|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 26, 2023 16:38:29 GMT
Possibly, and certainly in hindsight. But whenever did government controlled projects come in on time and on cost? (HMS Prince of Wales is an example of a government scheme.) How many fewer Schools and Hospitals would a government scheme fail to produce? When people attack the the cost of PFIs do they subtract the alternative build costs from PFI costs? Alternatively there is no guarantee that the end cost of a government scheme would not have ended up more costly than PFI costs. The answer to your post is covered in my first sentence.....If suucessive governments had the slightest clue about running anything. Please read more carefully.  They all do the same thing time after time while we hear no it was them not us! |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 26, 2023 17:20:19 GMT
Sorry but what has that to do with PFI contracts?. The PFI contract that was highlighted showed that the cost for a £2 hospital ended up being £10 Billion. What specifically happened during the financial crisis that made a contract balloon in the way you suggest? Ask your Tory governments, they reduced the annual average funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. But the NHS still had to pay for the PFI builds. Yes, I think PFI payments should have been made by |Blair and the Labour Party. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 26, 2023 17:20:30 GMT
Sorry but what has that to do with PFI contracts?. The PFI contract that was highlighted showed that the cost for a £2 hospital ended up being £10 Billion. What specifically happened during the financial crisis that made a contract balloon in the way you suggest? Ask your Tory governments, they reduced the annual average funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. But the NHS still had to pay for the PFI builds. The Tory Governments did not sign the PFI contracts - Labour did. Was the deal that was agreed by Labour where a £2 billion hospital ended up costing £10 billion a wise use of public funds? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 26, 2023 17:21:16 GMT
Ask your Tory governments, they reduced the annual average funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. But the NHS still had to pay for the PFI builds. Yes, I think PFI payments should have been made by |Blair and the Labour Party. Interesting idea - send the Labour Party the bill for the overspend..  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2023 17:29:55 GMT
Sorry but what has that to do with PFI contracts?. The PFI contract that was highlighted showed that the cost for a £2 hospital ended up being £10 Billion. What specifically happened during the financial crisis that made a contract balloon in the way you suggest? Ask your Tory governments, they reduced the annual average funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. But the NHS still had to pay for the PFI builds.That's really interesting. Where did the NHS get that money from? Only one guess allowed. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 26, 2023 17:49:45 GMT
Ask your Tory governments, they reduced the annual average funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. But the NHS still had to pay for the PFI builds. The Tory Governments did not sign the PFI contracts - Labour did. Was the deal that was agreed by Labour where a £2 billion hospital ended up costing £10 billion a wise use of public funds? Johnson's hospital building project is better, costwise.
He promised 40 new hospitals in the 2019 manifesto, and ministers have repeatedly claimed that the hospitals will be delivered by 2030. Now, an investigation by the Observer has revealed that only 10 of the 40 projects have the full planning permissions they need to go ahead.
40 new hospitals by 2030
The biggest hospital building programme in a generation According to the latest filings, 12 of the projects have no planning permission. Another 18 have only secured some kind of preliminary agreement, or have no confirmed permission. Several of the NHS trusts involved said they were awaiting a funding settlement from the government to progress the planning and design stages of their proposed projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 26, 2023 19:15:53 GMT
Possibly, and certainly in hindsight. But whenever did government controlled projects come in on time and on cost? (HMS Prince of Wales is an example of a government scheme.) How many fewer Schools and Hospitals would a government scheme fail to produce? When people attack the the cost of PFIs do they subtract the alternative build costs from PFI costs? Alternatively there is no guarantee that the end cost of a government scheme would not have ended up more costly than PFI costs. The answer to your post is covered in my first sentence.....If suucessive governments had the slightest clue about running anything. Please read more carefully. My post was an answer to your post. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 26, 2023 19:17:51 GMT
Ask your Tory governments, they reduced the annual average funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. But the NHS still had to pay for the PFI builds. Yes, I think PFI payments should have been made by |Blair and the Labour Party. You would have no cause to whinge but for the International financial meltdown, and the Tory blind dislike of the NHS. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Mar 26, 2023 19:19:50 GMT
PFI is a concept first introduced into this country by a Conservative government, but their use did expand under the government of Tony Blair. Someone once asked Gordon Brown if using PFI was financial recklesness, to which Gordon Brown answered "ask the people who use the new hospital whether they feel it should not have been built". The way in which PFI Contracts work is similar to a mortgage, very few people can purchase a house outright, most use a mortgage to lend the money, and pay off the mortgage, at the end of the loan term you have something which is yours.The alternative would be "No Home" PFI Contracts are "Off Book", meaning they do not form part of the National Debt, and instead they are paid by individual Health Trusts or Hospitals, and form part of their annual budgets. To be honest I can see both sides of the argument - but the bottom line is that if PFI had not been used, then in many instances new hospitals or schools would not have been built.If successive governments had the slightest clue about running anything, we would have built those hospitals from public funds. Spot on. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Mar 26, 2023 19:22:15 GMT
HMS Prince Of Wales.
Rosyth's finest.
Another example of Scotland not delivering the goods.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 26, 2023 19:42:44 GMT
Ask your Tory governments, they reduced the annual average funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. But the NHS still had to pay for the PFI builds. The Tory Governments did not sign the PFI contracts - Labour did. Was the deal that was agreed by Labour where a £2 billion hospital ended up costing £10 billion a wise use of public funds? No body, not even your magnificent 'have an answer for everything' self LOL, forecast the international financial meltdown, maybe that's why you are so reluctant to acknowledge the damage it did, or the reduction in NHS funding under the Tories. Instead of being a sarcastic 'know all' Why not take a look at the full picture? The Scottish PFI debt of £2b now costing £10b is for 45 hospitals and other health facilities, plus IIRC maintenance for what is it 25 or 30 years? The NHS then becomes the owner of property. In the same way as anyone who takes out a mortgage on a house. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 26, 2023 19:46:21 GMT
If successive governments had the slightest clue about running anything, we would have built those hospitals from public funds. Spot on. Nah, not even close. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 26, 2023 20:16:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 26, 2023 21:22:54 GMT
The Tory Governments did not sign the PFI contracts - Labour did. Was the deal that was agreed by Labour where a £2 billion hospital ended up costing £10 billion a wise use of public funds? Johnson's hospital building project is better, costwise.
He promised 40 new hospitals in the 2019 manifesto, and ministers have repeatedly claimed that the hospitals will be delivered by 2030. Now, an investigation by the Observer has revealed that only 10 of the 40 projects have the full planning permissions they need to go ahead.
40 new hospitals by 2030
The biggest hospital building programme in a generation According to the latest filings, 12 of the projects have no planning permission. Another 18 have only secured some kind of preliminary agreement, or have no confirmed permission. Several of the NHS trusts involved said they were awaiting a funding settlement from the government to progress the planning and design stages of their proposed projects.
What the hell has that word salad got to do with the overspend by PFI schemes? You once had some credibility but this latest - 'oh dont look at what Labour do, look at what the Tories do' is pretty pathetic even by the standards of the usual Labour shills on here. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 26, 2023 21:29:09 GMT
The Tory Governments did not sign the PFI contracts - Labour did. Was the deal that was agreed by Labour where a £2 billion hospital ended up costing £10 billion a wise use of public funds? No body, not even your magnificent 'have an answer for everything' self LOL, forecast the international financial meltdown, maybe that's why you are so reluctant to acknowledge the damage it did, or the reduction in NHS funding under the Tories. Instead of being a sarcastic 'know all' Why not take a look at the full picture? The Scottish PFI debt of £2b now costing £10b is for 45 hospitals and other health facilities, plus IIRC maintenance for what is it 25 or 30 years? The NHS then becomes the owner of property. In the same way as anyone who takes out a mortgage on a house. LOL - you keep waffling on about the 'international financial meltdown' as though it mean't anything. As I asked previously (but which you were unable to answer) what happened during the 'international financial meltdown' that changed the terms of the PFI contracts to make them more expensive. If you are correct and Labour agreed a contract for running a hospital where the cost of the contract would rise if a bank went bust, then they are a bigger bunch of imbeciles than even I took them to be. |
|
