PPP :: EducationForumz.com

Don H · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 187

Public-Private Partnership is in vogue, it seems, and the Victorian State
Government is to build various new State schools by this commercial
agreement.
Seems construction and subsequent maintenance will be the private
contractor's responsibility, with govt paying rent - until the schools
revert to public ownership later on.
Why the need for any private aspect?
After all, most large construction firms have shareholders, who demand
their cut of the cake, and this aspect may mean that any school is paid for,
by the State, several times over, before becoming public.
Let's see the full contractual details - or are these now secret because
of some "commercial, in confidence" ruling? But, hey, tax-payer funds are
involved.
What does PPP offer which Public alone cannot deliver?

Archived from group: aus>politics

lynx · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 16

Don H wrote:

> Public-Private Partnership is in vogue, it seems, and the Victorian State
> Government is to build various new State schools by this commercial
> agreement.
> Seems construction and subsequent maintenance will be the private
> contractor's responsibility, with govt paying rent - until the schools
> revert to public ownership later on.
> Why the need for any private aspect?
> After all, most large construction firms have shareholders, who demand
> their cut of the cake, and this aspect may mean that any school is paid for,
> by the State, several times over, before becoming public.
> Let's see the full contractual details - or are these now secret because
> of some "commercial, in confidence" ruling? But, hey, tax-payer funds are
> involved.
> What does PPP offer which Public alone cannot deliver?
>
>
>

Possibly just the fact that the govt doesn't have to come up with any
money up front.

--

rgds,

Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com/
'Hit any user to continue'

3rd Party · Joined: 07 Dec 2007 Posts: 1

Don H wrote in aus.politics:

> What does PPP offer which Public alone cannot deliver?

It allows the govt to escape scrutiny because these partnerships are done
in absolute secrecy until well after the project is finished. There is no
way for the public to keep track of what the government is up to. When
they get too corrupt you can throw the govt out and they will be replaced
with another one just as corrupt trhat will do exactly the same thing.
All with no public accountability whatsoever until years after the fact.

It allows a corrupt govt's main corporate donors to profit. In effect
they get a good return for their election bribery.

It allows private companies (again, usually those who bribe political
parties) to make money with absolutely no risk whatsoever. All the risk
is borne by the taxpayer. Any politician who loses his or her job when
such projects fall over can usually find a job with one of the partners
easily, at three times the money he received for being a politician. This
is only natural, after all he just robbed the taxpayers blind and made
the private company rich and the shareholders happy. Why wouldn't they
give him a job? He can bribe the new minister on their behalf and
everyone is happy (except the taxpayer).

A good examples of a PPP in Sydney is the airport rail link, where you
pay $15 for a ticket to go 10km to the airport. Now owned by the
Macquarie Bank (who also own the airport and charge exhorbitant amounts
to park or do anything.

Every single person involved should be in jail. But do you think that's
ever going to happen? Not a chance.