PFI Waste Continues, Public Accounts Committee Warns

Money

The Huffington Post UK   Dina Rickman First Posted: 01/09/11 07:15 BST Updated: 31/10/11 10:12 GMT

The government has not done enough to tackle waste in private finance initiatives (PFI) contracts despite billions of pounds of public money being at risk, according to an influential House of Commons committee report.

The Public Accounts Committee’s (PAC) report into the lessons from PFI warns that the schemes look like better value for the private sector than taxpayers.

“The taxpayer is being taken to the cleaners on these contracts”, Labour chair of the committee Margaret Hodge told Huff Post UK.

Britain currently has 700 PFI contracts, with many schemes started under the previous government.

“This government has been hugely critical of PFI, but they have committed over 60 new contracts and are negotiating over 100”, Hodge said.

Hodge said the government was not doing enough despite the billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money at stake.

In their report the Committee caution that the government’s case for using PFI has often been based on “invalid assumptions” and businesses could be registering offshore to avoid paying UK tax on their investments.

They add investors could be making excessive profits from selling shares in PFI projects, but there is no way of knowing because of a lack of transparency.

Hodge said government needed to stop thinking of the deals as the “only show in town”, warning that it was not always the right option for taxpayers.

Conservative MP Richard Harrington, a member of the PFI Rebate campaign, called on the state to negotiate some of the contracts again.

“It would seem to me that there are two specific problems. One is the actual cost to the public purse in the first place where the assets were basically acquired or constructed at over inflated prices.

“Secondly, there is the continual, ongoing purchase of the mundane, day-to-day items which vary from trivial things such as pot plants and light bulbs to more expensive pieces of equipment in hospitals and schools. The prices that have to be paid bear no relation to market prices.

“The state should use its immense power collectively to negotiate some of these outrageous terms.”

The Treasury have maintained that they are “committed” to providing value for money from PFI deals and have “already made a number of changes to improve the cost effectiveness and transparency of PFI contracts”.

“We are also committed to delivering £1.5billion efficiency savings across nearly 500 PFI projects, money which will be able to go back into frontline services. The Government will continue to look at what more can be done to get better value for money from existing and future PFI projects”, a spokesperson said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

The government has not done enough to tackle waste in private finance initiatives (PFI) contracts despite billions of pounds of public money being at risk, according to an influential House of Commons...
The government has not done enough to tackle waste in private finance initiatives (PFI) contracts despite billions of pounds of public money being at risk, according to an influential House of Commons...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 5
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:53 AM on 09/02/2011
Every time you cut programs, you take away a person who has a vested interest in high taxes and you put him on the tax rolls and make him a taxpayer. A farmer on subsidies is part welfare bum, whereas a free-market farmer is a small businessman with a gun.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:08 PM on 09/01/2011
WHATAREYOUGOINGTODOABOUTITWHITEY?
04:19 PM on 09/01/2011
Meh, PFI is what you get when neo-liberal ideology takes the driving seat. Even now when it's proven that PFI is poor value for money, the government still pours taxpayers' money down the PFI pit. Typical :-(((
12:55 PM on 09/01/2011
When I first heard of PFI, I thought it was some sort of joke.

The public sector is institutionally hopelessly inadequate to negotiate these lucrative deals. But if you pass the same individuals through the magic revolving door, they cream the hell out of us.

It's a Milton Friedman classic - type IV spending, where group A spends money from group B for the benefit of group C - except it is done in one huge irreversible dollop. Madness.
photo
Mike Beckett
LibDem Cllr & Director of Caring for Business Ltd
12:19 PM on 09/01/2011
Private Finance Initiatives should be good a thing, as potentially the synergy could work so well... However Margaret Hodge's analysis “The taxpayer is being taken to the cleaners on these contracts” seems to summarise my perception. I personally perceive these contracts as super expensive loans from the private sector, sought mainly to obfuscate the actual government borrowing figures. I remain a PFI sceptic, I wonder how long before PFI gets rebranded?