Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Wednesday, 9th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

SNP told 'show us the money' as alternative to PFI launched



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 20 May 2008
By GEMMA FRASER and IAN SWANSON
EDINBURGH'S education leader today called for urgent action to fund new city schools as the Scottish Government unveiled its long-awaited plans to replace private finance initiatives.
Councillor Marilyne MacLaren said she backed plans for an alternative funding mechanism as "better value to the public purse".

But she warned large sums of money were needed to ensure the Capital's new schools programme could go ahead.

The SNP
promised at last year's elections to replace PFI/PPP with a non-profit making Scottish Futures Trust, which would fund infrastructure investment in schools, hospitals and roads.

Today First Minister Alex Salmond and Finance Secretary John Swinney published the strategic business case for the SFT and announced the creation of a new public sector company to take the initiative forward.

They said up to £150m would be released each year for increased investment in infrastructure through greater partnership, improved preparation and handling of projects, and better value finance, including the non-profit distribution model.

The original idea behind the SFT was to raise money by issuing bonds. But the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities has argued the Scottish Government has no powers to issue bonds.

So it now plans to harness the existing bond-issuing power of local councils to enable a Scotland-wide municipal bond to fund infrastructure projects.

Speaking at the Infrastructure Investment in Scotland conference at Heriot-Watt University, Mr Salmond said:

"The development of the Scottish Futures Trust is the way forward, offering both better value finance and secure investment."

"By releasing up to £150 million each year for increased investment, we can ensure more resources for our public infrastructure compared to wasteful PFI."

Edinburgh has five schools waiting to be refurbished or replaced.

But Portobello, James Gillespie's and Boroughmuir high schools, along with St John's Primary and St Crispin's Special School, are all in limbo because the city council cannot afford the £165m needed to upgrade them.

Cllr MacLaren said more information was urgently needed on how local authorities can apply to the Scottish Futures Trust for money to fund projects and there was a lack of detail on how the new funding mechanism will work.

And she said the city council will only be able to afford to rebuild the "wave three" schools if the Scottish Government provides 80 per cent of the money, whether through the SFT or some other means.

"We are talking about costs of £165 million," she said. "By the time we actually start building, I would be extremely surprised if it's not going to be considerably more than that.

"Even with our contributions of 20 per cent, we are going to need an awful lot of money and we are just one local authority.

"Non-profit distribution does not mean that we don't need help from the Scottish Government."





The full article contains 478 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Vivas,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 10:12:21
She says that *where* exactly ?

Another classic misquote/misrepresentation from the EEN/Northbritishman. In so far as she says anything at all, it's:

...said she backed plans for an alternative funding mechanism as "better value to the public purse". (so she likes the idea)

..but she warned large sums of money were needed to ensure the Capital's new schools programme could go ahead. (no sh|t sherlock !)
2

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 10:33:29
Can I just ask why 20-30 years ago schools were looked after - none were rich but they were maintained in a general state of repair. Why there is no longer money for this?

I can answer; The Government at every level spends so much money now on Collection and Administration to create cushie jobs for unemployables that there is no money left for core services.

If you sacked 50% of the administration and got rid of their guilt edged pensions then we would have PLENTY of money for new schools etc.


I do not pay taxes to fund large bloated government. I, and I suspect I am not alone, am quite happy to pay taxes if they are collected, administered and distributed efficiently and actually go into Health, Education, and Defence (along with a few others too!).

Somebody really needs to grab the public sector by the spheres and get it totally under control in order to relieve the public of large government that is incapable of doing anything.
3

Peter,

Labour - liars from their bootstraps 20/05/2008 11:27:17
The Doc in Private Eye worked out ERI would have been cheaper if the health board had paid for it using their credit cards!

PFI - the system that awards bids that are price fixed by the prescribed contractors at about 20% over actual cost in the initial business case (OFT), that cost escalates at between 30% and 200% by the final business case (independent research for Unison), that actually cost on average 30% more than the final business case on completion(BMA).

PFI that provides hospitals and schools that are not fit for purpose, Carlisle Royal Infirmary, Kirkcudbright Primary School and have structural failures within five years of completion ERI.

PFI - that sucks funding from front line service provision straight out the door into contractor's pockets (£100 investment, £1.5 million return on the £100) North Lanarkshire health Board wanting to close Monklands is a classic case of the impact of budget squeeze caused by PFI. The BMA has noted that some PFI Contractors are making such a big profit on the existing contracts, are sufficiently embarrassed, that they are handing half back to the Hospital Trusts / Health Boards.

West Lothian borrowing on the commercial market to buy out their education PFI and saving money says it all.

Show us the money?

Well as the budget for PFI in Scotland will be an estimated £20 billion in the red on completion of current PFI contracts maybe Labour should suggest using the sub-prime mortgage market it is less expensive and less risky than PFI.

The buy out of PFI contracts using commercially raised loans(e.g. West Lothian)has already showed savings for public services so I do not see that Scottish Government Bonds backed by oil generating some £23.5 billion + per annum and a Scottish Government annual surplus of £4.4 billion will be seen as very high risk.

The only problem with this solution is Labour and its deathly hanging on to the Union.

PFI - yet another Union benefit!
4

steveh3,

20/05/2008 11:38:47
Cllr MacLaren likes the idea, wants to know how to apply to get the cash, this is what she is quoted as saying, the headlines dont match the content.
Just report the news dont put in your bias or sex up the head lines.
5

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 20/05/2008 11:59:29
Some very confused posters so far.

PFI can be well or badly managed. We only hear about the badly managed cases. Bad managers have nothing to do with politics. Non PFI projects can/have also been disasters. The new Forth RB is to cost 11 times the first one and that's allowing for inflation, God help us.

I would like to know, though, of any successful PFIs.
6

Lance Boyle,

Linlithgow 20/05/2008 12:05:24
More pie in the sky. How are they going to generate the money? I hesitate to suggest a John Bull printing outfit.
7

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 12:17:26
5 Fakey Federalist really a unionist

All PFI projects are badly mismanaged from a tax payers point of view.
ALL without exception rips off the tax payer which when added together cost us billions.
PFI has absolutely no saving graces for the public
NONE AT ALL.
8

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 12:19:54
6

We pay more taxation than anybody anywhere in the world if we cant generate enough money now we never will. Its not the generation of the money thats the problem its the way the money that is generated is managed. Private companies dealing with public funding make up costs as they go along and the prats dealing with the funding dont question or argue about its not in their job description.
9

cosmo,

edinburgh 20/05/2008 12:23:29
For PFI to be a success risk must be placed on the private party. Currently they see plenty of reward should the venture be successful but face no loss if it fails. If the government wants to get some private sector efficiency into its project it needs a private sector risk system to encourage efficiency.
10

DAVID,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 12:26:18
Anyone seen the article in the most recent Private Eye that outlines how Mussolini used a PFI-type "buy now, pay later" scheme to hoodwink Italians in the 30s?

The general point is that PFI creates a huge "first call" on your budget for future years. This creates a massive fixed future liability that is very difficult to re-negotiate and gives no flexibility for future financial planning.
11

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 12:38:57
10

Known throughout the known world as a rip off.
12

gorgeousgorgieboy,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 12:41:10
Youre all wrong!

PFI works and is the best thing that has happened to infrastructuire in this country for decades.

Look at public funded project - Parliament, Trams Bridges.... Need I say more.
13

Listening,

20/05/2008 12:46:15
If it wasn't for PFI we wouldn't have the new schools and hospitals we have now.

It is a necessary evil that we cannot do without.

It would be interesting to see where the SNP will exactly get the money to replace this.

The public purse just does not have enough money to do everything, ultimately a lot will be done by PPP/PFI so make your choice, what will it be if not schools and hospitals?
14

Buckpool Loon,

Cheshire 20/05/2008 13:01:36
PFI was a knee jerk fix with long term consequences exploited by the financial terrorists.

Cliches like the - get one for the price of two - seem, by the examples coming to light understate the rip off by a factor of 10:1. So the government - any government worth its salt - must grasp the nettle and correct the situation.

The terrorists may cry foul, but governments first priority is to re-establish its claim to financial prudence and common sense even if that includes an inherent admission of incompetence for introducing the policy in the first place.

The worlds of politics, public sectors, finance and commercialism all have their place in a balanced economy and social structure. But 'balanced' is the operative word and that can never be achieved by either exploitation or political cowardice.
15

Ard Righ,

The Rock Of Edinburgh 20/05/2008 13:05:38
Well, there is a headline that completely misses the point.

This is worth reading - http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2278997.0.0.php
16

John PM,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 13:16:52
Labour should be utterly ashamed of their PFI schemes which bankrupt the public purse to pay the private sector enormous dividends. The SNP is trying to do something better, thankfully.
17

Lance Boyle,

Linlithgow 20/05/2008 13:20:51
8

Foulkes Off, nonsense.
18

Lance Boyle,

Linlithgow 20/05/2008 13:21:22
16

John PM, explain how please.
19

Stephen Cowley,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 13:28:20
This article creates the impression that the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) is just to be a kind of Scottish Treasury, issuing fixed interest bonds.

If that is so, it seems the arguments for an element of private sector incentives in public service delivery is being abandoned by Alex Salmond & Co.

The SFT was sold as eliminating profiteering by effective monopolies. The argument clearly needs to be developed to do justice both to the unfashionable municipal socialism ideals and the capacities of the private sector.

It does seem that the policy is still being developed on the hoof, possible because the Civil Service didn't think the SNP would win the election and so didn't look at their policies in any detail.
20

Ard Righ,

The Rock Of Edinburgh 20/05/2008 13:31:58
There are three superb articles which took the front page of the Sunday Herald on the 18th.

This is the one - http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2278998.0.an_offbalance_sheet_scam_to_write_off.php
21

Epicuras,

20/05/2008 13:39:16
We don't actually need any new schools - check the demographics Marilyne; school rolls are collapsing in Edinburgh as families simply can't afford to live in the city. An ongoing rolling programme of refurbishment would sort out the schools we have at a fraction of the cost of new ones (and we'd still own them, instead of having to do it all again in 25/30 years) - the main priority seems to be how much can we get for the land now for and sod the long-term problems - we''ll be long gone in 30 years.
This is a national and local discrace; and I'm not just talking about Marilyne!
22

Peter,

Labour - liars from their bootstraps 20/05/2008 13:50:24
The problem, Fed, is that in the UK there are no good examples of PFI projects. This because the purchasing authorities never understood what it was they were buying and thought that the initial business case was what they would be paying.Add in the OFT's finding that many preferred bidders put in silly bids because they did not want the job which in turn escalated the accepted bid costs by an average of 20% higher than the real market value of the contract.

PFI as run by Labour was a ploy to keep public expenditure off the government balance sheet and had little to do with either effectiveness or efficient use of cash.

No less a body than the Audit Commission has condemned PFI / PPP on many occasions and highlighted the lack of any evidence in government accounting that PFI is a more effective use of public money than previous debenture / bond systems as has been claimed in the past by Brownovitch.

The big problem with all public building projects is they, the politicians or civil servants, are not spending their own money,as they see it, whether in PFI or as bonds so allow bidding and contract practices that they would never allow if it was their own house extension or new build.

So Fed the estimated excess cost to Scotland of current PFI against the budgeted cost over the next 20 odd years is £20billion+. Tell me how PFI, as practised by Labourand their preferred bidders, like Crapita, is not a drain on public finance?
23

Edward,

20/05/2008 14:12:28
#18
Suggest you read the investigative article in the Sunday Herald which exposed the PFI swindle
Labour trully are scum!
24

HughB,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 14:22:27
Surely the Liberals know where the money has gone - into the bottomless pit called the Trams, which they, Labour and the Tories set up.

They could also find billions of Scotlands money going south to Westminster from Scottish oil.

Come on Scotsman, you know where the money is.
25

Vincent-W,

20/05/2008 14:29:09
Working as I do in a PFI subbie - I can assure that profits for PFI are in line with non PFI.

We all work for profit in one way or another, so why is profit portrayed as a filthy word? Hundreds of jobs have been created, there is increased direct and indirect taxation (we pay taxes on profit and there are taxes on employees salaries), increased expenditure in the local communities from workers in PFI industries.

Also as a parent whose kids go to a PFI school I can assure you that the school is BRILLIANT. And in thirty years has to be handed over to the council in the state it was received. We have a high quality school which will last for a minimum of 40 years (Though no doubt the council will let it go to rack and ruin in double quick time once they take over).

The main issue we see is that initially many council teams were new at managing this kind of work. As time has gone on they have improved, and much of the liability is borne by the suppliers.)

We are now seeing English schools being commisioned under the BSF scheme - millions of pounds of which are being spent in Scottish companies as they have built up the expertise.

Incidentally there's a non PFI school built 5 years ago down the road and I can assure you that now only is the standard of build poor but the maintenance doesn't hold a candle to our PFI managed school.
26

Epicuras,

20/05/2008 14:38:02
RE: #25, so the Royal Edinburgh Hospital obviously now has internet access for it's sectioned patients - interesting use of public money instead of spending it on buildings etc
27

Vincent-W,

20/05/2008 15:03:46
I quote from a post occupancy report:-

H/teacher - the classrooms are a good size. the cleaners are very proud of the school. Every day when I walk into the building I think 'how lucky we are'. The furniture is very good quality.

Parent - the classrooms are lovely with lots of space and natural light. the breakout areas are fantastic.

Support staff - the furniture is good quality - robust and easy to clean. storage is very good. overall the facilities are incomparable to our previous accommodation - fantastic!



28

Edward,

20/05/2008 15:03:56
#25 Vincent-W
Typical twist on reality
No one has anything against profit
Its the method of funding that we are against
PFI only is benificial to the private companies who are
participating in PFI projects. It is not beficial to the tax payer, which includes you!
Its all very well crowing on about how brilliant a school is thats built under PFI, whats not so brilliant is that the money that has to be paid isnt very clever.
An examplye being Hairmyres Hospital in East Kilbride, for Equity of just £100 invested will 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!
Thr true cost of the actuall construction is a lot less than what we, thaxpayer is going to have to pay!
But what do you care, your part of the problem!
29

Miss H,

20/05/2008 15:04:49
2 They weren't. That's why so many of them were falling apart.
30

,

20/05/2008 15:05:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

Edward,

20/05/2008 15:07:48
The truth about PFI and how Labour and the Libdems swindled billions from the Scottish taxpayer is
here : http://tinyurl.com/5qtbcl
Read and learn
32

Miss H,

20/05/2008 15:09:57
25 You're having a laugh aren't you?
33

Ugly George,

20/05/2008 15:10:47
The article talks about the creatiion of "a new public sector company"

Is this company going to carry out the construction of schools etc. or is it gong to contract construction companies to do so?
34

,

20/05/2008 15:28:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
35

,

20/05/2008 15:29:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
36

,

20/05/2008 15:36:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
37

brownlie,

20/05/2008 16:20:44
36 Mirrorman

Elegant and eloquent contribution. I'm glad you've come along as I thought I was the only intelligent union poster on here today.
38

Edward,

20/05/2008 16:23:33
#36 Mirror Man
How amusing
You obviously disagree that Labour are just scum
You have no problem with Labour lining the pockets of their donors. You have no problem with Labour ensuring that the tax payer (thats you as well) pays through the nose for something that can be prvided at a lot les cost and are happy to ensure long lasting profits and inflated dividends to private industry. You obviously a labour supporter that no longer believes in socialism, if you did , you wouldnt be supporting New Labour
39

Edward,

20/05/2008 16:28:34
From the Sunday Herald :
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"

40

,

20/05/2008 16:32:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
41

Vincent-W,

20/05/2008 16:34:54
The reality was that my kids and their predecessors were educated for 30 years in
> leaky huts,
> with dirty crappy old furniture,
> playing in a hardpaved area only half the space required
> Serviced by disinterested idle Jannies
> the Head had a stack of lines for work needing doing but the Council took months to do anything
> as a parent I had to do repairs because the council couldn't/wouldn't.

They had been promised a new school for at least 20 years - in writing - nothing happened.

Then PFI - fantastic new school in less than 3 years - delivered on time and in budget.

PS my company makes less than 10% PoT - but are creating the first new apprenticeships for 20 years on the back of PFI.

Edward - I didn't metion profit first - why do we have to have non-profit schemes? And how dare you say I'm part of the problem, I work very hard to provide what the customer wants and am not paid over the odds. What's your line of business - do you provide your services at cost?
42

Peter,

Labour - liars from their bootstraps 20/05/2008 16:46:30
Re post 25: There is a world of difference between PFI subbies margins in these contracts and the main contractors margins.

The cleaning contract for one PFI where I did some work on quality of care only enabled the contractor to employ basic cleaning staff on minimum wage with one in ten trained to deal with 'blood spills'; an extra £1.50 p an hour over minimum wage.

The Hospital Trust asked me to investigate why it took up to 50 minutes for a blood spill to be cleared. Under the PFI contract nurses were not allowed to clear up said blood spill. When you looked at the sub contract value, the cleaning contractors costs and the actual gross margin (around 10% of the contract value)it was clear the hospital were getting the service the main contractor had paid for.

When I pointed this out and suggest that they need to shift the main contractor's contract valuation on cleaning the hospital the CEO said she could not ask her PFI manager to enter into yet more negotiations with the main contractor especially over such a small value sub contractor on the basis of cost.

Need, risk, health of staff and patients is subservient to the needs of the main contractor.

Love to know the name of this amazing PFI school as the PFI primary school coming to Kirkcudbright will already be overcrowded on the day it opens. The local community could have bought an extra classroom to resolve the problem for £180,000 according to the main contractor - but of course the local community would not have owned it!

Further evidence of how need takes second place to the PFI contract.
43

The Tin Man,

Over the Rainbow 20/05/2008 16:51:23
So, the Scottish Futures Trust would get private firms to carry-out contracts, without making a profit, but they would be offered cheap loans in order to see the work through.

Maybe I don't understand what is being proposed. But if I do, it is not going to work - what is the point? Who on earth is going to perform works, at cost?
44

Vincent-W,

20/05/2008 17:04:03
Peter - the fact that the school was built too small has nothing to do with PFI - more to do with council contract managers who didn't specify the job properly. It wasn't the contractors who deliberately built a school too small.

It happened in a school near me in the first round of PPP - by the second round they had put some decent managers in charge and we got the schools needed for the community (by and large).

Your story about bloodspills illustrates my point precisely - the CEO didn't/couldn't/wouldn't negotiate a contract properly. You can't blame PFI for that. If my company was being overcharged or undersold then we would negotiate - pronto!

It makes me wonder whether the whole scheme should have been turned over to the private sector from the start?

I believe Post Occupancy Reports are in the public domain - go and ask councils who've had PFI schools built.
45

Listening,

20/05/2008 17:04:40
This cannot work, or can it? We can only wait to see.

Meanwhile it seems that the vast majority here are so blinkered with political bias that they can't see what good has been done with PPP/PFI.

There is nothing to show that publicly funded projects would have been any different. Wages woould still need to be paid and materials purchased. Increasing market costs would still have escalated the costs. The only difference is the profit masde by the private companies. Of course they are legally commited to a repair and maintenance program that no council could match and even if they could it would come at an even higher cost.

Time to sit back, put political opinions aside and look at it impartially.

Unfortunatley there are many of you incapable of such a thing.
46

The Tin Man,

Over the Rainbow 20/05/2008 17:20:29
#45 Listening

I wouldn't think it would make much diference how projects were funded, they would still be negociated, and over-seen by the same public servants who are demostrably capable of making tremendous muddles, and seem to be accountable to no-one. Probably because there masters haven't got a clue what they should be held accountable for.
47

Edward,

20/05/2008 17:23:18
#41 Vincent-W
Over the last 30 years or so it was down to Labour to provide good schooling, from the providing the buildings, through to providing the materials and the skills to teach
As you rightly point out the reality is different with aging schools.
The Tories come along and go for PFI/PPP, on paper its good, as we theoretically we have some else picking up the tab and paying for it all, even managing it after completion. So we end up with nice clean schools (or any other building). The reality is, there is no such thing as a free lunch! It has to be paid for. These companies just don’t do these PFI projects because of their support in the community, its all about the bottom line in what’s in it for them and their shareholders. Along came Labour, who, prior to the 1997 elections were very critical of PPP/PFI. But when they came to power thy found that this system of finance would be a cash cow for their backers and donors, so they went out of their way to promote and expand on it further.

You mentioned that you had a ‘fantastic new school’ on time and on budget
It would be interesting to see and hear your ideas about ‘on budget’ You see the thing about PFI/PPP is not about what is paid on completion, its about the long term contract, which is usually 30 years. Which is why buildings such as Schools and Hospitals built under PFI, the actual cost is not what the taxpayer pay’s. PFI is the project that you just keep paying for, for the length of the agreed contract, so cost of
Couple of hundred millions, turns into Billions and a tidy ongoing profit.

Im not against profit, in fact Im all for it, but in a commercial sense
The problem that we have in this country, thanks to the Tories and perpetuated by Labour is that everything and I mean everything is seen as a business, All be it a School, Hospital or your local post office. Labour threw out the idea of certain things being for the public service, there is no longer public service, its just a busine
48

Edward,

20/05/2008 17:25:57
The idea that the SNP Government have is very sound
It works well in Canada and in California, where projects such as Schools, Hospitals and Highways, being built by local authorities can apply for funding and ensuring that the equity remains within government hands. Any profit made (and yes they have profits) its rolled back into the fund
49

,

20/05/2008 18:14:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
50

,

20/05/2008 18:17:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
51

,

20/05/2008 18:22:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
52

Brian M,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 18:28:49
She is "Edinburgh's Education leader".

Is she an expert in "education"?

She is no more than a bumped up local politician
53

WL,

livingston 20/05/2008 18:43:04
If Edinburgh needs more schools they should build them. They charge the people a council tax to do that - plus other things they would like to do.
54

Ard Righ,

The Rock Of Edinburgh 20/05/2008 18:53:23
If you consider the Old Royal Infirmary in Lauriston Place in Edinburgh, we have lost our money three times due to private enterprise being allowed to profit enormously from public service property.

One. The sale of a public site and it being (horrendously) developed privately. Loss of development profit for public government and public use.

Two. The purchase of land with flood problems miles away from town the implementing of a sub standard build(which was double price and half the quality) , with a highly inneficient corridor layout, and cheap services suppling two beds instead of one.

Three. Having to pay back 17 times more than the original figures for acquisition and build cost over a thirty year period to "make it appear to be off the books".

This was a scam from the beginning and all that I had said years ago is now merely proving it to be the scam that it is.

SCAM


SCAM



SCAM

The scam will cost 4 Billion, every year.




SCAM

55

,

20/05/2008 19:09:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
56

,

20/05/2008 19:18:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
57

Vincent-W,

20/05/2008 20:34:09
51 - I don't lie - but I do think you have a problem.

The non PFI school I refer to has floor tiles which have not been stuck down properly and remain missing for TWO YEARS. In our PFI school even minor repairs are attended to within 24hrs and usually within 1 hour. Much of it relies on the quality of local amnagement.

BTW Quit using foul language however pathetically disguised - my children read these sites!
58

Nikostratos,

20/05/2008 20:42:06
#58 AM2

Thats more like it AM2 be a man get the Barsta#d' Take him out............Show these mad dogs they can't get away with it............

The Scotsman must have a privacy code which has been violated and they have a duty of care to ensure this isn't allowed to happen to Individuals private data.

AM2 nobody said standing up for the 'Union' was going to be easy. especially against sc#m such some of the madder Nationalists.

59

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 20:48:11
58

You sad sad sad little man.
A troll by any other name is still a troll.
60

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 20:50:07
59

You lie in front of yer kids? disgraceful.
61

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 20/05/2008 20:52:00
59

I have a serious problem with lying gits motivated by politics.
62

Nikostratos,

20/05/2008 21:05:55
AM2

the only other clue i can give is that

The candyman is obviously a fan of 1971 film W#lly Wonka & the Chocolate Factory.



Who can take a sunrise,
Sprinkle it with dew?
Cover it in chocolate and a miracle or two
The candyman, the candyman can,
The candyman can 'cause he mixes it with love
and makes the world taste good

Who can take a rainbow,
Wrap it in a sigh?
Soak it in the sun and make the stra'bry lemon pie
The candyman? The candyman can
The candyman can 'cause he mixes it with love
and makes the world taste good
63

Nikostratos,

20/05/2008 21:09:28
AM2

why don't you do what i do sometimes and use someone else wireless connection all you have to is find unencrypted one. and then the only isp address etc would be to another pc..........Easy peasy

Mind i also have access to many other pcs as well....
64

Listening,

20/05/2008 22:29:09
#49

Very colourful and you have just lost any credibility you think you might have had!!
65

Vincent-W,

21/05/2008 12:50:57
foulkes - I am not motivated by politics, but I think you might be.

Please clean up you language.
66

Arrow,

edinburgh 21/05/2008 13:49:05
#15 hit the Herald web site and found it very interesting and revaling. probably none of the Hootsman readers have read it but herewith an extract:

"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".

Buy now and pass the cost on to the weans. not very sustainable to use the current buzz word.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 

More News

More News >>

More Schools in Edinburgh

More Schools in Edinburgh >>

Features

Supplements
Scotsman Digital Archive
Scotsman Hotels Scotsman Hotels

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.