• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

oh dear: PFI schemes 'to cost NHS £53bn'

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    oh dear: PFI schemes 'to cost NHS £53bn'

    PFI schemes 'to cost NHS £53bn'

    The NHS will pay private companies £53bn for private finance initiative hospitals worth only £8bn, the Conservatives have revealed.

    The figures emerged in a response to a Parliamentary Question tabled by Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley.

    Under PFI, a private company builds a hospital and then collects "rent" from the NHS for around 30 years.

    The government said the comparison was misleading, as the total cost includes cleaning and buildings maintenance.

    It says the flagship PFI policy means the private sector bears the risk and cost of building new hospitals.

    But unions said PFI schemes were "expensive, inflexible and adding to financial burdens".

    There are 58 NHS PFI schemes already open with another 30 under construction.

    Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley said: "Six years ago, Labour promised the biggest ever hospital building programme in the history of the NHS.

    "Now, they say they do not want care to be provided in hospitals after all.

    "It is perverse that, with hospitals around the country now suffering cutbacks and closures, over 80 NHS organisations are locked into long-term contracts for the building of large hospitals that we have no idea whether the NHS will actually need."

    He added: "While there is a key need for private sector investment in the NHS, Gordon Brown has failed to recognise that 30-year-long PFI contracts are often at odds with the Government's concept of competition between hospitals.

    "The extra costs of £45bn are completely unjustifiable in the context of an NHS under intolerable financial pressure."

    He added: "Every hospital I talk to wants the freedom to structure its borrowing projects as they wish. For all too many, PFI has turned into a straitjacket."

    A Department of Health spokesman said comparing PFI capital construction value and full-life costs was like comparing "chalk and cheese".

    ---------

    They will need to hire MF to redo all their reports to fit those 10 digit numbers

    #2
    And Accidenture still walked away. Where's all the fecking money going then?
    His heart is in the right place - shame we can't say the same about his brain...

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by AtW
      PFI schemes 'to cost NHS £53bn'

      The NHS will pay private companies £53bn for private finance initiative hospitals worth only £8bn, the Conservatives have revealed.

      The figures emerged in a response to a Parliamentary Question tabled by Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley.

      Under PFI, a private company builds a hospital and then collects "rent" from the NHS for around 30 years.

      The government said the comparison was misleading, as the total cost includes cleaning and buildings maintenance.

      It says the flagship PFI policy means the private sector bears the risk and cost of building new hospitals.

      But unions said PFI schemes were "expensive, inflexible and adding to financial burdens".

      There are 58 NHS PFI schemes already open with another 30 under construction.

      Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley said: "Six years ago, Labour promised the biggest ever hospital building programme in the history of the NHS.

      "Now, they say they do not want care to be provided in hospitals after all.

      "It is perverse that, with hospitals around the country now suffering cutbacks and closures, over 80 NHS organisations are locked into long-term contracts for the building of large hospitals that we have no idea whether the NHS will actually need."

      He added: "While there is a key need for private sector investment in the NHS, Gordon Brown has failed to recognise that 30-year-long PFI contracts are often at odds with the Government's concept of competition between hospitals.

      "The extra costs of £45bn are completely unjustifiable in the context of an NHS under intolerable financial pressure."

      He added: "Every hospital I talk to wants the freedom to structure its borrowing projects as they wish. For all too many, PFI has turned into a straitjacket."

      A Department of Health spokesman said comparing PFI capital construction value and full-life costs was like comparing "chalk and cheese".

      ---------

      They will need to hire MF to redo all their reports to fit those 10 digit numbers

      Who are MF? Is this an abbreviation for MotherF cuk ers ?

      Comment


        #4
        MF = MarillionFan. Did an NHS contract. Writes reports. Smells a bit.
        His heart is in the right place - shame we can't say the same about his brain...

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Mordac
          And Accidenture still walked away. Where's all the fecking money going then?
          I didn't know they had walked away from construction as well. I thought it was just NPfIT.

          Comment


            #6
            Actually you're right. I couldn't be arsed to read the whole article and thought they were talking about the NPfIT as well. That's another £15bn or so on top. We won't be able to afford all those wars soon.
            His heart is in the right place - shame we can't say the same about his brain...

            Comment


              #7
              In years to come this shower of sh1te we have in charge will be seen in their true light. When we are paying for thier mistakes and lies way off into the future.
              Rule Number 1 - Assuming that you have a valid contract in place always try to get your poo onto your timesheet, provided that the timesheet is valid for your current contract and covers the period of time that you are billing for.

              I preferred version 1!

              Comment


                #8
                What annoys me most about all this politicking over PFI, is that it was the bloody Tories who were the first to recommend using it.

                They will, no doubt, decide that it is a good thing after all should they get back in to power any time soon (like during the rest of my working life)

                Mr Pot meet Mr Kettle.

                tim

                Comment


                  #9
                  Although the Tories started this controversial system in 1992 under Major, the scale of PFI projects in the Health & Education sector undertaken by liebour since 1997 has increased enormously and is now having a serious impact on Public Service Budgets.
                  If you think my attitude stinks, you should smell my fingers.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    It doesn't actually matter who suggested the initial idea. It matters who gave the go ahead for a particular scheme and the terms, conditions and costs associated with it. £56bln does not seem a fair price to pay for an investment of £8bln.
                    Rule Number 1 - Assuming that you have a valid contract in place always try to get your poo onto your timesheet, provided that the timesheet is valid for your current contract and covers the period of time that you are billing for.

                    I preferred version 1!

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X