Author: Martin Wheatcroft

Challenges for public bodies as PFI contracts end

8 June 2020: An NAO report has recommended that public bodies start preparations seven years before PFI contracts expire to negotiate the handover of assets and ensure service delivery is not disrupted.

The National Audit Office (NAO) has issued a report on the challenges public bodies are facing as private finance initiative (PFI) contracts come to an end. 

There are over 700 PFI contracts in the UK involving assets with a capital value of £57bn. Of these, 72 are due to expire over the next seven years in England, with an estimated £3.9bn of assets expected to revert to public sector ownership in that time.

The NAO is the independent audit body responsible for scrutinising public spending on behalf of Parliament. In addition to auditing the financial accounts of departments and other public bodies, the NAO examines and reports on the value for money of how public money has been spent.

PFI is a contracting approach where public bodies acquire the right to use an asset embedded within a long-term service contract. PFI contracts are typically for periods of up to 25 years and were used extensively from the late 1990s until the early 2010s to build a range of assets including (but not limited to) schools, hospitals, offices, transport infrastructure and military equipment. 

Most PFI contracts expire from 2025 onwards, meaning there has so far only been a limited number of practical examples to learn from. Of those, the NAO reports that four out nine of the public bodies they surveyed were dissatisfied with the condition of PFI assets at expiry.

Key findings in the report include:

  • The public sector does not have a strategic or consistent approach to PFI contract expiry and risks failing to secure value for money in negotiations with the private sector
  • There is a risk of increased costs and service disruptions if public bodies do not prepare for contract expiry adequately in advance
  • Insufficient knowledge about asset condition risks them being returned in worse quality than expected
  • Contract expiry is resource-intensive and requires different skills, with external consultants needed in most cases
  • Many public bodies start preparing four years or more before expiry, but experience suggests that preparation time is often underestimated. Infrastructure & Projects Authority (IPA) guidance is seven years
  • There is a potential for disputes, especially as PFI providers often have a financial incentive to cut spending on asset maintenance and rectification towards the end of a contract
  • Early PFI contracts are likely to be ambiguous about roles and responsibilities at contract expiry, with poorly drafted clauses open to interpretation.

The NAO recommends that public bodies and sponsor departments start preparing for contract expiry on a timely basis, ensure the PFI contract is complete and expiry provisions are well understood, develop a contract expiry plan and escalate problems which cannot be resolved at a local level. It also recommends that adequate funding is provided to cover dispute resolution and hiring additional resources.

The NAO believes that the IPA and sponsor departments have key roles to play in supporting public bodies and departmental teams responsible for PFI contracts with resources, sector-specific expertise, specialist advice and training. They need to identify high-risk contracts, such as those sitting with public bodies that lack appropriate skills and capabilities, and potentially establish an electronic repository to enable a more consistent approach across government.

The NAO says the IPA should assess the value of money of establishing a centralised pool of internal resources, such as lawyers and surveyors, that authorities can use, provide contract expiry guidance and terms of reference for consultants, develop a consistent approach to resolving legal disputes, and develop an investor strategy to manage relationships with PFI equity investors, management service companies, and contractors.

The report’s final recommendation is to HM Treasury, saying it should provide funding to departments assisting financially constrained public bodies where it is value for money and practical to do so.

Commenting on the report Alison Ring, Director, Public Sector, at ICAEW said:

“Public bodies are very experienced in the operation of ongoing PFI contracts. But with most PFI contracts not due to finish until 2025 or later, they have much less experience of managing contract expiry.

The NAO is quite right to highlight the need to start planning well in advance and the need to invest in the very different skills and expertise required to negotiate the handover of assets to ensure service delivery is not disrupted. 

The role of the Infrastructure & Projects Authority and sponsoring departments will also be critical in supporting the 182 public bodies responsible for just one PFI contract, and in ensuring that lessons learned are shared across the public sector.

With tens if not hundreds of millions of pounds at stake if public bodies get this wrong, it is extremely important that the Government is not penny wise and pound foolish by failing to invest in the sufficiently skilled resources that will be required to get the best value for money for the taxpayer as PFI contracts come to an end.”

This article was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: EU spending plans 2021-27

5 June 2020: European Commission proposes €2tn in spending over the next seven years, including a major stimulus package – as illustrated by the #icaewchartoftheweek.

Last week the European Commission submitted its formal proposal for the EU’s multiannual financial framework for 2021 through 2027. This is the outline budget that sets out the EU’s medium-term financial priorities and forms the starting point for each year’s budget.

The proposals include an annual budget for financial commitments of €167bn in 2021, rising to €192bn in 2027 – a total of €1,241bn including inflation or €1,100bn in 2018 prices. There is also a one-off €809bn (€750bn in 2018 prices) proposal for a ‘Next Generation’ economic recovery plan in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic, to be funded initially by borrowing.

Although the outline budget of €167bn for 2021 is smaller than the €173bn amended commitments budget for the current financial year, it is actually a significant increase once the departure of the UK is taken into account – at least assuming the UK-EU transition period is not extended for a further one or two years.

The largest area of spending is on regional and social development (‘cohesion and values’ in EU jargon), including programmes such as the European Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and Erasmus.

This is followed by agriculture and environment, the majority of which relates to agricultural subsidies and rural development as well as environmental and climate action programmes.

Science, digital and single market includes spending on research and development (including Horizon), the European space programme, Connecting Europe (transport, energy and digitally), Digital Europe, and the operation of the single market.

Security and migration bring together ‘migration and border management’ with ‘resilience, security and defence’, while External includes the cost of development programmes (principally in neighbouring countries), humanitarian aid, and pre-accession assistance for candidate countries that have applied to join the EU.

Spending on institutions mainly comprises the administrative costs of the European Commission, the European Council and the European Parliament, together with other agencies, European Schools, and pensions.

These numbers are for spending commitments, being the maximum amounts that can be authorised in any one year. In practice, commitments can cover several years and the expenditures actually occurred in each year are typically a lower amount – for example, in 2020 budget expenditures are €155bn (including spending from previous year’s commitments), less than the €173bn commitment budget.

These numbers may seem pretty large, but with a population of 448 million, the spending proposals are equivalent to an average of just over €30 a month per person over the seven years, together with a one-off stimulus package costing a further €21 a month per person if spread over the same period.

This chart was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: borrowing to exceed half a trillion pounds

29 May 2020: Government looks to financial markets to fund large-scale fiscal interventions in the economy.

The #icaewchartoftheweek shines a light on the massive expansion in borrowing being undertaken by the UK Government as it seeks to plug an expanding gap between tax receipts and spending and fund a huge amount of loans to banks and businesses in order to try and keep the economy from collapsing.

At the Spring Budget on 11 March, HM Treasury issued a financial remit to the Debt Management Office and National Savings & Investment amounting to £162bn, comprising £98bn to fund the repayment of existing debts, £55bn to fund a planned shortfall between tax receipts and public spending (the deficit), and £9bn to fund public lending to individuals and businesses.

Since then the fiscal situation has transformed, with the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) suggesting that the deficit could increase by as much as £243bn to £298bn in 2020-21, while lending activities could increase by a further £168bn to £177bn. Public sector net debt at 31 March 2021 might increase by £411bn from the Spring Budget forecast of £1,819bn to £2,230bn.

The good news is that the cost of this borrowing is relatively small, with yields on ten-year gilts as low as 0.20%.

To find about more about the global and UK fiscal crisis read the ICAEW Fiscal Insight on coronavirus and public finances.

ICAEW Fiscal Insight: Coronavirus and the public finances

28 May 2020: ICAEW has today published a Fiscal Insight on coronavirus and the public finances, setting out how a huge economic shock combined with unprecedented fiscal interventions are driving a global and UK fiscal crisis.

The Fiscal Insight describes how the global economy is experiencing a major recession with severe consequences for public finances around the world. Whole sectors of the economy have been closed down, while governments have borrowed heavily to finance large-scale fiscal interventions in order to mitigate the damage.

In the UK, there has been a dramatic transformation in the fiscal position with public spending expected to exceed £1tn for the first time, with a fiscal deficit approaching £300bn and net debt rising from £1.8tn to in excess of £2.2tn.

Rebuilding the public finances will be challenging, with sustainable public investment key to driving the economic recovery and a long-term fiscal strategy essential to repairing public finances.

ICAEW Fiscal Insight cover page. Click on image or link to reach the contents.

April public finances awash with red ink

27 May 2020: fiscal deficit of £62.1bn in April exceeds budget of £55bn for the whole of 2020-21.

The latest public sector finances for April 2020 published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported a deficit of £62.1bn in April and a revision of £14.0bn to the deficit in the financial year to March 2020; a total of £76.1bn in costs and revenue losses reported since the previous monthly release.

Public sector net debt increased to £1,887.6bn or 97.7% of GDP, an increase of £118.4bn or 17.4 percentage points compared with April 2019.

These results reflect the substantial fiscal interventions by the UK Government to support businesses and individuals affected by the coronavirus pandemic, together with a collapse in tax revenues since the lockdown. The deficit of £62.1bn for the month of April is more than the budgeted deficit of £55bn for the whole of the 2020-21 financial year set in the Spring Budget only a couple of months ago.

Table 1 summarises the results for April 2020, while Table 2 sets out the revised results for the financial year to 31 March 2020.

Some caution is needed with respect to the numbers published by the ONS, which are expected to be revised as estimates are refined and gaps in the underlying data are filled.

Alison Ring, director of public sector for ICAEW, commented:

“The volume of red ink in April’s public finances is astonishing.

The scale of the damage from the coronavirus pandemic is only just starting to become apparent, particularly when you consider that the deficit in April alone is more than previous forecasts for the whole of 2020-21.

A full-year deficit of £300bn as suggested by the Office for Budget Responsibility looks increasingly plausible, with the only silver lining the ultra-low interest rates payable on the borrowing needed to finance it.”

This article was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: Money for nothing

22 May 2020: The UK Government is being paid to borrow money, with first negative yield gilt

Cash invested £1,026.35 (nominal value £1,000, premium and interest £26.35). Cash returned £1,026.25 (7 coupon payments £26.25, principal repayment £1,000). Net return -£0.10, yield -0.003%.

The news this week that the UK Government issued debt with a negative interest rate is the subject of the #icaewchartoftheweek. This shows how purchasers of the 0¾% Treasury Gilt 2023 at an auction on Wednesday 20 May accepted a negative yield of -0.003% on their investment.

At an average price of £102.388 for each £100 gilt or £1,023.88 for ten gilts, someone buying gilts at the auction would have paid £1,026.35 to the Government for each £1,000 of nominal value purchased, once £2.47 for interest already accrued payable with the bid is included. 

That investor will receive less money back, with 7 semi-annual coupon payments of £3.75 before repayment of the principal of £1,000 on 22 July 2023 adding up to £1,026.25, a net loss of 10p.

This is a return of just under -0.01% over 38 months on the £1,026.35 invested, equivalent to an annualised yield of -0.003%.

This is only just negative, and the UK Government still needs to pay to borrow for longer periods, with yields on 10-year and 30-year gilts still in positive territory at around +0.24% and +0.63% respectively.

Although this gilt auction is a milestone, being the first fixed-rate government bond with a duration over two years to be issued at a negative yield in the UK, this is not a new phenomenon in the world of government borrowing. For example, with 10-year and 30-year government bonds currently yielding -0.49% and -0.07% respectively, Germany’s €156bn of projected borrowing this year should end up reducing its interest bill!

Whether this presages a similar situation in the UK is unknowable, so we are not yet at the stage of money for nothing.

This chart of the week was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: charities

15 May 2020: The topic for the #icaewchartoftheweek is the charity sector, with data originally sourced from the Charities Commission indicating that a total of £77.5bn was generated by the 142,790 registered charities in England & Wales that reported receiving income in 2017-18.

£77.5bn gross income in 2017-18 from 142,790 charities. Income £50m+ (191) £28.4bn. £10m-£50n (1,048) £20.9bn. £1m-£10m (5,974) £18.2bn. £250k-£1m (11,302) £5.5bn. £0-£250k (124,275) £4.5bn.

As in many parts of the economy, a small number of very large organisations generate a significant share of the total, with £28.4bn or 37% being received by just under 200 charities with annual incomes in excess of £50m. At the other end of the scale, 124,000 or so charities with incomes less than £250,000 generated £4.5bn or 6% of the total.

According to the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (albeit based on a different dataset), the public remains the biggest source of income for charities and other voluntary organisations, making up 45% of total income, followed by government (31%), other parts of the voluntary sector (10%), investment income (8%), businesses (5%) and the National Lottery (1%).

However, the situation has changed dramatically this year. Despite the growth in online donations, other forms of fundraising have been significantly curtailed with most charity shops and cultural facilities closed and street collections and physical events no longer possible.

The Government has announced £750m in emergency funding for certain charities, but this will not be enough to make up for the loss of income across the whole sector, with total income for charities in 2020 likely to fall by many billions of pounds. It is particularly difficult for charities focused on supporting the most vulnerable in society, where more rather than less funding is needed in challenging circumstances.

As a consequence, many charities will quite rightly be concerned about whether they will still be operating in 2021.

ICAEW chart of the week: US deficit

8 May 2020: Public finances around the world are being severely affected by the coronavirus pandemic, with the United States being no exception.

US federal deficit 2002 $159bn, $374bn, $413bn, $319bn, $248bn, $163bn, $455bn, 2009 $1,417bn, 2010, $1,294bn, $1,299bn, $1,089bn, $680bn, $483bn, $439bn, $587bn, $666bn, $779bn, $984bn, 2020 $3.7tn, 2021 $2.1tn.

The US Congressional Budget Office had already forecast that the federal deficit would exceed $1tn this year, but on 24 April 2020, it updated its predictions to suggest that the US federal deficit could reach $3.7tn or 18% of GDP in 2020. It is also predicting a deficit of $2.1tn or 10% of GDP in 2021.
 
These are substantially larger than the deficits experienced a decade ago during the financial crisis, reflecting a combination of a massive shock to the US economy and a series of large scale fiscal interventions on an unprecedented scale.
 
The CBO prediction is heavily caveated given the prospect of further fiscal interventions and the potential for a second wave of infection in the fall, so watch this space for further developments in the increasingly topical subject of accounting for governments.

This chart of the week was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: UK gilt issues

1 May 2020: The unsung heroes at the Debt Management Office (DMO) have swung into action as the UK Government has started to burn through cash at an astonishing rate, as illustrated by the #icaewchartoftheweek.

Chart. Cash raised 2019-20: £10bn, £10bn, £10bn, £13bn, £8bn, £12bn, £12bn, £12bn, £10bn, £13bn, £12bn, £15bn. Cash raised 2020-21: April £58bn.

The DMO, the low-profile unit within HM Treasury responsible for the national debt, raised an astonishing £58bn from selling gilt-edged government securities in April, compared with an average of £11bn obtained each month in the financial year to March. The size and frequency of gilt auctions went from an average of £2.6bn from one auction a week in 2019-20 to £3.2bn from four auctions a week in April.

The scale of the challenge became apparent in March as the Government announced a series of eye-watering fiscal interventions, with the DMO going overdrawn by £18.5bn to keep the Government supplied with cash in advance of ramping up gilt auctions in April.

Fortunately, the DMO is able to finance the Government at ultra-low rates of interest at the moment, with auctions oversubscribed and yields on 10-year gilts at just over 0.3% during the course of April. If maintained, the incremental cost of the additional £384bn in public sector net debt in 2020-21 set out by the Office for Budget Responsibility in its coronavirus reference scenario would be less than £2bn a year.

A legacy of debt for future generations to deal with, but – at least for now – a relatively cheap burden to service.

This chart of the week was originally published by ICAEW.

PAC launches local authority property investments inquiry

27 April 2020: the Public Accounts Committee has launched a formal inquiry into the risks from English local authority investments in commercial property, and how these are monitored by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government.

The inquiry will investigate concerns about gaps in commercial skills and whether risks are being properly monitored, as well as the potential for big losses following the coronavirus.

The National Audit Office (NAO) reported in February that English local authorities had invested £6.6bn in commercial property over the three years to 31 March 2019, an increase of 1,340% compared with the previous three years.

With many of these investments funded by borrowing, the PAC is concerned about what the coronavirus pandemic might be doing to local authority finances, especially on the £2.5bn invested by councils outside of their local areas.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) plans to question officials from the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) on gaps in commercial skills in local government, and the extent to which MHCLG formally monitors commercial activity and long-term exposure to risk. The PAC will also ask officials about the Ministry’s response to COVID-19, and what impact the pandemic has had on local government finances.

Commenting on the launch of the investigation Alison Ring, Director, Public Sector at ICAEW, said: “The Public Accounts Committee is right to ask questions about the significant increase in balance sheet risk being taken on by a small but growing number of local authorities and how those risks are being managed both locally and by central government. The coronavirus pandemic will have resulted in significant losses in many local authority commercial property portfolios, adding to the pressure on their finances at a difficult time.

“The PAC also needs to consider the structural issues that have driven local authorities to establish debt-financed ‘mini sovereign wealth funds’ that predominantly invest in one particular asset class, rather than spreading risk across multiple types of investment. 

“Central government also needs to consider how local authorities can be encouraged to invest in infrastructure and other productive assets that will support economic growth and benefit local taxpayers in the long-term, in addition to managing financial investment risks effectively. This will be particularly important if the economy is to recover fully after the end of the pandemic.”

The PAC has put out a call for evidence asking for submissions by Wednesday 6 May 2020.

For further insights during the coronavirus pandemic, please see the ICAEW designated COVID-19 hub.

This article was originally published by ICAEW.