This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/25/john-mcdonnell-labour-would-bring-pfi-contracts-back-in-house

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Labour pledge to bring PFI contracts in-house alarms business leaders Labour pledge to bring PFI contracts in-house alarms business leaders
(about 9 hours later)
Shadow chancellor receives standing ovations at conference but CBI says plan could send investors ‘running for the hills’
Heather Stewart Political editor
Tue 26 Sep 2017 08.17 BST
First published on Mon 25 Sep 2017 13.16 BST
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share via Email
View more sharing options
Share on LinkedIn
Share on Pinterest
Share on Google+
Share on WhatsApp
Share on Messenger
Close
Britain’s business groups have reacted with alarm to a pledge by the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, to bring billions of pounds’ worth of PFI projects and their staff back under government control.Britain’s business groups have reacted with alarm to a pledge by the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, to bring billions of pounds’ worth of PFI projects and their staff back under government control.
McDonnell received repeated standing ovations from Labour activists in Brighton as he rattled through the party’s manifesto pledges on the economy – including large-scale nationalisations and tax rises for business – and announced he would “bring existing PFI contracts back in-house.”McDonnell received repeated standing ovations from Labour activists in Brighton as he rattled through the party’s manifesto pledges on the economy – including large-scale nationalisations and tax rises for business – and announced he would “bring existing PFI contracts back in-house.”
But the CBI said Labour’s policies could send investors “running for the hills” just as businesses were fretting about the impact of Brexit.But the CBI said Labour’s policies could send investors “running for the hills” just as businesses were fretting about the impact of Brexit.
“The shadow chancellor’s vision of massive state intervention is the wrong plan at the wrong time. It raises a warning flag over the British economy at a critical time for our country’s future,” said the CBI’s director general, Carolyn Fairbairn.“The shadow chancellor’s vision of massive state intervention is the wrong plan at the wrong time. It raises a warning flag over the British economy at a critical time for our country’s future,” said the CBI’s director general, Carolyn Fairbairn.
Later, at a sometimes testy evening fringe event at the conference, McDonnell and Fairbairn clashed in person over Labour’s plans, with the CBI head saying she feared that a “major state intervention agenda” with policies such as nationalisation, rising corporation tax and a maximum wage could exacerbate uncertainty arising from Brexit.Later, at a sometimes testy evening fringe event at the conference, McDonnell and Fairbairn clashed in person over Labour’s plans, with the CBI head saying she feared that a “major state intervention agenda” with policies such as nationalisation, rising corporation tax and a maximum wage could exacerbate uncertainty arising from Brexit.
She said: “That is the question: how you square the commitment around investment, which we share, with this apparent dampening and chilling effect on entrepreneurship, on business and investors? And the world is watching.”She said: “That is the question: how you square the commitment around investment, which we share, with this apparent dampening and chilling effect on entrepreneurship, on business and investors? And the world is watching.”
Other business groups also expressed unease over McDonnell’s plan. Adam Marshall, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said: “With the UK’s departure from the EU on the horizon, businesses will be concerned by the shadow chancellor’s proposals for widespread and deep intervention across the economy. Proposals to nationalise key industries would put business investment in the deep freeze at precisely the time that it is needed most.”Other business groups also expressed unease over McDonnell’s plan. Adam Marshall, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said: “With the UK’s departure from the EU on the horizon, businesses will be concerned by the shadow chancellor’s proposals for widespread and deep intervention across the economy. Proposals to nationalise key industries would put business investment in the deep freeze at precisely the time that it is needed most.”
Analysis by the Centre for Health and the Public Interest suggests PFI contracts – a way of financing large-scale infrastructure projects, including schools and hospitals, widely used under Conservative and Labour governments over the past two decades – have generated £831m in profits for private sector firms in the health sector over the past six years alone.Analysis by the Centre for Health and the Public Interest suggests PFI contracts – a way of financing large-scale infrastructure projects, including schools and hospitals, widely used under Conservative and Labour governments over the past two decades – have generated £831m in profits for private sector firms in the health sector over the past six years alone.
Private finance initiative deals were introduced in 1992 under John Major but became widespread under Tony Blair. Typically used for public buildings and infrastructure, PFI schemes introduce private investors into the design, build, finance and operation of new facilities which are then rented back by the state. Private finance initiative deals were introduced in 1992 under John Major but became widespread under Tony Blair. Typically used for public buildings and infrastructure, PFI schemes introduce private investors into the design, build, finance and operation of new facilities which are then rented back by the state. 
Why did it become widespread?Why did it become widespread?
PFI allowed ministers to build schools and hospitals with minimal upfront costs to the Treasury. It was a way to commission popular projects without immediately hitting the public purse. PFI allowed ministers to build schools and hospitals with minimal upfront costs to the Treasury. It was a way to commission popular projects without immediately hitting the public purse. 
Why is it controversial?Why is it controversial?
It massages public finances in the short-term, but holds a higher long-term cost.  In 2013-14 around £10bn was spent on servicing PFI contracts, with about £4bn of this on debt and interest.It massages public finances in the short-term, but holds a higher long-term cost.  In 2013-14 around £10bn was spent on servicing PFI contracts, with about £4bn of this on debt and interest.
Where is the money going?Where is the money going?
Firms that have built NHS hospitals using PFI deals have made pre-tax profits of £831m over the past six years, according to the Centre for Health and the Public Interest. Firms such as Carillion, Interserve and Kier Group are among the big players.Firms that have built NHS hospitals using PFI deals have made pre-tax profits of £831m over the past six years, according to the Centre for Health and the Public Interest. Firms such as Carillion, Interserve and Kier Group are among the big players.
What is PFI2?What is PFI2?
Created in 2010 by the George Osborne, PFI2 aimed to cut long-term taxpayer liabilities and trim excessive profits. In essence, they are meant to be “less private and more public”, with the state taking stakes of up to 49%. A board is appointed and annual accounts printed. They cut back on bank financing (from 90% to 80%), improve transparency and accountability, and speed up procurement to cut costs. PFI2 deals aim to be smaller, dealing more with  facilities and services, rather than building. The government calls it PF2, not PFI2.Created in 2010 by the George Osborne, PFI2 aimed to cut long-term taxpayer liabilities and trim excessive profits. In essence, they are meant to be “less private and more public”, with the state taking stakes of up to 49%. A board is appointed and annual accounts printed. They cut back on bank financing (from 90% to 80%), improve transparency and accountability, and speed up procurement to cut costs. PFI2 deals aim to be smaller, dealing more with  facilities and services, rather than building. The government calls it PF2, not PFI2.
McDonnell told the conference: “The scandal of the PFI, launched by John Major, has resulted in huge long-term costs for taxpayers whilst handing out enormous profits to some companies.”McDonnell told the conference: “The scandal of the PFI, launched by John Major, has resulted in huge long-term costs for taxpayers whilst handing out enormous profits to some companies.”
An accompanying press release about the PFI policy appeared to be less radical than McDonnell’s speech, suggesting Labour would take the contracts back in house “if necessary”.An accompanying press release about the PFI policy appeared to be less radical than McDonnell’s speech, suggesting Labour would take the contracts back in house “if necessary”.
“Labour will review all PFI contracts and, if necessary, take over outstanding contracts and bring them back in-house, while ensuring NHS trusts, local councils and others do not lose out and there is no detriment to services or staff,” it said.“Labour will review all PFI contracts and, if necessary, take over outstanding contracts and bring them back in-house, while ensuring NHS trusts, local councils and others do not lose out and there is no detriment to services or staff,” it said.
A spokesman said a future Labour government would compensate shareholders in PFI companies by swapping their shares for government bonds. “Parliament will assess the appropriate level of compensation at the point at which contracts are brought back in-house,” he said.A spokesman said a future Labour government would compensate shareholders in PFI companies by swapping their shares for government bonds. “Parliament will assess the appropriate level of compensation at the point at which contracts are brought back in-house,” he said.
John Appleby, chief economist at the Nuffield Trust, a health charity, told the BBC’s World At One that the total cost of buying out all the PFI contracts in the NHS alone could be well over £50bn.John Appleby, chief economist at the Nuffield Trust, a health charity, told the BBC’s World At One that the total cost of buying out all the PFI contracts in the NHS alone could be well over £50bn.
“In the NHS in England, it is paying around £2bn a year in [PFI] repayments, and they will peak in about 2028, 2030. And I suppose if you add those up from now to the end of those contracts – the contracts end at different periods – we could be looking at something like £56bn by 2048,” he said.“In the NHS in England, it is paying around £2bn a year in [PFI] repayments, and they will peak in about 2028, 2030. And I suppose if you add those up from now to the end of those contracts – the contracts end at different periods – we could be looking at something like £56bn by 2048,” he said.
McDonnell also said he would prevent firms that owned shares in PFI projects from listing in tax havens. “The government would intervene immediately to ensure that companies in tax havens can’t invest in PFI projects and their profits can’t be hidden to HMRC,” he said.McDonnell also said he would prevent firms that owned shares in PFI projects from listing in tax havens. “The government would intervene immediately to ensure that companies in tax havens can’t invest in PFI projects and their profits can’t be hidden to HMRC,” he said.
In his wide-ranging conference speech, which was greeted warmly in the hall, the shadow chancellor said the next Labour government, led by Jeremy Corbyn, would have to “rescue our country from the long years of austerity” and “lay the foundations of the new world that awaits us”.In his wide-ranging conference speech, which was greeted warmly in the hall, the shadow chancellor said the next Labour government, led by Jeremy Corbyn, would have to “rescue our country from the long years of austerity” and “lay the foundations of the new world that awaits us”.
He paid tribute to the Harold Wilson government, and to the boost to public sector investment delivered by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.He paid tribute to the Harold Wilson government, and to the boost to public sector investment delivered by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
McDonnell received further cheers when he promised to renationalise public utilities including water and rail, and to cap the interest on debt repayments.McDonnell received further cheers when he promised to renationalise public utilities including water and rail, and to cap the interest on debt repayments.
“Under Labour pressure, the government was forced to cap interest payments on payday loans. But more than 3 million credit card holders are trapped by their debt. They’ve paid more in interest charges and fees than they originally borrowed,” he said.“Under Labour pressure, the government was forced to cap interest payments on payday loans. But more than 3 million credit card holders are trapped by their debt. They’ve paid more in interest charges and fees than they originally borrowed,” he said.
“I am calling upon the government to act now and apply the same rules on payday loans to credit card debt. It means that no one will ever pay more in interest than their original loan. If the Tories refuse to act, I can announce today that the next Labour government will amend the law.”“I am calling upon the government to act now and apply the same rules on payday loans to credit card debt. It means that no one will ever pay more in interest than their original loan. If the Tories refuse to act, I can announce today that the next Labour government will amend the law.”
He joked that the rule change could be dubbed the “McDonnell amendment” – a phrase usually used to refer to a change of Labour leadership rules favoured by leftwing activists and regarded by centrist MPs as a way of securing the top job for the shadow chancellor in future.He joked that the rule change could be dubbed the “McDonnell amendment” – a phrase usually used to refer to a change of Labour leadership rules favoured by leftwing activists and regarded by centrist MPs as a way of securing the top job for the shadow chancellor in future.
This article was amended on 26 September 2017. The original stated that Labour analysis found private firms had made £831m profit from PFI contracts over the past six years. The analysis actually came from the Centre for Health and the Public Interest, and the profits were only from private sector PFI deals with the NHS.This article was amended on 26 September 2017. The original stated that Labour analysis found private firms had made £831m profit from PFI contracts over the past six years. The analysis actually came from the Centre for Health and the Public Interest, and the profits were only from private sector PFI deals with the NHS.
Labour conference 2017
John McDonnell
Labour
Private finance initiative
Privatisation
Economic policy
news
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share via Email
Share on LinkedIn
Share on Pinterest
Share on Google+
Share on WhatsApp
Share on Messenger
Reuse this content