“There is no magic money tree” say the people who think there's a magic housing tree, health, education and police trees

OUR RELATED STORIES:

£100bn a year is missing from our high streets thanks to 50 years of pay squeezes

Why does everyone say inequality is falling, when it's rising? Because they're only counting incomes, not all wealth (property, pensions, etc.)

The NHS is not a “cost”. It creates nationwide jobs, technology, growth and wealth. Oh, and health

FTSE bosses take 2.5 days to earn what you earn all year. Data shows they don't deserve it

All governments agree to fix the housing crisis. Latest figures show we're still not even trying

Recovery? What recovery?! Bank of England director explains why broke Britain is still broken

Brexit was about inequality in Britain, not immigration. Have our politicians realised this?

See the Stats: Osborne's 2016 budget protected the wealthiest while the most vulnerable suffer

Inequality: the UK has 9 of the 10 poorest regions in Northern Europe. But Inner London is the richest

Graphs at a glance: With highest pay and highest job growth is London sucking the life out of Britain?

Londoners earn 15% more 'cos London is damn expensive! But the poorest 5th in London are paid only 4% more

Graphs at a glance: Britain is already a low-pay economy with falling average wages

Is your Cost of Living crisis over?! Average wages are still back where they were 10 years ago

Election 2020: since 1997 the percentage of those under 55 who don't vote has doubled

Don't be fooled: the top 1% are paying more income tax? Because their income has doubled since 1995 while the bottom 90%'s has stagnated

Read More

The big question: who was behind the NHS malware?

Fee and KJ hazard a guess...

SOURCE PUBLIC SECTOR EXECUTIVE: Lib Dems join Labour in pledge to scrap 1% public sector pay cap

Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron has pledged to put an end to the government’s 1% public sector pay cap and uprate wages in line with inflation, a commitment that is in line with Labour’s pledges according to its leaked manifesto. Farron, who accused the Conservatives of treating health workers “like dirt” at yesterday’s Royal College of Nursing (RCN) annual conference, said nurses and teachers could be £780 better off by 2021 as part of his party’s plans. Conversely, it is estimated that a new nurse would be around £530 worse off by then under current Tory plans, while a primary school teacher would lose out on £550 and an army sergeant £830, according to Lib Dem analysis. The party’s leader also said that the controversial pay cap, branded by many unions as a “cruel” policy, would leave the average civil servant £800 worse off by 2021. Vince Cable, Lib Dem shadow chancellor and the former business secretary, said: “Public sector workers are facing a double blow at the hands of this Conservative government, with years of pitiful increases to pay combined with a Brexit squeeze caused by soaring inflation. “Our NHS and schools are already struggling to recruit the staff they need. "Living standards are falling, prices are rising and nurses are going to food banks – but Theresa May doesn’t care.” Just last week, a leading trade union claimed the cap policy will cost the UK economy around £16bn in lost wages by the end of the decade. Analysis by the GMB also predicted that between 2017 and 2020, five million workers in the public sector will find themselves out of pocket by around £3,300 each. As expected, the cap has been an extremely controversial policy since its inception, and is now threatening to drive the nursing workforce to its first-ever strike in the RCN’s 100-year history.

OUR RELATED STORIES:

£100bn a year is missing from our high streets thanks to 50 years of pay squeezes. See the stats

Hoping for a Brexit U-turn? Then let's U-turn inequality. Except Hammond’s budget is making it worse

Why does everyone say inequality is falling when it's rising? Measure all wealth/assets, not just incomes

The NHS is not a “cost”. It creates nationwide jobs, technology, growth and wealth. Oh, and health

FTSE bosses take 2.5 days to earn what you earn all year. Data shows they don't deserve it

All governments agree to fix the housing crisis. Latest figures show we're still not even trying

Recovery? What recovery?! Bank of England director explains why broke Britain is still broken

Brexit was about inequality in Britain, not immigration. Have our politicians realised this?

See the Stats: Osborne's 2016 budget protected the wealthiest while the most vulnerable suffer

Inequality: the UK has 9 of the 10 poorest regions in Northern Europe. But Inner London is the richest

Graphs at a glance: With highest pay and highest job growth is London sucking the life out of Britain?

Londoners earn 15% more 'cos London is damn expensive! But the poorest 5th in London are paid only 4% more

Graphs at a glance: Britain is already a low-pay economy with falling average wages

Is your Cost of Living crisis over?! Average wages are still back where they were 10 years ago

Election 2020: since 1997 the percentage of those under 55 who don't vote has doubled

Don't be fooled: the top 1% are paying more income tax? Because their income has doubled since 1995 while the bottom 90%'s has stagnated

Read More

Grammar schools are asking parents for donations to cover funding cuts

Fee and KJ identify our last remaining hope for social mobility...

SOURCE GUARDIAN: Grammar schools ask parents for donations to cover funding cuts

The government’s plans for a revised “fair funding” formula would mean most grammar schools were worse off as a result of the changes proposed by the education secretary, Justine Greening – at a time when the government is banking on grammar school expansion as a key domestic policy aim. The Grammar School Heads’ Association said more than 100 of the existing 163 grammar schools in England would be worse off as a result of the proposals, with more than 60 suffering deep cuts in annual budgets. The new “fair funding” formula unveiled by Greening at the end of last year would impose cuts on schools in mainly urban and suburban areas, and redistribute funding to more rural regions that have received considerably lower per pupil funding for many years. However, the policy failed to inject any new funds into the school system, meaning that thousands of schools in England with frozen budgets will be further disadvantaged. Grammar schools, which select by academic ability at the age of 11, are worse off than many state schools because of their failure to admit disadvantaged pupils eligible for additional government funding of more than £900 each a year. Altrincham Grammar School for Boys has just 26 students receiving pupil premium funding out of 1,250 students enrolled, or just 2% overall. Schools in England are not allowed to charge pupils for teaching, attending or applying to join a school. But they are allowed to approach parents for donations and to charge for additional activities such as trips. While some grammar schools already ask parents for regular donations, Tim Gartside, the headteacher of Altrincham Grammar School for Boys in Trafford, said his school was considering asking parents for donations of £30 to £40 a month if the new formula goes ahead. Parents of pupils at Latymer school, a grammar school in north London, were told last year that a “very significant financial shortfall” could force it to cut staff, increase class sizes and offer fewer subjects at GCSE and A-level. A letter from the school’s headteacher and governors asked for donations of £30 to £50 a month, and told parents such contributions were “considerably less than the average fees of an independent school”. Other grammar schools known to have asked parents for donations include Southend High School and Ilkley Grammar School.

OUR RELATED STORIES:

Official stats show Free Schools are no better, but they are cheaper to "build" from ex-office space!

Government spending on education, health and other services are being cut to pre-1948 levels

School class sizes in England are among the largest in the OECD

The NHS is not a “cost”. It creates nationwide jobs, technology, growth and wealth. Oh, and health

FTSE bosses take 2.5 days to earn what you earn all year. Data shows they don't deserve it

All governments agree to fix the housing crisis. Latest figures show we're still not even trying

Recovery? What recovery?! Bank of England director explains why broke Britain is still broken

Brexit was about inequality in Britain, not immigration. Have our politicians realised this?

See the Stats: Osborne's 2016 budget protected the wealthiest while the most vulnerable suffer

Inequality: the UK has 9 of the 10 poorest regions in Northern Europe. But Inner London is the richest

Graphs at a glance: With highest pay and highest job growth is London sucking the life out of Britain?

Londoners earn 15% more 'cos London is damn expensive! But the poorest 5th in London are paid only 4% more

Graphs at a glance: Britain is already a low-pay economy with falling average wages

Is your Cost of Living crisis over?! Average wages are still back where they were 10 years ago

Election 2020: since 1997 the percentage of those under 55 who don't vote has doubled

Don't be fooled: the top 1% are paying more income tax? Because their income has doubled since 1995 while the bottom 90%'s has stagnated

Read More

The EU enforces laws we didn’t agree to? Any more than our “Tory mandate” govt does?!

Chris and KJ work themselves up over the EU referendum...

OUR RELATED STORIES:

Election 2015: more voters swung left than right. It was the constituency boundaries wot won it!

Osborne's 2016 budget protects the wealthiest while the most vulnerable suffer

Department of Health consultation embarrassingly shows public strongly against Tory plans for NHS

Our NHS is expensive? Comparable countries' public/private mix costs them even more

The poorest 10% get 18 fewer years of health than the top 10%, and 9 fewer years of life

NHS budget is protected? Not per head, which is what counts. Our growing and ageing population means it's a £5bn/year cut

Cuts to the NHS, Military, the Courts, Prisons, Benefits, Passports... Will fixing the chaos end up costing more than the cuts saved?

Graphs at a glance: The UK has the worst investment record of the 27 EU nations

Liebrary: PFI saves us virtually nothing, if you believe the NAO’s figures. If you believe the Commons Treasury Committee, it costs us a vast amount that nobody has yet quantified

Graphs at a glance: how cuts have slashed the number of available hospital beds since 1987

House of Lords refuses to block bill forcing NHS to tender services, and taking away their right to reject dodgy providers

Official stats show Free Schools are no better, but they are cheaper to "build" from ex-office space!

Government spending on education, health and other services are being cut to pre-1948 levels

School class sizes in England are among the largest in the OECD

Read More

Privately educated elite continues to take top jobs

SOURCE GUARDIAN: Privately schooled people still dominate law, politics, medicine and journalism despite signs of progress

The Sutton Trust educational charity has been carrying out similar surveys for more than a decade, and though it reports “small signs” of progress, this year’s results confirm what has long been known – that if you have a private education, you are considerably more likely to get to the top of British public life. Just 7% of the population attend independent fee-paying schools, while comprehensive schools currently educate 88% of the population. Yet the survey reveals that almost three quarters (71%) of top military officers were educated privately, with 12% having been taught in comprehensive schools. In the field of law, 74% of top judges working in the high court and appeals court were privately educated, while in journalism, more than half (51%) of leading print journalists went to independent schools, with one in five having attended comprehensive schools. In medicine, meanwhile, Sutton Trust research says 61% of the country’s top doctors were educated at independent schools; nearly a quarter (22%) went to grammar school and the remainder to comprehensives. In politics, the picture is a little better, with under a third (32%) of MPs having been privately educated, though that figure goes up to half of the cabinet, compared with 13% of the shadow cabinet. Graduates of Oxford and Cambridge universities also continue to dominate the field, though they educate less than 1% of the population. In law, nearly three quarters (74%) of the top judiciary went to Oxbridge; 54% of the country’s leading journalists went to Oxbridge, and just under half (47%) of the cabinet attended Oxbridge, compared with 32% of the shadow cabinet. It reveals that award-winning British actors are more than twice as likely to have had a private education than award-winning pop stars. While 42% of British Bafta winners went to an independent school, just 19% of British winners at the Brit music awards were educated privately. While Eddie Redmayne, star of The Danish Girl; Homeland actor Damian Lewis; and Tom Hiddleston, now starring in the BBC series The Night Manager, famously went to Eton College, the Sutton Trust points out that British music stars like Adele, Imogen Heap and Jessie J found success after attending the state-funded Brit School in Croydon.

OUR RELATED STORIES:

Government reforms of higher education and family health created thousands more administrator jobs, but no more teachers or nurses

ONS stats show 47% of those who graduated in the last 5 years are doing non-graduate jobs. The second biggest destination of new graduates in 2012 was catering, waiters, and bar staff

Official stats show Free Schools are no better, but they are cheaper to "build" from ex-office space!

Government spending on education, health and other services are being cut to pre-1948 levels

School class sizes in England are among the largest in the OECD

Read More

What happened to our promise not to make future generations pay for the debt we created?

Chris finds out from his professor chum...

SOURCE GUARDIAN: Soaring student rents push college accommodation to brink of crisis
Between 2010 and 2013, rents rose 25%, according to the student housing charity Unipol. This compared with rises in the wider rental market over the same period of 13%, according to Homelet. The latest Unipol data, to be published in November, is expected to show further rises of around 7%. A maintenance loan of up to £8,000 in London or £5,500 outside the capital is available to students for help with living costs, but the National Union of Students (NUS) is concerned that the sky-high costs of housing mean this is now being almost being completely eaten up by rent. NUS figures for the academic year just gone show a typical £8,000 a year shortfall between student living costs and their income from loans and the maintenance grant. The housing charity Shelter said: “Even when people do find somewhere, we too often hear from students dealing with issues like poor conditions, unprotected deposits and unfair terms in tenancy agreements.” The figures from Shelter’s Private Tenant Survey show that 50% of students are struggling with rent and 40% of student renters had borrowed money from any one of a range of sources to meet their monthly rental payments, in the last year. The majority of the new accommodation needed will be provided by private companies, which in 2013 provided 80% of new bed spaces, according to Unipol. Already this year private investment in student digs has reached record levels with billions poured into the market by Russian, Middle Eastern and Canadian investors. At the same time, the lower-cost rooms available from education institutions have got much more expensive, rising 23% in price since the academic year 2009-10, according to Unipol. This means some institutions no longer have any low-cost rooms for their poorer students.

SOURCE BBC NEWS: Most graduates 'in non-graduate jobs', says CIPD
Overall, 58.8% of graduates are in jobs deemed to be non-graduate roles, according to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. It said the number of graduates had now "significantly outstripped" the creation of high-skilled jobs. The CIPD said: "The assumption that we will transition to a more productive, higher-value, higher-skilled economy just by increasing the conveyor belt of graduates is proven to be flawed." The report found the issue was leading to "negative consequences" including employers requesting degrees for traditionally non-graduate roles despite no change to the skills needed for the role. As a result, it found graduates were now replacing non-graduates in roles and taking jobs where the demand for graduate skills was either non-existent or falling. The trend was particularly prominent in construction and manufacturing sectors where apprenticeships have previously been traditional routes into the industry, the report found. The CIPD is calling for a "national debate" over how to generate more high-skilled jobs. It said government and organisations both needed to act to help graduates make better use of their skills, but said the report also highlighted that for young people choosing an apprenticeship instead of university could be a "much better choice".

Read More

It's not just school kids who worry about their grades. The government has similar problems. But for the government there are ways around this students can only dream of!

For years the government has struggled with both Grade Inflation (us) and Grade Deflation (them).

In schools grades were inflating too much. Exam boards were allegedly in a "race to the bottom", competing for schools to sign up with them in return for easier marking and higher grades.

The government implemented multifarious education changes to tighten and toughen the curriculum, all slapped with the lipstick of changing the way GCSEs are graded. Instead of A*; A; B; C; D; E; F; G, grades awarded from 2017 (i.e. for courses started in 2015) will be 9;8;7;6;5;4;3;2;1. This provides 9 numeric categories, instead of the 8 alphabetic grades. 

The consequence being to make almost everyone feel a bit worse: a 9 will provoke scarcely more celebration than an A*; an 8 demotes the child from the elite; while a 1 will reinforce a child’s position in the de-elite even more poignantly than a G.  

On the other hand, the government's own grades on policy results were deflating, particularly to ministerial egos. 

For example Iain Duncan Smith's homework has produced some very worrying marks, (e.g. foodbank usage up; job centre sanctions up (artificially?)). Following a Freedom of Information Request Duncan Smith was hoping to lose his report-card on the number of people who died soon after having disability benefits withheld:


IDS's claim that he didn't have it (his dog ate it?) was scotched by his own staff. The Information Commissioner's report reveals: 
"The DWP [Department for Works and Pensions] responded on 12 August 2014. It stated that it held requested information however as it intended to publish this information it was exempt from disclosure under section 22 of the FOIA. It also stated that it did not have a definite publication date at the time."

On 30th April 2015 The Information Commissioner dismissed the DWP's excuses, ordering that the DWP must produce the information:

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2015/1424160/fs_50557638.pdf

IDS appealed against this decision, kicking off a remarkably successful public petition: "Publish the statistics showing how many people have died after their benefits were stopped". 

Another method the Government has used to deal with “Grade Deflation” is based closely on its GCSE grading reform referred to above. Except while the grade boundaries for students have been raised, the grade boundaries for government have been lowered:

Child Poverty: The Tories plan to reduce Child Poverty not by making poor children better off, but by changing the definition of child poverty. Cameron said in June 2015:
"Just take the historic approach to tackling child poverty. Today, because of the way it is measured, we are in the absurd situation where if we increase the state pension, child poverty actually goes up."
The widely accepted definition of Poverty is households with income below 60% of the median (average) income. This attempts to link the economic condition of the poor with that of the rest of the nation.

The Tories would rather cook up a measure that allows half the country (upto the median) to get richer leaving the others behind without raising the poverty-rate-nouveau.


Fuel Poverty: In 2013 the UK government changed the definition of 'fuel poverty'.
"The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has changed the way it defines fuel poverty - seemingly lifting two million households out of it in the process. "

The graph below shows the government's expectation of the impact on Fuel Poverty:

Disabled: The Tories changed the definition of 'disabled'. Prior to the reforms one was eligible for transport related benefits if one could not walk more than 50 metres at a time. By changing the rule to not being able to walk more than 20 metres, as if by miracle an estimated 428,000 people would be declared fit enough and lose mobility benefits.

Of course the best way to be sure of good results is to have a sympathetic marker. How long before the government decides to ditch its unsatisfactory examiners (that would be many of us voters)? Perhaps by bringing back the potwalloper voting requirement: 
"The potwalloper qualification [for voting] was a householder who was self-sustaining (they made no claim on poor relief) and who had their own hearth on which they could cook or boil (wallop) a pot."

Read More

Cameron admits his promise to freeze the education budget is, in fact, a cut

SOURCE DAILY MAIL: Education spending to be cut in real terms after the election. Cameron admits 'difficult decision' will be hard for schools

David Cameron came under attack yesterday over his promise to protect funding for schools after it emerged his plans would see spending per pupil fall in real terms. Speaking at a school in Enfield, North London, yesterday, Mr Cameron made his pledge not to cut the funding per child because good schools ‘need money’. But his pledge that the amount of funding per pupil would be ring-fenced in the next Parliament started to unravel as he admitted spending would not increase in line with inflation. By the end of the next Parliament, this would mean a cut in real terms of around 7 per cent to the schools budget for children aged between five and 16, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Mr Cameron said the Government ‘won’t tolerate failure’ and would raise achievement in 3,500 schools rated ‘requires improvement’ by the watchdog Ofsted. He said every secondary school in this category would be expected to become an academy. Russell Hobby, leader of the National Association of Head Teachers, attacked the proposals as ‘ill informed’ and a decision to ‘declare war on schools’.

Read More

Graphs at a glance: Government reforms of Higher Education and Family Health created thousands more Administrator jobs, but no more teachers or nurses.

Some interesting graphs we stumbled across during our general research show how Administrators have been the big winners from reforms in both the Higher Education and the Family Health sectors.

It would be interesting to know if this is the case in other areas of the Public Sector. If you come across any more, please email them to us to graphs@rippedoffbritons.com

1) National Audit Office report, "Further education and skills sector: implementing the Simplification Plan", shows: 
Between 2010/11 and 2012/13 the total number of "Administration and central services" staff rose by 5%. Teaching and teaching support staff together fell by 8%.

2) Health & Social Care Information Centre report shows:
Between 2009 and 2013 the number of GPs remained about constant. However, "Admin & Clerical" rose by about 20%.

Read More

Graphs at a glance: ONS stats show 47% of those who graduated in the last 5 years are doing non-graduate jobs. The second biggest destination of new graduates in 2012 was catering, waiters, and bar staff.

Office of National Statistics (ONS) figures show a strong correlation between having a degree and being wealthy. However, 'correlation' does not prove 'causation'. i.e. just because two things happen together doesn't prove that they actually cause each other. Daffodils bloom in spring before tulips, but blooming daffodils aren't the reason why tulips bloom.

A degree doesn't cause wealth. Those who have the discipline to work hard academically to get a degree are more likely to have the discipline to work hard in their career to get wealthy. The key common factor is having the discipline and the work ethic.

Read More

At last! From September 2014 financial education becomes part of the national curriculum in schools!

Fee, KJ and Chris wonder what difference it'll make...

Read More

Rule u-turn means student loan debt WILL count against you getting a mortgage

Chris and his professor chum try to work out all the implications...

Read More

In the 30 years since 1983, the British Social Attitudes (BSA) Survey shows fewer than 1 in 10 Britons want taxes cut

Read More

Graphs at a glance: Tories abolished 50% tax rate for people earning more than £150k. But did you notice the stealthy 51% tax rate for graduates earning more than £43k?

Did they or didn't they? Did the Tories abolish the 50% tax rate, or didn't they. 

Actually, they did and they didn't: 

a) They Did: People earning more than £150,000 have been spared the 50% rate (52% including 2% National Insurance). 

b) They Didn't: People with student loans earning more than about £43,000 are heading for a 51% rate (including 2% National Insurance).

This is illustrated by a graph in the IFS report "Payback time? Student debt and loan repayments: what will the 2012 reforms mean for graduates?" showing the marginal tax rate for people repaying student loans.

Graduates will start paying an additional 9% of their earnings once their pay exceeds £21,000. The 40% income tax rate kicks in at about £43k (assuming 1% annual increases in the upper earning limit). Marginal rate = 40% (income tax) + 2% (NIC) + 9% (Student Loan) = 51%.

Added on 5th December 2014, after the Autumn Statement:
The government announced a new £10,000 postgraduate student loan, starting in the 2016/17 academic year, to be repaid concurrently with the undergraduate loan. The Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) calculated the effective marginal 'tax' rate for a postgraduate who took loans for both undergraduate and postgraduate studies. Paul Johnson, boss of the IFS, stated this highly qualified individual once over the £21,000 earnings threshold would be paying 50% as a basic rate taxpayer, and 60% as a higher rate taxpayer:

"it is worth saying that those who take out the loan would face rather high effective marginal withdrawal rates on earnings of 50% for basic rate taxpayers (20% income tax, plus 12% NI, plus 9% repayment of undergraduate loan, plus 9% repayment of postgraduate loan) and 60% for higher rate taxpayers."

Read More

Lessons on the dangers of loan sharks are being launched in our schools. Why stop with loan sharks?

Read More

Academies caught paying millions of taxpayer money in fees to firms owned by the school directors and trustees

KJ, Chris and Fee get to the heart of the public/private debate...

Read More

Graphs at a glance: Whether Free Schools are any good or not, they cost half as much to build as traditional schools. Is this the real reason the government is so keen on them?

A National Audit Office (NAO) report published in December 2013 reported that 'free schools' were costing twice as much (on average £6.6 million per school) as expected to build. On the day of publication the media herd wallowed in this cost-doubling story. 

What was less talked about is the report's observation that even though the schools' costs were double the original estimate, they still cost 45% less than building a traditional school. The NAO report stated:

Costs have been lower partly because the Department has taken an innovative approach to providing premises for Free Schools. It has used significant numbers of existing buildings to reduce costs, including properties not traditionally used for schools (Figure 13).

 

the Department also used less extensive building specifications than on its previous building programmes, such as Building Schools for the Future. It also adopted new space standards, which were approximately 15 per cent smaller for secondary and 5 per cent smaller for primary Schools than existing standards.

Free Schools are 45% cheaper on average to build than traditional schools, helped by having less space per student (15% less in secondary schools!) and by moving into unused former hospital, police, office and retail buildings.

With all the evangelical talk of a 'free school revolution' could grubby cost-cutting be the real motivation? Or was the cheapness just collateral to improving educational standards? The same NAO report sheds some light on this. 

Read More

Liebrary: PFI saves us virtually nothing, if you believe the NAO’s figures. If you believe the Commons Treasury Committee, it costs us a vast amount that nobody has yet quantified

Private Finance Initiatives (PFI) were first used by the Conservatives in 1992, were enthusiastically embraced by Labour when they came into power in 1997, and continue to be cuddled and kissed by the coalition government of 2010. PFI involves the government entering into contracts with the private sector, where public infrastructure (hospitals, schools etc) are handed to the private sector for development and management and effectively rented back. A report by the National Audit Office (NAO) helpfully explains this:

"The private finance initiative (PFI) is a way to finance and provide public sector infrastructure and capital equipment projects. Under a PFI contract, a public sector authority pays a private contractor an annual fee, the ‘unitary charge’ for the provision and maintenance of a building or other asset. The unitary charge may also cover services such as cleaning, catering and security in relation to the asset."

Government ministers of all odour promised better services and greater savings from PFI. The reality, stated in a House of Commons Treasury Committee report in 2011 is very different:

"Private finance has always been more expensive than government borrowing, but since the financial crisis the difference between the costs has widened significantly. The cost of capital for a typical PFI project is currently over 8%—double the long term government gilt rate of approximately 4%. The difference in finance costs means that PFI projects are significantly more expensive to fund over the life of a project. This represents a significant cost to taxpayers."

The same Treasury Committee report complained that analyses justifying PFI contracts made unjustifiable assumptions without which the contracts would never have been signed. These included:

• Understating the internal rate of return (IRR), i.e. the profit the private sector partner would extract.
• Overstating the cost of the government simply borrowing money to pay for capital investment, instead of paying rent to a private sector partner
• Underestimating the whole life cost of the contract.
• Overestimating the cost of keeping the work in the public sector
• etc. etc.

Read More