitson, he discovered evidence of widespread bias and censorship on the part of the state broadcaster in favour of UK Government reforms to the English NHS.

    http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourbeeb/oliver-huitson/how-bbc-betrayed-nhs-exclusive-report-on-two-years-of-censorship-and-distortion

    I’m having problems with this link,

    http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/5962-what-was-behind-bbc-scotlands-attack-on-the-scottish-nhs

  • Colin Carr

    Craig,
    What you say is very true, though not really new. I agree with the comments that a growing number of people are sick of these corrupt politicians, regardless of which party line they follow.
    The really depressing thing is that they and their wealthy cronies seem to have the system pretty well sewn up. This makes them extremely difficult to challenge by legal means. Even peaceful demonstrations are now construed as a threat to national security or acts of terrorism. Does this mean the only option remaining to right thinking citizens is take to the streets in bloody revolution? I hope not, but find it ever harder see any peaceful alternative.

  • Tom Welsh

    The trouble is, Craig, the bigger governments get the more liable they are to be infiltrated and permeated by the kind of corruption you point out. Human beings evolved living in bands of 10-20 to maybe 50-60. Groups like that, especially when they are permanent and lifelong, can be well organised and governed – our natural instincts actually help that to happen. We defer to those who are naturally dominant, letting them lead while others may advise and support them.

    Scale up to a village – a couple of thousand – and it still works fairly well, after a fashion. But the worm has entered the apple, as even at this scale of community a well-organised and ruthless person can take over complete control. (See every second Western you ever enjoyed, for example).

    Scale up to a nation state, such as the UK, and you have a recipe for domination by the powerful and the wealthy, working together in an always uneasy and often bloody dynamic balance. When millions are ruled, the power and the profits are big enough to motivate truly horrible behaviour: war, repression, systematic exploitation, methodical propaganda. Whatever the theoretical form of government, it will in reality become a plutocratic oligarchy (as the ancient Greeks would put it) or fascism (as we would).

    And what happens when you scale up another step, to the continental or even global level? I leave that as an exercise for the student.

  • Orwell

    1984 approaching fast…..just wait and see. I pity our children for the future they’re going to live in.

  • Frank Bowles

    Craig, I don’t really think this stands up to analysis, certainly not as far as the Lib Dems are concerned. There is one six-figure donor, an eccentric who runs a health care provider, but his donations stretch into the dim and distant past where he was certainly not buying influence. In any event the propriety of these donations were discussed by the media during the election. The other much smaller donor is one of the party’s peers, who surely could be expected to bung a few grand in the party’s direction from time to time.

    And its hard to say from this that there is anything special about the amount donated to the Tories from health companies compared with everyone else who gives them money and we all know that business interests of all kinds like to feather the Tories’ pockets. That might be because they want a special favour in the sector they trade in be it health or arms or it might be because they want the more “business friendly party in power”

    But you need to prove the direct favours for it to be a story. And this guy doesn’t do it, he’s having a rant.

    If you don’t want political parties funded by rich organisations then there needs to be some form of state funding, and we all know that too.

    So, we know the problem and we can get all emotive about it, but what are the first steps to creating something better?

    Cheers

    Frank

  • Matt Keefe

    I agree entirely with your final paragraph. I get stick for spoiling my ballot from friends I know full well would likewise rather not vote for any of these people. What choice.

  • Nextus

    “Since all three main parties are now essentially the same”

    Ah, all in the service of political harmony (read “hegemony”).

    Ed Balls is currently telling the party conference that divisions in politics are holding back decision-making about redevelopment of the country’s infrastructure, on everything from energy policy to transport. He is continually reiterating the need for “cross-party consensus”.

    Here’s how it will work: independent decision-making bodies will be appointed to recommend the best way forward for Britain. But they won’t be comprised of politicians – oh, no, that would be too divisive – instead they’ll be staffed by consultants and chaired by business leaders. So there will be less of that troublesome bickering in the House of Commons. Balls has already asked Sir John Armitt, chair of the Olympic delivery authority, to conduct a review of long-term infrastructure decision-making. What’s the betting that his report will conclude that more public money should be spent on private contracts?

    What a neat solution! This arrangement saves the politicians the trouble of having to think up policies on behalf of their constituents. And all parties will be compelled to rubberstamp these recommendations from “independent” experts, so “cross-party consensus” can be achieved without having to waste time debating the policies in parliament. The running of the country can simply be handed over to those nice philanthropic unaccountable businessmen. No need to allow the people to have a say at all.

    Really, what’s the point of voting at all now? Elections have become such a sham.

  • John Devon

    I have voted LD for the last 4 elections after Blair and (New) Labour sold us out.

    But I won’t vote at all at the next election as all the parties and their leaders make me want to vomit. The last straw was when Clegg refused to back fairer constinuencies as a piece of petty revenge for not getting his way over Lords reform (yes, I know this would work to the advantage of the Tories but that’s not a reason not to do it).

    There is now no political party in England that you can vote for and it not be a wasted vote. That’s the reality of 2012.

  • Mark Golding - Children of Iraq Association

    Orwell – It might not be so foreboding. A harbinger suggested that *knowing* collective human minds have reached a tipping point to prepare identification with the single sentient entity that holds the complex orderings of an entire universe.

    That imminent identification will evolve our own consciousness to the level needed to sustain our existence. Many of us will be left to extinction like dinosaurs, outmoded, something of the past, while the rest prepare neoteric frames of reference based on involvement, harmony and union.

    This will happen late December.

1 2 3 5

Comments are closed.