Part · What Works

The alternative isn't "do nothing".

It would be easy to read this site as "all privatisation is evil, build nothing." That's not the argument. Roads, hospitals and power grids do need building, and private contractors will always do a lot of the physical work. The argument is about who finances the asset, who owns the monopoly, and who is allowed to know the terms. On each of those, there is a better answer than the one Australia keeps choosing.

Finance it the cheap way: public borrowing

The single biggest cost in a PPP is the cost-of-capital gap — private investors demanding an 8–15% return where a government could borrow at a few per cent. The fix is not exotic: let the government borrow to build public assets, and hire private firms to build them under ordinary, transparent construction contracts — without handing over ownership or a 50-year toll. You still get private expertise and private jobs. You just don't sign away the monopoly and the income stream for a generation.

"But debt is bad / the budget can't afford it" A PPP is debt — more expensive debt, wearing a costume that keeps it off this year's balance sheet. Refusing cheap public borrowing while committing to decades of expensive private payments isn't prudence; it's accounting theatre that costs the public more, not less.

Keep the natural monopolies public

Some things are monopolies by nature — you can't build a second competing power grid, port channel or land-title registry down the street. Handing a natural monopoly to a private owner doesn't create competition; it just creates a private tax-collector with a guaranteed return.

If you must do a deal, do it in the open

Where a partnership genuinely makes sense, the minimum price of doing it should be that the public can check it. Every objection to this is an objection to being caught.

Publish the contract

Full terms, risk allocation and payment schedules public by default. "Commercial-in-confidence" should be the rare, justified exception — not the standard cover. See the secrecy →

Publish the comparator

Release the "public sector comparator" — the government's own estimate of doing it publicly — so anyone can see whether the PPP was really cheaper.

Ban above-CPI escalators

No more "greater of CPI or 4%" ratchets on essential-service monopolies. If a price must rise, it tracks inflation — not a guaranteed real increase forever. See the ratchet →

Close the revolving door

Real cooling-off periods and conflict rules for the officials and ministers who sign these deals and then work for the firms that win them. See who cashes in →

The real fix: consent

Every reform above is good, and every one of them will be watered down or reversed the moment the political convenience of the next sell-off outweighs it — because the people who benefit are in the room, and you are not. The durable fix isn't a better clause in a contract. It's changing who gets to decide whether a public asset is sold at all.

A public asset is wealth held in common. No government should be able to sell it — or lease it for 99 years, or buy it back with your compulsory savings — without the owners' consent. And the owners are you. — the argument of this whole site

That is what direct, radical democracy is for: putting the policy — not just the politician — to the people who have to live with it, and giving them the power to veto a deal done to them without consent. See how to push for it →

Cross-references: The cost-of-capital gap · The hospital ban · What the UK did · Take action.