A question and a thought or two, on privatization and the RBPF DISCLAIMER: IANAE (I Am Not An Economist), IANAPO (I Am Not A Police Officer) and IANAP (I Am Not A Politician).

A few of you, by now, should know that I tend to think about random things while I'm on the road, going to and fro. These trips give me the occasion (opportunity), to think, question, reflect and generally study things while waiting at a traffic light, or while sitting in traffic (but still keeping a constant vigil on the flow of traffic in front and behind me, talk about multi-tasking!).

Today was no different. While I was not doing this sort of thinking (or philosophizing?) while driving home, the question came to me much later (at around 2:45 AM).

What would happen if we were to privatize the RBPF?

Don't laugh. I'm asking a serious question. Spare it some thought. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the term, Wikipedia has the following to say:

"Privatization is the incidence or process of transferring ownership of business from the public sector (government) to the private sector (business). In a broader sense, privatization refers to transfer of any government function to the private sector including hardcore governmental functions like revenue collection and law enforcement."

Why, in the first place, would a government want to transfer ownership of a business from the public sector to the private sector? If you can answer this, then maybe you can apply the same thinking to why a government would want to (OR NOT WANT TO), transfer law enforcement to the private sector.

So back to the question, what would happen if we were to privatize the RBPF? Do you see better pay for the officers? More equipment and resources becoming available? What about the negative effects, i.e., having a private company providing law enforcement services? If you've got an answer, my e-mail address can be found on the side-bar, alternatively, feel free to leave a comment. Based upon feedback, I will try to dispense my own humble opinion in a week or two, as I'm currently preparing for an exam.

However, I will leave you with one possible result of privatization: I'm pretty sure that our taxes pay for law enforcement (as well as for other social services). Privatization should, in theory, result in less taxes paid to a government, however, it would also mean no law enforcement for society unless you pay a private firm to provide such services (how would the poor be able to pay and should they even have to pay in the first place?).

In conclusion, one of the many roles of government (correct me if I'm wrong), is to provide basic protection of life and property (be you rich or poor). This is a social service. I can't remember where I read it, and I'm probably bastardizing what it is I read, but the essence of it was this: We, as citizens or members of society, in effect give up certain rights and freedoms when we agree to be governed. In return, it is the government's role to protect society from internal as well as external agression, conflicts, threats, etcetera. That is the price we pay for this security and stability.

Food for thought.

Labels: Barbados, economics, law, life, Philosophy, police

2:42 AM 1 Comments Links to this post