tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9095270985170721876.post6171376201130262917..comments2024-03-24T23:22:43.753+00:00Comments on Tony's Musings: PFIs for Jersey Hospital Development: A Bad IdeaTonyTheProfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10486414706261508994noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9095270985170721876.post-66963803992549207402012-10-18T07:20:09.945+00:002012-10-18T07:20:09.945+00:00One further issue with the DBFO aspect of PFI proj...One further issue with the DBFO aspect of PFI projects is the transfer of staff. In the UK, transfers from civil service to private sector are protected under TUPE regulations: not least because the Civil Service pension scheme - while nowhere near "gold-plated" - is backed by the taxpayer and cannot therefore go bankrupt.<br /><br />Jersey, of course, has no TUPE regulations. Expect a considerable amount of unrest and disruption unless this is addressed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9095270985170721876.post-59878702509473765092012-10-17T21:38:16.774+00:002012-10-17T21:38:16.774+00:00Interesting that Morier House is now seen as a ver...Interesting that Morier House is now seen as a very inadequete building by its users and not at all economic value by the States. It is part of a huge (in Jersey terms) portfolio of "public use" property that is not really fit for purpose.<br />Ozouf did have a grand plan to sell it all off and remove to a new centralised States rented building on the Waterfront as part of a Public Private partnerhsip deal that would be milking the Jersey taxpaying public for generations to come.<br />Integral to current thinking is the son of WEB aka the Jersey Development Company which will have enormous powers to develope land and properties all over the Island with very little public accountability.<br />The proprties tied up in the Propery Services section of the States will be augmented as one big potential honey pot for the private devlopers to dip into and since that Department was more or less gutted following the Lime Grove fiasco - along with any chance of an effective audit oversight - well its not too difficult to see who will be making a fortune out of the huge Health Department proposals...Tom Gruchyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01384387998228996741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9095270985170721876.post-62068250411410270342012-10-17T18:04:38.552+00:002012-10-17T18:04:38.552+00:00Tony, I am willing to bet the new hospital will be...Tony, I am willing to bet the new hospital will be a PFI deal. Wasn't Morier house built this way?<br /><br />Recently the States of Jersey Treasury advertised a tender for professional advice on borrowing. Today for the umpteenth time the Treasury Minister said words to the effect "we are great we have no debt".<br /><br />Yet recently he advertised for borrowing advice and when questioned said it was wise to do so as credit was so cheap right now.<br /><br />If you have a good look at the MTFP it's clear to see the new hospital cannot be funded without borrowing.<br /><br />You or I would do without it as we can't afford it. You or I would take great heed of the all the evidence you have produced in another well researched post.<br /><br />Our government will do neither, they will borrow to build what we cannot afford. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9095270985170721876.post-53670160040641468722012-10-17T09:54:59.800+00:002012-10-17T09:54:59.800+00:00Two points you passed over:
1. Part of the reason...Two points you passed over:<br /><br />1. Part of the reason that PFI is such a problem is that the contracts have been written as "design, build, finance <b>and operate</b>". Not only do the companies get paid for providing the infrastucture - they get control of how it is used (and consequently have incentive to use this to screw more money out of their tenants).<br /><br />The general example quoted of how this goes is that central government sets a policy that says schools should remove vending machines that sell junk food - but if the school is a PFI facility, this is an amendment to the operating contract, and a penalty clause kicks in. This is fairly trivial: there are other cases I know of where the impact has been much greater.<br /><br />2.The major scandal with the QAH in Portsmouth is that a significant percentage of the finance is now run through an offshore company (based in Guernsey, I think) - thus ensuring that the PFI consortium wins twice, once by making profit on the contract and second by paying the UK government no tax on the profit. This is becoming more and more common. Letting a contract directly prevents this from happening.<br /><br />The QAH is not the worst example either: it says something that HM Revenue and Customs transferred its portfolio of buildings into the hands of an offshore company!!<br /><br />There is, of course, one thing the UK government could very easily do to solve the problem. The first two rounds of Quantitative Easing created money which mostly ended up being trousered by the banksters. QE3 could easily be used to buy out a substantial tranche of PFI. All it requires is the political will to do so. And if G4S, Serco, Capita etc complain about losing lucrative contracts the general public, being aware of the PFI rip-off, will afford them scant sympathy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com