Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain

Top Menu

  • About US
  • Join US
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Comment
  • Question and Answer
  • Watch us Live

Main Menu

  • Home
  • Viewpoint
  • Islamic Culture
  • Da’wah
  • Media
  • People
    • Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabahani (Founder)
    • Sheikh Abdul Qadeem Zallum (Successor)
    • Sheikh Ata Abu Rashta (Ameer)
    • Abdul Wahid
    • Abu Yusuf
    • Jamal Harwood
    • Taji Mustafa
  • Books
  • Youth
  • Covid-19
  • About US
  • Join US
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Comment
  • Question and Answer
  • Watch us Live

logo

Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain

  • Home
  • Viewpoint
    • Abortion isn’t about Roe v Wade but Truth v Hypocrisy

      June 27, 2022
      0
    • Bangladesh Floods: farcical mantra of economic success disguising failure to provide basic ...

      June 24, 2022
      0
    • The Sectarian Card – Shia and Sunni divisions under the spotlight

      June 5, 2022
      0
    • Making Sense of Pakistan

      April 16, 2022
      0
    • How Should We View the War in Ukraine?

      March 30, 2022
      0
    • The India Hijab Issue from an Islamic Perspective

      March 24, 2022
      0
    • DEEP DIVE: The Weaponisation and Politicisation of British Citizenship Laws

      March 12, 2022
      0
    • Our Role in the Ukraine war is to Expose the Propaganda

      March 2, 2022
      0
    • Muslims Should Rejoice Over the Islamic Ruling System

      January 21, 2022
      0
  • Islamic Culture
    • Reading Quran

      The story of the man who was told to “Enter Paradise” and ...

      January 24, 2022
      0
    • Significance of Rabi’ul-Awwal

      October 10, 2021
      0
    • Virtues of the Month of Muharram

      August 10, 2021
      0
    • The significance of first 10 days of Dhul Hijjah

      July 10, 2021
      0
    • The Honour of the Prophets

      April 30, 2021
      0
    • A to Z of Ramadan

      April 19, 2021
      0
    • The Dawah to Allah (swt)

      December 29, 2020
      0
    • Miracle of the Quran

      Q & A - Compilation of The Holy Quran During the Reign ...

      December 27, 2020
      0
    • Imam Bukhari: A Role Model for the ‘Ulema and Da’wah Carriers to ...

      November 17, 2020
      0
  • Da’wah
    • National Conferences : From al-Hind to al-Quds: Speak Out | Act | ...

      June 18, 2022
      0
    • Public Demonstration - Independence Not Intervention

      April 22, 2022
      0
    • VIDEO : [LIVESTREAMED] Pakistan in Crisis: The Players, Politics, and People

      April 20, 2022
      0
    • Ramadan Message: The World Needs Islam - We Must Work for the ...

      April 1, 2022
      0
    • The India Hijab Issue from an Islamic Perspective

      March 24, 2022
      0
    • Ramadhan event: Kyiv to Kabul: The World Needs Islam

      March 20, 2022
      0
    • Obituary of a Dawah Carrier Dr. Youssef Haj Youssef

      December 30, 2021
      0
    • Open Letter to Imams and Muslim Leaders

      September 28, 2021
      0
    • Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain Sends Delegation to Chinese Embassy Condemning the Inhumane Treatment ...

      June 30, 2021
      0
  • Media
  • People
    • Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabahani (Founder)
    • Sheikh Abdul Qadeem Zallum (Successor)
    • Sheikh Ata Abu Rashta (Ameer)
    • Abdul Wahid
    • Abu Yusuf
    • Jamal Harwood
    • Taji Mustafa
  • Books
  • Youth
  • Covid-19
Viewpoint
Home›Viewpoint›A Better Way to Manage Public Services

A Better Way to Manage Public Services

By Editor
August 2, 2017
3562
0
Share:

The decision to privatise or nationalise certain utilities has long been a central consideration in political and economic discourse. To privatise is to transfer ownership of any given business/service/property from the public sector to the private sector, that is from the people to a private agent. Proponents of such a transfer of ownership, argue that privatisation can lead to a level of market-efficiency that the government is unable to achieve. On the contrary, to nationalise is to do the opposite and those in support of such a transfer argue that nationalisation protects the market from private injustices.

Despite the dichotomy in ownership, privatisation is an endemic phenomenon under capitalism, particularly as it coincides with the fundamental principles of a free market system; granting the individual agent power and freedom to privately manage any given utility without external influence. However, the incessant drive towards privatisation has created many complications within the market, exposing a flaw in the ideology that incentivises it – leaving the people, and society worse off. For instance, the privatisation of public services within the UK under the Thatcher years, such as British Steel, BP, British Airways, water and electricity caused their respective prices to rise, depriving their supply despite the extremely high demand for them. This meant, for instance, that the cost of energy, travelling by air, water and or electricity rose to the detriment of the people that regularly used them.

Perhaps the greatest injustice of privatisation is the creation of monopoly power, concentrated in the hands of a few companies and individuals, who profit from highly inelastic utilities that are integral to society’s survival such as food, water and energy. This is perhaps clear in healthcare and medicine, where, for instance, monopolies are able to charge extortionate prices for remedies to treat problems as harsh as cancer.

Not only has this stripped essential services from society, but it has also reduced accountability towards private agents, who do not answer to the public per se but solely to their investors. Surely the role of a state is to guarantee these public utilities rather than allowing them to be syphoned out to private providers that seek to exploit them! In actual fact, despite the purported benefits of privatisation, it is clear that it also fails to eliminate inefficiency; apparent when one looks to the likes of National Rail, where trains are often delayed and marred by poor service.

On the other extreme, pure nationalisation is also not the cure to ownership. For instance, despite the Labour Party’s rhetoric to prevent the NHS from falling into private hands, it is clear that the government (of all leanings) has consistently failed at efficiently managing public health care for the benefit of its people. The same can certainly be said for a number of public utilities related to energy and telecommunications within the UK alone, which are marred by poor output, weak telephone signals and commonly high prices at no benefit to the British people. This is due to the profit-maximising and cost-minimising incentives that exist even in government, who seek to cut costs for the betterment of their budget.

History is littered with many examples of the poor records of nationalisation in maintaining utilities for the public; the most recent was the nationalisation of Northern Rock and the Royal Bank of Scotland, which, although was done to prevent defaulting, it was a clear indication of the government’s inability to manage efficiently – particularly as it was unable to later recover toxic assets or even sell shares in the very company they had bought!

Capitalism has failed to regulate ownership of natural resources and essential services other than let things run loose on a free for all basis – akin to an unruly group of children left unsupervised in the classroom with only a supply teacher making periodic visits to control them. In neglecting the system by which wealth and its ownership is distributed within society, it has caused great confusion. On the contrary, Islam left the economic science (the means to produce or manufacture) to the people but detailed the economic system (the rules and laws), so that humans are able to create wealth independently but manage it in accordance with the Islamic ideology, particularly in respect to its ownership.

The Khilafah would secure fundamental goods and services, so that they remain in the hands of the public as opposed to the private sector. For instance, Muhammad (saw) said that:

لَيْسَ لِابْنِ آدَمَ حَقٌّ فِي سِوَى هَذِهِ الْخِصَالِ بَيْتٌ يَسْكُنُهُ وَثَوْبٌ يُوَارِي عَوْرَتَهُ وَجِلْفُ الْخُبْزِ وَالْمَاءِ

“the Son of Adam has no better right than that he would have a house wherein he may live, a piece of clothing whereby he may hide his nakedness and a piece of bread and some water.” [Tirmidhi]

This serves as a fundamental basis to secure that which is integral to the people’s survival, preventing the privatisation of these goods (such as water, energy, transport and shelter) so that they can be consistently available and in abundance for those who need them. Although it would manage these services on behalf of the people, they would be owned entirely by the public and provided to the people at cost price, so that they do not pay for that which they have a right to.

The Khilafah system would also sustain a private sector in accordance with the Islamic ideology. It certainly incentivises economic activity and profit for the one who seeks it, but, unlike capitalism, the private sector would be closely regulated and stripped of monopoly power to ensure healthy competition between firms and businesses. In fact, Muhammad (saw) said, in relation to the privatisation of public goods, that

“Whoever withholds food (in order to raise its price), has certainly erred!” [Muslim]

The Islamic way of life also has a unique view to manage resources that are neither private nor public yet are administered on behalf of the people by the state. In contrast to public property, state property can be given to individuals such as land and buildings based on the Khalifah’s discretion.

Thus Islam, as an alternative ideology, provides a system by which ownership is justly divided between the people in different respects; public, private and state. The Khilafah would solve those problems related to utilities that exist within capitalism, whether that be preventing the privatisation of public goods or regulating the private sector so that it is able to flourish, rather than being marred by inefficiency and corruption.

TagsCapitalismMonopolyNationalisationPrivatisationPublic Utilities
Previous Article

Al-Aqsa Demonstration in Pictures

Next Article

China’s Muslim banned from using their own ...

0
Shares
  • 0
  • +

National Conferences

Join US on Telegram

Podcast

Latest Posts

Viewpoint

Abortion isn’t about Roe v Wade but Truth v Hypocrisy

he recent US Supreme Court verdict reversing Roe v Wade dominated the front pages of every Western media outlet. Abortion has become so toxic that even the worst cost of living crisis ...
  • Bangladesh Floods: farcical mantra of economic success disguising failure to provide basic protection

    By Editor
    June 24, 2022
  • National Conferences : From al-Hind to al-Quds: Speak Out | Act | Liberate

    By Editor
    June 18, 2022
  • The Champions of Free Speech Haven’t a Leg to Stand on

    By Yahya Nisbet
    June 13, 2022
  • Two July Conferences on Indian and Zionist Oppression Organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain

    By Yahya Nisbet
    June 10, 2022
  • The Sectarian Card – Shia and Sunni divisions under the spotlight

    By Editor
    June 5, 2022
  • Muslims Must Condemn the Hate Filled Film and the Attempt to Divide Us

    By Yahya Nisbet
    June 5, 2022
  • Protest in London Says No To More Democracy, Yes to the Khilafah

    By Yahya Nisbet
    May 7, 2022
  • Press Centre