The June 2021 assessment [0] of the service notes that "the team will never be able to fully recoup their cost through a recharge model so will need to rely on centrally provided funding. This poses an important risk to the longevity of the product, as it is *dependent on political buy-in and budget from the Treasury*".
A pathetic example of the ideological myopia that plagues Europe these days. States have provided services to their inhabitants since prehistory, and the notion that this infrastructure does not need financing is as healthy as a corporation that thinks it does not need to invest to succeed. At best, this strategy of living off of investments made by previous generations is doomed to underperform compared to states that take an active role in their own development.
We don’t even have to zoom in on Europe. In the US, it’s quite common for folks to expect public services (like public transit or even the USPS) to be profitable. Which means these services don’t get the investment they really need.
Having a profit motive drives a behavior of raising prices as high as the market will bear. That inherently excludes citizens who cannot afford to pay the “most efficient” price, who are often the ones who need the service the most (e.g. busses and other public transport). That reduces the ability for society to operate as a whole. If someone can’t afford to get to school, or to an entry-level job, how will they ever be able to move up in skills and pay? Who will the high-end electronic store sell their products to if people can’t afford them?
Municipal services are meant to serve as many citizens as possible, not to extract as much profit as possible, because it’s an overall benefit to everyone.
Definitely applies to Germany. Our infrastructure is deeply fucked and we missed all the chances to innovate after 16 years of conservative rule, but the balance sheets look nice though.
[0] https://www.gov.uk/service-standard-reports/gov-dot-uk-platf...