logo
   Web Issue 3198 July 20 2008   
spacer
Concern at huge profit for firms behind PFI projects
ROBBIE DINWOODIE, Chief Scottish Political CorrespondentApril 29 2008

The companies behind a controversial Lanarkshire hospital development stand to gain £145m for an £8.4m initial investment, according to research by a team of leading economists into the huge profits made by firms behind PFI deals.

Jim and Margaret Cuthbert analysed details released through Freedom of Information requests into projects such as the development of Hairmyres Hospital in East Kilbride.

They claim sometimes more than double the capital could have been raised through conventional public means via the National Loan Fund, for the same costs levied by the PFI operators.

Their financial analysis has nothing to do with the other way PFI firms make their money, which is through management and service charges for building, operating and maintaining hospitals, schools or colleges.

The Cuthberts have focused purely on the financing of the deals.

Their presentation to members of Holyrood's Finance Committee today looks in detail at Hairmyres Hospital, claiming documents show that the consortium comprising construction firm Keir and financiers Innisfree put in just £100 in equity to the project initially.

They then put in £8.4m in so-called "subordinate debt", charged at a rate of return estimated at 18.8% annually. Another £65m was raised in outside cash, known as "senior debt" at the much lower rate of around 7.2%.

The contract then provided for the senior debt to be paid off more quickly, while the subordinate debt sat accumulating more interest. The result was that the outlay of £8.4m plus £100 equity will recoup £145.2m - almost as much as the £147.1m repaid to the senior debt which had been initially eight times as much.

The economists claim that under this financial mechanism, the cost of financing Hairmyres was just under double (a ratio of 1.97) what conventional public financing would have cost.

For the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh this ratio was 2.04; for James Watt College in Greenock it was 1.97; for Perth and Kinross Council office buildings 1.82; for Hereford Hospital in England 1.68; and for a tranche of schools in the Highlands it was 1.49.

There is also concern over the way the original consortium members for such projects can cash in early. At Hairmyres, five years into the project the two original partners sold on part of their share and recouped £8.1m each, almost double what they had originally invested, while three years later the construction firm Keir sold out its remaining stake to Innisfree for £13.8m.

SNP MSP Alex Neil had been in the forefront of demanding the information on the Hairmyres project.

He said last night: "What this shows is that you could have got two and a half hospitals for the price of one using conventional finance. Hairmyres has been a complete rip-off for the taxpayer and shows that PFI is the most expensive way of financing public facilities.

"This has been a licence to print money on the public purse.

"This shows beyond any reasonable doubt that PFI is far too expensive and only exists to allow these companies to line their pockets at taxpayers' expense."


© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Posted by: stevie, glasgow on 10:41pm Mon 28 Apr 08
Blue Labour at their best,(for them that is!1).
Posted by: Vivas, Embra on 12:03am Tue 29 Apr 08
Whether its for 10p or £145million., the labour party never misses a chance to screw the punters and deposit money in the bank accounts of those who need it least.
Posted by: Alex on 12:33am Tue 29 Apr 08
It is time to "clean house"! We need to rid our country of all these bandits who the Labour and Tory governments have allowed to rob us blind. It is to be hoped that with a government independent of Westminster, these contracts can be revisited to see if there is any way in which public funds may be recovered.
Posted by: tris, scotland on 12:58am Tue 29 Apr 08
Vivas wrote:
Whether its for 10p or £145million., the labour party never misses a chance to screw the punters and deposit money in the bank accounts of those who need it least.

Well said Vivas.

We;ll Wendy, what do you say to this news?

I'm sure you'll deplore it, you being a socialist and that....? No?
Posted by: Graham, Glasgow on 1:22am Tue 29 Apr 08
tris,12:58am. Is the problem not actually with the Scottish /British people. They think they can get public services on the cheap. The bottom line is they do not want to pay tax. The SNP HAVE COME TO REALISE THIS. Therefore they will not use tax raising pwers. They will come up with other schemes but inevitably the punters will pay. Public services should be paid for by public money.Time for a debate. If you want a decent service then give up some of your fags and booze. Do not expect someone else to pay for you.
Posted by: jonny bond, glasgow on 1:42am Tue 29 Apr 08
There is a word for profit like that sleaze. What is PFI if it isnt goverment sponsors getting kickbacks above board and legal.
Posted by: wisnaeme, wisnae there on 1:47am Tue 29 Apr 08

I take no great pleasure in the revelations that PFI/PPP scams are not the best practice, not the best value, nor quite fit for purpose Tory and New Labour flagship policy as promoted by politico grandees who didn't know their @rse from their elbows in fiscal matters and are still in denial of ignorance and collusion but who knew which side their bread was buttered on and who provided the jam both for themselves and their pals in beezness.

I do not feel smug in any shape or form at being vindicated by years of campaigning against the cretins responsible for this inept and irresponsible use of public funds.

What I do feel is rage and anger tinged with sorrow directed at those snakeoil salesmen/women, lobbyists and other senior public servants in positions of trust who were involved in the promotion and acquiescence of these so called joint ventures. Orders were orders, eh? Aye right.

Years I spent digging out what the cretins wished to remain erm.. commercial confidential and some of the maneuverings by health boards, various quangos, politicos and other spendthrift creatures of officialdom and authority to avoid responsibility or accountability were totally unbelievable in their he11 bent crusade of " things will get better". Years ago, as I stood outside a Coventry hospital, only thirty years old and soon to be demolished in a wanton act of vandalism and destruction unparralelled since the Coventry blitz. A sacrifice to the great god mammon by his believers and followers, you'll understand. I was in the company of George Monbiot, the well known and respected investigative journalist at the time, Labour, I said, has broken many promises but what they are doing to places like this is unforgivable.* Hell mend and pity those Labour cretins, for I won't. Nor will I forgive them for the damage they have wrought to our communities and our public services.

... and a warm and heartfelt thankyou to Jim and Margaret Cuthbert.

Tom McAllister.

*George Monbiot, Captive State, Chapter two, Hospital cases- The Corporate takeover of the National Health Service.

Posted by: Proud to be Scottish, Glasgow on 4:52am Tue 29 Apr 08
No doubt this board will be taken over by a raft of angry nats.

PFI has delivered us crucial partnerships between government and industry that would not be possible without this model.

It seems it is abhorent in the eyes of some nats that a private company make a profit.

Our British PFI model is being copied by progressive governments all over the world as a solution to financing problems.
Posted by: David Alexander, The affshore on 5:11am Tue 29 Apr 08
Tom

Thank you for your post.

We have all been taken for the biggest ride of our lives and I will be glad when its all over and this Labour government and all its twisted, grasping ways are history.

To think that we are scrabbling for 30 million for our elderly.




Posted by: Donald Anderson, glasgow on 5:51am Tue 29 Apr 08
The Wendy Thatcher clique must go.
Posted by: george alexander, north lanarkshire on 6:36am Tue 29 Apr 08
No doubt this board will be taken over by a raft of angry nats.
Posted by: george alexander, north lanarkshire on 6:38am Tue 29 Apr 08
The comment above, a quote from from PTBS, was the first troll post of the day.

The profits made by these companies by any measure is disgusting. That the public are paying for this Labour party scheme is shocking.
Posted by: george alexander, north lanarkshire on 6:45am Tue 29 Apr 08
Douglas Fraser has an article about the selling off of assets and land at cut down prices by Aberdeenshire council.

The article deliberately doesn't make clear that these were sold off by the previous Lab/Lib lot but informs the reader that this is the council that have recently introduced cuts.

There are no comments allowed on Fraser's article and it is clear why. Fraser has gone to great pains to conflate the 'dodgy' sell off with the current council leaders and the resultant cuts.
Posted by: Macuistean, Isle of Tiree on 7:19am Tue 29 Apr 08
Yesterday I stated that all villages have an idiot and asked Proud to be Scottish which village he represented? I am still waiting on a reply.
Posted by: Buris, Larkhall on 7:31am Tue 29 Apr 08
For once is his life, PTBS is correct. PPP/PFI is used in Europe and Australia, and is being seriously considered in the USA. The article is predictably misleading as it makes no mention of the running costs, and potentialy severe financial penalties, incurred by the company, which are far greater then the construction / bid cost. Indeed research in the US has shown that over the whole life of a building, PFI delivery actually provides better VFM than traditional procurement routes.

Posted by: fatzdomingo, Glasgow on 7:42am Tue 29 Apr 08
When is a fraud not a fraud, when it;s a PFI.........should we not be asking the Police this question?
Posted by: Big Eye, Paisley on 9:38am Tue 29 Apr 08
Was it not last week the SNP government were being attacked by the Scottish media for trying to bring an end to the PFI/PPP rip off?

Thought so!
Posted by: sam, Helensburgh on 10:25am Tue 29 Apr 08
Macuistean wrote:
Yesterday I stated that all villages have an idiot and asked Proud to be Scottish which village he represented? I am still waiting on a reply.
Inverkip
Posted by: sam, greenock on 10:26am Tue 29 Apr 08
PFI making HUGE profits for construction companies-
Who would've thunk it?
Posted by: Peter Thomson, Labour, Democratic? My A****! on 11:14am Tue 29 Apr 08
The excess cost of PFI as practised in the UK has been known about for around four years now. An independent report for Unison showed that between signing the contact based on the initial PFI business case and the final PFI business case costs escalated by between 33% and 200%.

The BMA's independently commissioned research showed that the cost escalated on average another 33% between the final PFI business case and the final cost.

The National Audit commission have long stated there is no evidence that PFI is cost effective when compared to other forms of public finance in the UK.

Then we have the OFT investigation into contract fixing in public contracts revealing the excessive additional costs this has put on the public purse.

Now to this list we can add the chicanery that has been going on in Aberdeen prior to 2006 and no doubt other councils on sales of public land to private developers.

Then the problem that most PFI built hospitals are not fit for purpose, ERI and Carlisle Royal are just two I know about, and are shoddily constructed so that building failure is already effecting many of them. Ceilings and walls in the ERI are already failing as I noted visiting my mother in the cardiac unit.

All this too make Mr bean and his public accounts look good!
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 3:21pm Tue 29 Apr 08
Definitely about time the Westmidden cesspit was well and truly cleaned up, the stench of corruption is now unbearable.
Posted by: Sharpaxe on 5:00pm Tue 29 Apr 08
Wisname wrote: "I do not feel smug in any shape or form at being vindicated by years of campaigning against the cretins responsible for this inept and irresponsible use of public funds"

Having seen the disasterous results of the nationalisation of Canadian medicine and the hastening collapse of pupblic British National Health, I'm almost ready to believe that the American system of predominately private medicine is far ahead on points.
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 5:53pm Tue 29 Apr 08
I'm almost ready to believe that the American system of predominately private medicine is far ahead on points.


Nah, just money. Lot's of it from big pharma to bung at the cheapest politicians that money can buy.

I'm pretty sure there are plenty of others here who have also experience American Private healthcare and aren't impressed with it anymore than I am.

The only problem I've ever seen with the NHS, wasn't with the medical and nursing staff but the poor administration and interference by westmiddenster for political and economic reasons.
Posted by: joe90, Wishaw on 6:01pm Tue 29 Apr 08
Peter Thomson
please could you give me sources for those reports you mention mate?

I wouldn't mind getting my hands on them - even just the names of the reports, then I could google for them myself.

I would be really grateful if you could do that !

all the best!
Posted by: JBlackley, Florida on 6:39pm Tue 29 Apr 08
At what point or by what characteristic does a profit become 'disgusting'?
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 8:17pm Tue 29 Apr 08

Blackley in Flouride
At what point or by what characteristic does a profit become 'disgusting'?
At what point does your pretence of niaviety become malevolent?

Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 8:19pm Tue 29 Apr 08

The revelation is shocking.

We already know Labour is incompetent, but in this case a way should be found to take the company to court to renegotiate the contract, or at least, threaten to do so in order to force their compliance. The status quo is usuary!


Posted by: wisnaeme, wisnae there on 8:26pm Tue 29 Apr 08

Thank you Peter Thomson. Your post at 11: 14am today is greatly appreciated.

You wrote:



The National Audit commission have long stated there is no evidence that PFI is cost effective when compared to other forms of public finance in the UK.



Indeed and with more than a little understatement, I do perceive.

... and Joe90, Wishaw.

This makes interesting reading, that's if you have the stomach for it.

House of Commons. Session 1997-98.

Committee of Public Accounts.

Forty-Second Report.

THE Skye Bridge.

7) Overall our main conclusions in this case are:

(i) A better comparison of alternative options was needed

In negotiating the deal with the only acceptable bidder to emerge from the competition, the Department did not make a systematic comparison of the costs and benefits of the proposed deal with alternative options....
This was a serious omission in their evaluation of the project which leaves a question mark over it's value for money...


Their conclusions go on to state that:

(ii) Toll payers interests were insufficiently protected.

(iii) The financial terms of the deal were not fully satisfactory.

...and the examination of witnesses was also very revealing, by the way. I wouldn't have let them change the battery in my torch or given them the responsibility of shovelling $hite.

Tom McAllister.

Posted by: florence, Edinburgh on 8:37pm Tue 29 Apr 08
GEORGE ALEXANDER @ 6.45 a.m. Like you I noted that Douglas Fraser failed to report that the selling off of Aberdeenshire assets was during the time of the Libs and Labour administration and I'm pretty sure the Tories were involved as well. No mentionn that the SNP had no involvement whatsoever. Well, there's a surprise!!
Posted by: highlander45, Highlands on 8:41pm Tue 29 Apr 08
florence wrote:
GEORGE ALEXANDER @ 6.45 a.m. Like you I noted that Douglas Fraser failed to report that the selling off of Aberdeenshire assets was during the time of the Libs and Labour administration and I'm pretty sure the Tories were involved as well. No mentionn that the SNP had no involvement whatsoever. Well, there's a surprise!!
indeed !
Posted by: wisnaeme, wisnae there on 9:05pm Tue 29 Apr 08

Sharpaxe at 5:00pm wrote:



.., I'm almost ready to believe that the American system of predominately private medicine is far ahead on points.



Sooo, you're almost ready to believe. Why the hesitation? Feart of the small print clauses then, or the ones written in ambulance chasing lawyer's legalese with invisble ink on the contract.

Aye weel, you could always sell yer blood to pay for the elastoplast at the checkout counter. Then again, you could always sell a spare part or two.

Medicare $ucks, by the way..... Come to think of it, that might be a way to pay for your medical bills.
.
Posted by: JBlackley, Florida on 9:16pm Tue 29 Apr 08
wisnaeme, that's about the most scurrilous collection of ill-informed nonsense about the United States' healthcare system I've ever read in one place.

Congratulations.
Posted by: wisnaeme, wisnae there on 9:31pm Tue 29 Apr 08


Why thank you, JBlackley in the land of gold plated boulevards.

It's a pleasure, ah'm sure.
.
Posted by: joe90, Wishaw on 12:02am Wed 30 Apr 08
waisnaeme, wisnae
thanks for your messege of 8.26 pm.

Much appreciated!

ps
Good joab you irnae fae Wishae like me waisnaeme, wisnae!

pps
Trying saying "Iranian uranium enrichment" dead quick!
Add your comment
Please note: to publish your comment you must be registered on this site. If you are already registered, please enter your details below.
Email:
Password:
spacer
 IN YOUR AREA
 
Herald Appointments - Every Friday
Travel Shop
Airport Parking
Travel Insurance
Copyright © 2008 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights Reserved   
Sitemap :: Circulation :: Syndication :: Advertising :: About Us :: Terms of Use