2.20 When the Contributions Agency formally invited private-sector interest in January 1995 their objective was to award the contract within nine months, by the end of September. This timetable was not questioned by any of their advisers or members of the Project Board with wider Private Finance experience. They had set it with reference to the timetable for procuring the Contributions Agency's new National Insurance Recording System through the Private Finance Initiative. In May 1995, they recognised that they had not appreciated the full impact of the following key differences between that project and the Newcastle Estate Development. The estate project:
a) potentially included a much wider range of services;
b) would involve several executive agencies; and
c) was likely to require the involvement of financial institutions to fund the projects, which adds significantly to the complexity of negotiation and is unusual in information technology projects.
2.21 The procurement took longer, however, than other ground-breaking Private Finance Projects, taking three years from the Agency inviting interest until signature of the deal. Because of acceleration in the programme of work, the impact of this slippage on the implementation of the project was limited to a 10-month estimated delay in completing the estate redevelopment.
2.22 The Department have engaged in another Private Finance accommodation project, called PRIME, on which we have also reported (The PRIME project: The transfer of the Department of Social Security estate to the private sector, HC 370). This project was similar in some ways to the Newcastle Estate project: both involved contracting for the delivery of office accommodation services. But there were also important differences between them. PRIME was much larger, involving over 700 buildings and numerous existing contracts. It covered a wider range of office services, including cleaning and security, but, unlike Newcastle, did not involve the design and construction of new buildings on existing or greenfield sites. PRIME also started later (in June 1996), and the PRIME consortium was, unlike NEP, led by financial institutions. The PRIME deal was signed in December 1997 (in the Newcastle case, the parties reached commercial agreement in August 1997 and signed the contract in January 1998) and the Department started receiving estate services under it from the private sector in April 1998 (immediately after contract signature in the Newcastle case).
| Figure 9 |
|
The time taken to procure ground-breaking Private Finance Initiative deals |
|
| The first Private Finance Initiative deals for accommodation-related services took between 22 and 36 months to negotiate. The Agency recognise the validity of the principle of using comparisons where appropriate. However, they believe that the results of comparisons should be treated with extreme caution because of the widely differing natures of the projects. | |||
| Private Finance Initiative Project | Procurement started | Date of deal signature | Months (note) |
| Newcastle Estate Development (Offices) | January 1995 | August 1997 (commercial agreement) | 32 |
|
|
| December 1997 (financial agreement) | 35 |
|
|
| January 1998 (actual deal signature) | 361 |
| Bridgend and Fazakerley Prisons | November 1993 | January 1996, December 1995 | 25 and 262 |
| Norfolk and Norwich Hospital | February 1995 | January 1998 | 353 |
| Dartford and Gravesham Hospital | September 1995 | July 1997 | 22 |
| Notes: 1. The elapsed time on the Newcastle project featured a five-month period when NEP sought funding for the project from financial institutions. The Agency consider that the Newcastle project was more complicated than other ground-breaking projects as it involved construction on an existing rather than a greenfield site, and included the logistical difficulties of reducing the number of sites occupied by the Department in the Newcastle area from 12 to 5. | |||
| 2. The prisons projects included a much wider range of services than did the Newcastle Development, but the Prisons Service already had experience of negotiating contracts with the private sector for the management of existing prisons. The prisons were also greenfield developments, unlike at Newcastle where some bidders had to plan how to redevelop an operational site. | |||
Source: National Audit Office | 3. The Norfolk and Norwich project was delayed between November 1996 and July 1997 while the National Health Service resolved a generic issue relating to the powers of NHS Trusts to enter into Private Finance arrangements. | |||