Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation 5

5

We are concerned that the approach to managing the expiry of PFI contracts risks authorities...

Recommendation
We are concerned that the approach to managing the expiry of PFI contracts risks authorities working in silos rather than collectively securing value for the taxpayer. In the education sector, there are examples where the ownership of the PFI assets and the responsibility for managing the contract are not aligned. When a school is converted to an academy, it is no longer the responsibility of the authority, but is instead run by an independent academy trust and receives funding directly from the Department of Education. The authority, however, remains responsible for administering the PFI contract until it ends, despite not inheriting the assets. This can create perverse incentives to protect budgets and limit expenditure on managing the contract, especially during the expiry phase, potentially putting taxpayer interests at risk. The academy trust acquiring the assets may inherit a ‘liability’— the cost of bringing the assets back up to usable condition. The potential risk to the Department for Education is significant with around 300 PFI schools already converted to academy status. This is a very complex issue and further clarification is needed. Recommendation: Within 3 months, the Treasury should outline how it is ensuring taxpayer interests are being protected when the expiry of PFI contracts creates a change of asset ownership between public bodies.
Government Response

A response document is linked to this report, dated 31 August 2021. Response attribution to this conclusion has not been verified. Read the response document ↗