Never understood why this PFI malarkey continued after it was first outed as being a way for the Government to ‘borrow’ without increasing public sector borrowing ratios. At least in that guise it made (perverted) sense as a political device to simultaneously invest heavily in the public sector while appearing to exercise fiscal restraint. With that cover blown, it seems to me nothing more than a device for the Government to make investments that are unaffordable over its own (short) financial planning horizon. If investing on a 30-40 year outlook is possible in the private sector with the backing of investment banks, then surely the public sector can do likewise with cheaper finance in the form of Government bonds and cut out the management charges paid to the corporate middle-men? (scratches head... explanation gladly received)