- Why was the security contract given to one company, rather than split between the different Olympic sites?
- How many companies bid for this contract? There are very few which would be in a position to bid, and that's a perennial problem in outsourcing. You create private monopolies.
- Why was the contract given to a company with a poor track record? That one is being asked. Apparently G4S mucked up the security at least year's Wimbledon. But the answer is one we know from W2W. The procurement process doesn't take a company's past record into account.
- Did G4S subcontract, or have arrangements with other companies, to supply or train the workers?
- Were they deliberately leaving things to the last minute so that people they trained didn't go off and get a job with someone else?
Most of those questions won't be answered this week. And Labour's outrage is necessarily limited by the fact that the contracts were given out under their administration. But it matters very much in the creeping advance of privatisation. Take the IT system for Universal Credit. The Telegraph reports that the project is in danger because the IT isn't ready. The DWP and HMRC are squabbling about whose responsibility this is, but behind it will be private contractors.