The majority of Australian states have modelled their PPP approaches on Partnerships Victoria policy and guidelines (Quiggin 2004; English 2006). Like in Victoria, the New South Wales Government has been using PPP arrangements for over two decades (New South Wales Treasury 2009: p.I) and both of these governments have worked together strategically to formulate a consistent methodology for the development of general policies and processes (New South Wales Treasury 2002: p.11). According to the New South Wales Treasury, the similarities between Working With Government and Partnerships Victoria include their respective policy platforms, in particular the technical aspects underpinning the guidance material; and obtaining VfM outcomes for their communities (New South Wales Treasury 2002: p.1-2; Department of the Parliamentary Library 2003: p.5).
Although there are similarities, it is claimed by the New South Wales Government that there are key differences (New South Wales Parliament 2006b: p.71) between the New South Wales and Victorian approaches to PPP. Whereas Partnerships Victoria guidelines cover a broad spectrum of PPP, Working With Government is limited to Privately Financed Projects (PFP) (New South Wales Government 2001: p.III), a sub-set of PPP (New South Wales Parliament 2006b: p.XII). This is due to so called "unique issues and risks" associated with private sector financing, ownership and long-term contractual obligations specific to the State of New South Wales (New South Wales Government 2001: p2).
In its guidelines document, the New South Wales Government states that PFP involves the creation of an asset - on the private sector side. This extends to the financing and ownership of infrastructure for an agreed time period, and from the government side, the provision of land, resources, risk sharing, diversion of revenue or the purchase of services (New South Wales Government 2001: p.IV) and predominantly relates to Economic Infrastructure projects. However, arrangements under PFP are structured differently in the case of Social Infrastructure projects. In context of the New Schools Privately Financed Project and according to the New South Wales Auditor-General (2006: p.12), the service provider agreed to operate nine new schools under licence in exchange for payments received from the State. Under this agreement, the Government owns the school assets and the private partner bears no risk with regard to shortfalls in the number of children that attend each school as this particular risk is retained by the State (New South Wales Auditor-General 2006: p.12).
In addition to the example provided above for a Social Infrastructure project, Sydney's Cross City Tunnel (the toll road), is an example of an Economic Infrastructure project.