Value for money is a term used an awful lot by people nowadays, and mostly used as an alternative to ‘cheap’.
The term has been used by corporations such as the BBC, Gordon Brown, local councils and even supermarkets, to give their message the idea that cost is an issue, and that every penny of our money must be used effectively. The only thing we’re missing though, is a definition of effectively.
Take the huge costs of consulting with Londoners, manufacturers and other public bodies to replace the ‘bendy-bus’. Where is the cost effectiveness or value for money?
After the frosts of recent weeks, huge potholes have sprung up across London. The weather is largely blamed, but that’s skipping over the true source of the issue – poorly maintained highways.
But that brings up another issue. For years we’ve been told that excess from vehicle and road taxes, petrol taxes and the Congestion Charge would go into improving the state of roads in the UK, as well as public transport. By the time it filters down to your local council, they will have sub-contracted the work to another firm, who again scrimp, save and cut corners to maximise their profits, from your taxes.
Value for money isn’t another way of saying ‘cheapest option’. Value for money means getting it right the first time, spending those few extra pounds to perfect it. Cheapest option, as we’re seeing now, means that work will last a few years, then catastrophically fail.
Think again, Boris.
Last comments