PPPs the key to NZ's future infrastructure

Transmission Gully – the $1.3 billion highway as proposed
The steep-sided route the PPP project will follow

The future of New Zealand's major infrastructure projects lie with public-private partnerships.

Last week's government decision to go ahead with a PPP for the $1.3 billion Transmission Gully motorway north of Wellington should just be the beginning, Council for Infrastructure Development ceo Stephen Selwood says.

"The PPP model is applicable right across the infrastructure sector, from roads to water supply, local councils, schools and hospitals.

"There are few sectors where the model does not have the potential to add value."

Rather than being an alternative funding source, PPPs provide an incentive for the private sector to provide innovative but cost-effective solutions to projects, he says.

"One of the tendencies in New Zealand – and it goes back to the reforms of the 1980s and 1990s – is when a capital investment is made for infrastructure, the focus is totally on the up-front capital cost and a desire to minimise that."

Mr Selwood says that makes the total cost of the project over its life higher because inferior materials are often used to keep costs down.

"What PPPs do is transfer the risk of that whole-of-life performance across to the private sector, and the private sector has to compete against traditional procurement effectively to deliver a better whole-of-life outcome at a lower cost."

The traditional method is for the government to put a contract out to tender, with the construction costs totally paid for by the time the project is completed.

However, for projects as expensive as Transmission Gully, it is preferable for the government to pay it off over time and free up funds for other transport projects, he says.

The overseas approach

The Ontario government in Canada took a similar approach to its massive Highway 407 project, opened in 1997.

It was built and operated by a private company, which will hand it back to city ownership after 2031.

A recently announced $C1 billion extension to the highway will be owned by Toronto but financed and built by the private sector.

In Europe, the concept is taken even further and fully private highways are common.

In Italy, for example, 56% of the country's toll roads are controlled by a private firm, Autostrade Concessioni e Costruzioni, according to Forbes.

It was a state-owned company until 1999, when it was privatised and partially floated on the stock exchange.

New Zealand's Green Party are quick to point to problems with the PPP model in Australia, such as Sydney's Cross City Tunnel and the Lane Cover Tunnel in Brisbane.

These projects have "lost billions", according to the party's transport spokeswoman Julie Ann Genter.

"Why should we copy in New Zealand what has already failed in Australia?" 

However, what has allegedly failed in Australia has been a roaring success in other parts of the world, such as Italy and Canada.

The model works when it is executed right.

Not the solution for everything

Mr Selwood says a PPP is a borrowing rather than a funding solution.

Auckland's proposed inner-city rail loop, for example, would still need a significant contribution from the government or council.

"Even if the $2 billion-plus which is required for the rail loop would be funded over time, you've still got to have the revenue stream, whether it's through rates or petrol taxes, to repay that debt.

"The challenge for the rail loop is not so much how it will be financed, but where does the revenue come from to repay that finance."

For a highway, a private consortium might add a petrol station with fast-food restaurants to provide another revenue stream.

"That's an example of where a PPP would provide a solution which the government wouldn't consider – looking for ancillary opportunities."

Mr Selwood says the future of PPPs probably lies mainly in the roading a public transport sector.

"That's where the really big investment is required in New Zealand infrastructure."

However, he says PPPs should also be used in the education sector.

"There is billions of dollars of rebuild required both in Christchurch and to refurbish a whole lot of leaky buildings across the education sector.

"Had those schools suffering leaky buildings been built under a PPP, then the liability to fix them would fall on the private sector."

Being careful not to make PPPs sound like a one-size-fits-all solution, Mr Selwood explains there are some difficulties.

"They are complex deals to do which require extensive investigations into the future risk.

"That requires a lot of professional expertise which is expensive, so you would only do PPPs where you can get sufficient scale to warrant that fixed overhead in doing that analysis."

He says for projects costing less than $50 million more traditional funding methods would be more appropriate. 

7 · Got a question about this story? Leave it in Comments & Questions below.

This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about MyNBR Tags

Post Comment

7 Comments & Questions

Commenter icon key: Subscriber Verified

Don't be daft. Do you like toll roads and increased costs on everything?
PPPs have been proven to be failures unto society while giving welfare bonuses to corporate monopolies.
It's as unreasonable as saying that increased cost for services is desirable.

  • 0
  • 0

PPPs are not the government partnering with New Zealand companies on the big things; the big contracts go to the overseas multinational corporations who take our money (billions) offshore. What happens is that all over the world, in both developed and developing nations, corporations come in, rark up the figures for a bigger-than-necessary 'investment' (which is usually a loan of huge proportions to, ultimately, us, who end up having to pay it back for generations) and then the contracts go to overseas corporations as a condition of the loan. Some future: massive debt for taxpayers. Anyway, this article lists PPP ventures that serve to market the idea of PPPs, because PPPs are unpopular, and in the future there will be oil drilling, and mining, and unnecessary infrastructure. This article is not the full story and it doesn't tell you how badly other countries have fared, so it is just media marketing for the Nats' corporate agenda, not investigative journalism.

  • 0
  • 0

Having been involved in some capacity or another with public/private partnerships (they used to call it the Private Finance Initiative or PFI) since 1995, I suggest the descriptor of 'private finance' is something of a misnomer. While off-balance sheet funding is a feature of PPP schemes, the KEY to the success of these models lies within the capability of the Crown and private sector consortia to add value by working together and managing the totality of risks more efficiently and effectively than if the risks were allocated to one side of the contract or the other. In many infrastructure projects executed via a PPP, the Crown adds value to a private consortia by (often) assuming some risk while the lion's share of the risks are carried by the private sector.
Tolls (on key roads) are often a form of revenue to the private sector of course - but this should not be a lightning rod for scorn because only users pay-whereas in a publicly funded scheme ALL taxpayers share some burden of cost accountability. Let's never forget that a publicly-funded alternative route is ordinarily available for those not willing to pay a toll for the 'express' lane. Some PPP schemes have been failures for all concerned but this is not a fault of the model-rather the execution of the project. Hopefully the NZ led consortia will 'man up' and involve overseas companies only when their specialist skills are warranted. The last result any Kiwi would want is shovelling large payments across the Tasman or further afield for 25-30 years!

  • 0
  • 0

Very well articulated and said there Stewart.

Anyone not wanting "increased costs" are only adopting the ostrich head in the sand approach not wanting to face the reality that us motorists have been able to use roading infrastructure at a subsidised cost by ALL tax payers. The PPP funding structure is a true reflection of the cost to build, maintain and operate infrastructure like this.

User pays - and that's a great thing...

  • 0
  • 0

Perhaps Union attitude had something to do with the 'failure' of the Sydney and brisbane Tunnel Projects

  • 0
  • 0

With the number of road users back to 2005 figures, having a PPP based not on users but availability is an interesting move by current government. It loads up 25+ years of repayments on the taxpayer but not on the balance sheet of the government. However, surely the government can borrow at better rates than private business so the taxpayer is worse off in terms of borrowing to build Transmission Gulley (and any other projects that Joyce & the RTF seems determined to drive through - pun intended)

  • 0
  • 0

Sounds like corporate welfare again.

  • 0
  • 0

Post New comment or question

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

NZ Market Snapshot


Sym Price Change
USD 0.6952 0.0000 0.00%
AUD 0.8901 0.0000 0.00%
EUR 0.5907 0.0000 0.00%
GBP 0.5276 0.0000 0.00%
HKD 5.4294 0.0000 0.00%
JPY 78.9230 0.0000 0.00%


Commodity Price Change Time
Gold Index 1278.6 -9.430 2017-10-20T00:
Oil Brent 57.8 0.550 2017-10-20T00:
Oil Nymex 51.9 0.580 2017-10-20T00:
Silver Index 17.0 -0.177 2017-10-20T00:


Symbol Open High Last %
NZX 50 8124.1 8142.3 8124.1 0.07%
NASDAQ 6633.4 6640.0 6605.1 0.36%
DAX 13057.8 13063.6 12990.1 0.01%
DJI 23205.2 23328.8 23163.0 0.71%
FTSE 7523.0 7560.0 7523.0 0.00%
HKSE 28360.0 28519.8 28159.1 1.17%
NI225 21391.0 21489.3 21448.5 0.04%
ASX 5896.1 5924.9 5896.1 0.17%