Institutions

Charles Moore, writing in The Daily Telegraph: "From its inception the NHS has been a nationalised industry. All nationalised industries put those who run them first, their trade unions second and their customers nowhere. They are by nature indifferent to human need and so their effect, whatever the intention, is cruel. Until this is acknowledged, nothing much will change."
He has a point but I think his focus on nationalised industries is too narrow: I think what he says applies to pretty well all institutions. After some time, when good intentions start to be eroded by the necessity of maintaining effective efficiency, something happens to the system: it seems that it becomes necessary in the minds of those who run the institutions that efficiency of operation is more important than whatever were the good intentions at the start of the process.
Charles Moore is a Catholic: isn't he aware that the institution of the Roman Catholic Church is too concsious of the mechanism of its own set-up to notice the sinful behaviour of some of its priests as regards their paedophilia, or, if aware, then too anxious to cover up their wrong-doings by moving them to other parishes?
It isn't only nationalised industries which are guilty of these malpractices. The trouble is, I believe, that someone comes along with an idea which seems brilliant - e.g. comprehensive education. It is untried and an experiment but believed to be the right thing to implement. After a while the brilliant idea is found not to work to the degree of satisfaction previously desired but instead of the idea being abandoned, it is made to work. Or an attempt to make it work is operated. Then it seems to work because those operating it think it is working: they operate it for their own benefit because they cannot believe their "brilliant idea|" lacks credibility. Once it appears to be working then everyone is satisfied - except those, the children, who are being so-called educated.