Local authorities, health trusts and other public agencies will end up paying up to twice as much as is necessary for the 700 developments planned or built under the UK government's Private Finance Initiative (PFI).
And private companies could pocket up to £50 billion in profits from investing in schools, hospitals and other public building projects through the scheme, an investigation by the Sunday Herald has revealed.
The revelations, based on tens of thousands of pages released under freedom of information laws, have confirmed critics' worst fears. They say PFI has turned out to be "a huge scam", "a total taxpayer rip-off" and "a cynical accounting fiddle".
Internal financial projections for six PFI schemes show investors are expecting to recoup 12 times more than they invested. In some cases shareholders are predicted to make truly astronomical gains.
Equity of just £100 invested in rebuilding Hairmyres Hospital in East Kilbride is projected to earn £89 million in dividends over 30 years, while half a million pounds of equity in the new Edinburgh Royal Infirmary is expected to win dividends of £168m.
PFI was introduced under the Conservative prime minister, John Major, in 1992 and later pursued by Gordon Brown after he became chancellor in 1997. It was designed as a way of injecting private capital into public projects in an attempt to get debts off the Treasury's books.
The idea was that capital would be raised on the private market to fund developments that would then be built and run by private firms. Although the projects would cost public authorities little up-front, they would then have to pay for them in instalments over the next 25 or 30 years.
Despite the fact PFI has delivered hundreds of new hospitals, schools, sewage works and roads across the country, it has provoked a prolonged storm of controversy. But until now, there has been little hard information on which to judge the schemes because they have been shrouded in commercial secrecy.
A series of recent requests under freedom of information legislation has, however, begun to lift the lid. For the first time the detailed analyses done for the backers of six PFI schemes, five in Scotland and one in England, have been released.
The resulting piles of paperwork have been studied over the last year by economists Jim and Margaret Cuthbert. Jim is a former chief statistician with the Scottish Office, while Margaret was an academic at three Scottish universities. Now the husband-and-wife team run their own consultancy in Edinburgh.
Using investors' own projections, the Cuthberts have calculated how much profit was predicted from the six schemes. As well as the new Edinburgh and Hairmyres hospitals, they included the James Watt College campus in Kilwinning, 11 Highland schools, new Perth and Kinross Council offices and County Hospital in Hereford.
After stripping out the payments made for servicing the buildings and the normal commercial lending by major banks, the couple uncovered what they describe as "eye-catching" returns. They have submitted their findings to the investigation into the funding of capital projects being carried out by the Scottish parliament's finance committee.
Overall, the Cuthberts found that £42m of "subordinate debt" invested by the companies building the six schemes was predicted to yield £517m. Included in that, the profits on the £717,297 put in as equity by shareholders were projected to reach £350m.
They calculated that the internal rate of return being earned by investors varied from 17% to 23% on debts that were often more than double the capital invested. Even when the profits were converted to reflect the effects of possible future inflation, they look very healthy.
What's more, the Cuthberts' calculations suggest the projects are very poor value for money. The Edinburgh Infirmary, Hairmyres and James Watt College could all have been built for half the cost if the money had been borrowed in the normal way from the government's national loan fund, they say, and huge savings could have also been made on the Highland schools, the Perth offices and the Hereford hospital.
"What this suggests about the costs of PFI is extremely worrying," said Jim Cuthbert. "No country, whether it be Scotland or the UK as a whole, could long support funding its major public infrastructure on a one-for-the-price-of-two' basis.
"There has clearly been a systemic failure in the existing mechanisms designed to secure value for money from PFI schemes."
Detailed financial information on the vast majority of the 700-plus PFI schemes agreed across the UK is still confidential. But if their projected profits were only a proportion of those from the six schemes on which data is available, they could reach a massive £50bn.
On similar assumptions, the profit from more than 60 completed PFI projects in Scotland alone could rise to more than £5bn.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article