ICGFM Promotes Knowledge Transfer Among Public Financial Management Experts

Working globally with governments, organizations, and individuals, the International Consortium on Governmental Financial Management is dedicated to improving financial management by providing opportunities for professional development and information exchange.

Showing posts with label public private partnerships. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public private partnerships. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Public Financial Management Responses to an Economically Challenging World

Jason Levergood, Senior Manager at Grant Thornton LLP, provided an overview of the ICGFM Worldwide Survey, Public Financial Management Responses to an Economically Challenging World on December 7th. at the ICGFM Winter Conference. Public financial managements from over 50 countries were surveyed in 2010.

The survey found that the financial crisis and stimulus packages have had significant impact on public financial managers. Yet, in this environment of doing more with less, governments have accelerated reforms including support for international standards and improvements in transparency.

Mr. Levergood described the survey results for stimulus programs, use of public private partnerships (PPPs), infrastructure investment and increasing transparency. 76% of respondents said that their countries have made or renewed a strong commitment to public fianncial management transparency. 80% of respondents said that their countries are adopting international standards. The survey found that the use of the eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) is gaining interest but has not been widely adopted in government.

The survey concludes with the observation that "public financial managers face some of the most challenging times in decades in meeting their responsibilities, but they have faced them no only with a variety of policy measures but with an unprecedented commitment to transparency".




Public Financial Management Responses to an Economically Challenging World 2011 ICGFM Survey

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Private Public Partnership Survey at ICGFM Conference

Conference attendees were surveyed about PPPs. The results show that many PPP projects have not been successful. The lack of policy and guidelines is the most frequently sited reason for failures in PPPs.

Has your country used Public Private Partnerships to find sustainable funding for infrastructure investments:
  • Yes 43%
  • No 53%
  • Do not know, does not apply: 3%
If you answered yes to the previous question, have PPPs been successful?
  • Yes 39%
  • No 26%
  • Do not know, does not apply: 35%
If you answered no to the previous question, why were PPPs not successful?
  • Lack of policy and guidance 45%
  • Lack of PPP unit to provide guidance 20%
  • Lack of government guarantees 15%
  • Lack of interest from investors and operators 15%
  • Political circumstances 5%

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

The Impact of the Financial Crisis on Public Private Partnerships

Filip Drapak, Senior PPP Specialist at the World Bank discussed the impact of the financial crisis on Public Private Partnerships. He recognizes the affect of PPP on public accounts. The financial community has not provided effective guidance on how to account for PPP. Nevertheless, he remains an advocate for public private partnerships

The European Union has provided some guidance on how much risk must be passed to the private sector to not show PPP investments on the government balance sheets. There is always something that doesn't go well in long-term contracts, PPPs are no different, according to Mr. Drapak.

The financial crises impact on the PPP market is not over yet, however recovery and optimism is quite strong, according to Mr. Drapak.

Unexpected stress can increase risk on PPP financing and deliverables. Mr. Drapak pointed out that financial stress can originate in unexpected places like Greece. You must expect that financial markets will undergo stress of some sort. Governance of financial markets will increase according to Mr. Drapak. He sees governance as the most important aspect to PPPs.

The financial crisis affected PPPs in liquidity, capital allocation, and the "de-risking" of projects. Debt guarantees have become a new tool in use for PPPs according to Mr. Drapak. Before the financial crisis, there was considered that large projects had less risk. But, financing issues have resulted in many smaller projects. And, some of the risks that were exclusively with the private sector before the crisis is now shared with the public sector. Mr. Drapak asks how governments can show market disruption risks on financing on the books?

The financial crisis has put pressure on PPP governance. Mr. Drapak provided PPP case studies from the UK, South Africa and Russia. The UK is the largest PPP market, according to Mr. Drapak. India has emerged as the second largest world market. The UK created a special agency called "Partnership UK". There is a plan is to make an organization, within Treasury, called "Infrastructure UK." The Treasury of the Government of South Africa is creating a separate PPP organization in order to separate delivery from regulatory interests. The Government of Russia viewed that PPPs were unnecessary because of large budget surpluses. Now, the Government is developing PPPs. Russia is managing PPPs through its own development bank.

Mr. Drapak says that governments did consider the full lifecycle of PPP projects. However, there had not been any planning associated with potential financial crisis. PPP projects today suffers from the increased cost of equity. This requires higher levels of financing by governments which tends to reduce the value for money. In some projects, the government had to replace all private financing while the private sector has the equity risk.

Mr. Drapak discussed global PPP trends showing an increase in activity in BRIC countries. He showed a case study from Canada for Partnerships BC. The organization looked at the internal rate of return while looking at the public contribution to debt. Some people wonder whether government funding is a PPP. Mr. Drapak points out that banks have very little risk in PPPs, so government funding does not change the fundamentals of PPPs. This option is really only available to governments with stable revenue.

Mr. Drapak believes that the financial crisis is improving PPP governance. He also pointed out that the analysis of PPP projects tend to look at full lifecycles unlike traditional capital financing. This often results in better long-term planning for PPPs.

Developed countries tend to leverage PPPs to improve efficiency, according to Mr. Drapak. Developing countries tend to use PPPs for other reasons. The finance crisis means that developing country governments tend to have to take more financing risk than developed country governments.

Filip Drapak has over 14 years of experience in economics, public policy, and finance. Mr. Drapak has worked as assisting professor at Prague University of Economics, as a head of financial advisory services in Societe Generale Komercni banka and as assistant director in corporate finance of PricewaterhouseCoopers During the past six years, Filip was involved in the area of public-private partnerships (PPP) and was instrumental in the creation of PPP Centrum, under the Ministry of Finance to provide technical assistance and support to public entities engaged in public private partnerships. He introduced the Czech Republic's policy for public-private partnerships and was involved in training for the public sector as well as in the formulation of legislation for privatization and concessions.

Mr. Drapak served as the CEO and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the PPP Centrum, as a non executive Chairman of electric distribution company, oil transport company and on boards of airlines company and energy engineering company.





Tuesday, May 18, 2010

The Expanding Role and Increasing Responsibility of Public Auditors

Rakesh Verma, the Principal Accountant General of India described the trend toward greater involvement and reliance on public auditors in public financial management. He pointed out that there are those who believe that India is over-regulated. He does not agree with this view. Mr. Verma described the impact of the financial crisis on countries around the world. This has resulted in monetary policy changes and other public management adjustments.

Mr. Verma described the impact of Public Private Partnerships on public finances. PPP's are high risk. Therefore, the role of the public auditor is critical according to Mr. Verma. PPP analysis is challenging to ensure that risk is properly distributed. He described the INTOSAI PPP guidelines for auditing for value for money.

Mr. Verma described problems with private auditors with many private sector companies. He warned that there are important lessons here for public auditors. Public auditors do not have a financial incentive to find unqualified audits And, constitutions around the world guarantee the independence of public auditors to ensure more reliable audit.

Audits are moving from compliance to performance in the public sector according to Mr. Verma. Compliance audit are still critical particularly because these address legal issues. He described the need to audit companies where the government owns more than 50%.

Mr. Verma described lessons learned from the financial crisis. Many interventions by public authorities have been based on the grounds of "too big to fail" rather than in the public interest. The public interest is better served by autonomous and independent organizations. He described how public audit can expand. Mr. Verma argued that government audit information should be published in newspapers to get scrutiny by the common man. He described the approach for risk-based audit in India.



Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Sprited Second Thought on Public Private Partnerships

Andy Wynne, the editor of the International Journal on Government Financial Management, is skeptical about PPPs. Mr. Wynne provided examples from the UK and Nigeria of why governments should be dilligent about using PPPs as a vehicle for infrastructure projects.

Monday, May 18, 2009

Private Sector Financing should not be an option for Public Infrrastructure


Andy Wynne, the editor of the International Journal on Governmental Financial Management, described why the public sector should not use public sector financing for public infrastructure. Mr. Wynne argues that private sector finance, public private partnerships or privatisation are never an efficient option for public sector infrastructure.

PPPs seem like magic like free money. Yet, companies have made significant profits. The magic is that the debt is hidden where the government has the obligation to repay the debt to the private sector.

Private Sector Financing – why it is never an option for public infrastructure




PPPs appear to reduce the level of borrowing. Andy believes that PPP sounds more cuddly and friendly than privatization. Mr. Wynne provided evidence for why PPPs do not provide value for money:

•in UK private sector borrowing is 1-2% more expensive than state debt
• December 2008: Lagos ₦50 billion bond at only 13% (inflation 15%)
• 2002 – 57% of public sector accountants in UK did not think PPPs provided value for money

Mr. Wynne pointed out that risk is never fully transferred to the private sector. This means that the government assumes the liability. Allowing the private sector to charge for public services as part of PPPs is not sustainable. The poor cannot afford to pay.
If you wanted to design a system to maximize the opportunity for corruption, you would create something like PPPs, according to Mr. Wynne. "You have all the ingredients to maximize corruption."
Mr. Wynne believes that PPPs have never been an appropriate vehicle. The reduction in PPPs after the late 90's represents this experience.

How has the Financial Crisis Changed the PPP Market

Filip Drapak of the World Bank says that there have always been financial crisis. The current crisis is wider reaching than those in the past. Mr. Drapak spoke about the impact on infrastructure project public private partnerships with the financial crisis at the ICGFM Spring Conference.








Infrastructure programs provide significant investment opportunities even in the financial crisis. Mr. Drapak suggests that PPP economics have changed. In particular, emerging countries are seeing a lack of funding on both the equity and debt side. There is a general lack of interest of investors and operators in PPP for infrastructure projects.

Before the financial crisis most experts did not make provisions for economic cycles. Equity bubbles are present every 13 years and last 2 1/2 years on average. Housing bubbles have larger impacts.

New debt calculations and risk management concerns can mean that many cost-benefit analysis do not show a positive value for money. Equity financing has increased as an overall percentage, creating high costs. Governments need to look at broader factors in order to better evaluate PPP projects.

The rule had been that larger projects were more attractive to the private sector. Risk and equity factors mean that projects need to be of a more modest size to gain financing.

The government of the United Kingdom has created a method to improve PPP projects called DFC (Direct Funding Competition). The French Institute for PPP is advocating flexible financing rates.

Mr. Drapak concludes that PPP economics are only temporarily jeopardized by the financial crises. He recommends that PPP is not solution in time of financial crises, and should not be leveraged to stimulate the economy.