Yes of course public-private initiatives can work, as I’ve already said – nationalise the loses and privatise the profit. What could possibly go wrong ?

Depends on what cost overruns they’re offering to underwrite

If they’re saying they’ll underwrite cost overruns that are as a result of delay or additional expenses caused by something the government have control over, such as future changes in legislation or govt policy that causes delay – then thats probably a fair concession to make.

Whereas if they’re talking about cost overrun due to the contractors own delays then its a different thing.

Just for clarity.

I work for an electricity distribution company where I would contend that regulated privatisation has been a success on the basis of lower prices, better service and better safety as I mentioned earlier. Yes we make a profit, but our owner chooses to reinvest that in the company and it’s UK infrastructure – we do not pay a dividend. We do not receive any subsidy from the state. We do pay UK taxes – and quite a sizeable amount given the size of our operation.

We are distinct from the energy supply companies where regulation has been far lighter. I just switched my energy supplier from nod that claims only to make 5% profit to one that (based on last year’s consumption) should be 10% cheaper – inside of them to donated their entire profit to me and give me a little extra for my trouble. I’ll let you decide whether I think the energy supply market is truly competitive, or perhaps in need of a little more regulation.