Defence PFIs Get a Proper Kicking

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by meridian, Jul 9, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. meridian

    meridian LE Good Egg (charities)

    This is an article by a US research foundation comparing UK and US outsourcing looking particularly at the MoD's use of PFI's

    Its no wonder we only have 8 Chinooks in Afghanistan, oh hang on a minute, I forgot, Bob reckons helicopters aren't the answer to battlefield mobility
  2. Stand by for ashie, Whet and parapauk rushing to the defence of the PFI. The Qinetiq story is all true - I was there and it was all started by that w@anker Rifkind :evil:
  3. So, the Defence Select Committee of the House of Commons should investigate the MoD's reliance on PFI and assess whether it has

    delivered value for money

    produced perverse incentives

    become a way to manufacture private-sector jobs that in reality are paid for by the public sector

    supported ineffective procurement practices

    been used to conceal inappropriate levels of debt.

    Well, that should not take very long. :roll:
  4. Where does the Heritage Foundation sit in the Yank political spectrum? Quick scan suggests somewhere on the Republican side of the fence...

    On the PFI front - can't help but agree that the lack of willingness to invest in anything up front seems mad, although it made some fairly big projects affordable for a while. Unfortunately seems that salami slicing of budgets is now making even the PFIs too expensive, bit tricky to deal with that when you're in a 25 year fixed price contract though!
  5. Since the author is Senior Research Fellow in the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, that should give some idea of his leanings.

    However, he is right and PFI's as vastly abused by Labour are a menace to future generations. Even now they are stil trying to hide the appalling truth

    Treasury 'manipulating' PFI books

    The Government is manipulating new accountancy rules to favour future Private Finance Initiative (PFI) schemes, the BBC has been told.

    "New international accounting standards which Britain is adopting this year mean that, for the first time, most existing PFI schemes will be put onto the balance sheets of government departments.

    But new guidelines issued by the Treasury earlier this month are alleged to be a deliberate way of avoiding treating PFI projects in the same way in the future spending budgets of government departments.

    Nobody at the Treasury was available for comment"
  6. PFI - Lots of jobs for the boys, lots of profits to be made and if you can't provide what you promised, the Governmrnt takes over all the loses/risk.

    PFI really is having your cake and eating it for the contractor.
  7. It only SEEMED to make them affordable. They were used to take the money off the books. If I did that in my business then I would go to jail,
  8. ENRON did a similar trick to PFI by mooving its debt off BS and look what happened there.......
  9. I'm no expert on the accounting methods used, but we did get a service, capability, etc for a few years for very minimal capital investment.

    The real problem hiding underneath all this has got to be that we cannot afford PFIs over the long term because budgets are consistently being reduced. This may be something to do with the long term costs of the PFIs being hidden from proper scrutiny and therefore being missed from planning assumptions but how you get away with that I don't know!
  10. If Gordon Brown had been the Finance Director of a listed company running the way the UK Treasury does he would have been in jail long ago.

    What he and Labour have done will hit not just us but our children with crippling financial burdens.

    Never mind the politics, it is beyond that now because in practical terms the finances of the next few Governments will be cursed by his stupidity. FFS state spending is pushing the levels of Cuba.

    There is no easy way out and all the bullsh1t in the world will not change that
  11. Anyone heard about the new gym/pool at catterick that was financed by the mod but costs soldiers £30 quid a month, run by some company called bladerunner seemingly going to shut down the old pool this week correct me if im wrong
  12. And there is the rub. Not only will w be paying for it, so will our successors 30 years from now. The first thing a new Government will do will to identify exactly how skint we are and for how long. I can assure you - it will be very, for a long time!

    If you can't afford it, don't have it!
  13. That would surprise me if true, I'm all for charging non-military personnel if they want to use the facilities but charging soldiers to use the gym at ITC would be a step too far...
  14. big development opposite tesco up here not quite open yet but like it says on the paperwork financed by the mod run by civi company (Bladerunner) one of the lads asked about cost and was qouted 30 for mod and i think 32 for civi a month dont know ins and outs but pool is shutting so everyone will use this one
  15. meridian

    meridian LE Good Egg (charities)

    PFI is just an extension of leasing

    There is nothing inherrantly wrong with leasing, organisations all over the world lease things to keep the expenditure in revenue rather than capital.

    But as usual, this Government take a perfectly good concept and fcuk things up by using for items that simply should not be outsourced because they are warlike, have hugely unpredictable usage/wear rates and are risky. An outsource is all about risk, risk to profit.

    The outsourcers can afford the best commercial and legal talent, whilst the MoD faces them with a handful of halfwits, bot uniformed and civil service, who go into negotiations like lambs to the slaughter, bent over the desk and given a thorough going over.

    Because there is an overwhelming desire on the part of the MoD to do the PFI, i.e. its a buyers market and they know it. In order to mitigigate the risk of say for example, your HET getting blown up by the Taleban, you make the contract all in your favour.

    RE C Vehicles, HET, FSTA and the list then goes on to the construction/infrastructure projects

    Yes, the author is biased politically but does that make him wrong, no it doesnt