I'm probably the only one who does not fully understand what they are, I have an idea, but can someone explain what they are?
I'm probably the only one who does not fully understand what they are, I have an idea, but can someone explain what they are?
www.ppp.gov.ieOriginally Posted by Gladstone
Its all here Gladstone!
They are a means of a lazy govt. selling off its duties to the highest bidder.
Result is poorer services, safety conditions etc. but sure they save a few bob and some company makes a few bob, its only the citizens who lose out
Sovereignty is Democracy
I see it as corrupt Government Ministers signing long term agreements to rent critical infrastructure from their cronies at inflated prices.Originally Posted by MacCoise
The return on investment for the promoters tends to be of the order of 15% per annum, whereas the Government could have borrowed the money for under 3%.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." Mark Twain
“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoléon Bonaparte
Maybe so, but if state bodies do the work there are major, HR and pay/pension agreements that cost more in the long run.Originally Posted by SPN
Public private partnerships are collaborations between the public sector and the private sector for the purposes of providing services or carrying out significant infrastructure projects. The public private partnership can involve a number of different types of approaches, including: -
· Design and build (DB)
· Design, build and operate (DBO)
· Design, build, operate and finance (DBOF)
The Irish Government has recently awarded a number of contracts whereby the private sector agreed to design, build, finance and operate public infrastructure under 25 to 30 year agreements.
The key to success of PPP's is putting each project risk with the person best able to manage that risk. It is not a 100% transfer of risk to either the public or private sector. The public sector will generally retain control over the creation and regulation of policy together with issues relating to public standards and safety. The private sector is often better equipped to provide innovative solutions, to deliver projects on time and to minimise costs. A combination of apportioning the risk to those best suited to handling risk should ultimately result in an optimal solution.
PP projects should be most successful where uncertainty is minimised. Uncertainty is one of the key causes of cost and risk in an infrastructure project.
Typically a consortium of parties would come together with a view to tendering for a specific project. Eg a bank/third party, a construction contractor and an operator. They would establish a special Purpose Company (PPP Co) with a view to tendering for a specific project. PPP Co would submit a tender and if successful would contract with the public sector for the infrastructures Design, Build, Operation and Finance. PPP Co would in turn sub-contract its finance, construction contract and operations.
What kind of things do be built using these?
Dick Cheney is building the Fermoy By-Pass using a PPP.Originally Posted by Gladstone
(no, I'm not kidding!)
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." Mark Twain
“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoléon Bonaparte
Watch the Prime Time on how much of an idealogical waste of much needed resources these public private partnerships are here
Not that their UK cousins, private finance initiative (PFI), are any different or provide value for money.
You'd really want to have left your brain at reception to think otherwise. The toll/charge/tax payers get shafted with PPPs while the contractors (more specifically the shareholders and executives of the Bechtels et al )make a killing.... It's unecessary right wing economic voodoo and we shouldn't be sucked in by it.
With the state providing these it most certainly would not cost more in the long run.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
He should spend more time looking after his own bypass.Originally Posted by SPN
Absomalutely. The state and its agencies are well known for their judicious guarding of the nation's resources.Originally Posted by Pax
It is rare to hear of any state involvement in things like inefficient spending, mismanagement, industrial relations horrors, myopic lack of strategic thinking, an absence of risk taking and entrepreneurial spirit.
Sure everyone knows that the state is best. In fact, come to think of it, we should nationalise a few things and make the country more efficient. I propose hairdressers for a start, followed perhaps by cinemas. Then we can look forward to the big one of them all: The National Food Service.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.