Chamber and committees

The Pricewaterhouse Coopers report explains why the information is not available:Para 4.2:It is clear that it is not possible to construct a detailed financial model of the PPP Private Build Public Operate model with the same degree of confidence in cost estimates as it is for the PPP Private Build Private Operate and PSC options because of the absence of any benchmark data. To have an equivalent level of certainty in such a model, there would need to be a fully worked up definition of how the model would be implemented, stating where the boundaries of risk transfer would lie, with assumptions regarding the private sector's response to the brief.Consequently, for the purpose of this initial assessment of the PPP Private Build Public Operate Option, PwC's approach has been:(a) to consider in conjunction with SPS the key issues of risk transfer and operational interface involved in implementing a PPP Private Build Public Operate Option and the implications of these for the definition of the PPP Private Build Public Operate Option and for its deliverability;(b) to undertake an outline financial assessment of the PPP Private Build Public Operate Option based upon scenario analysis of possible financial outturns relative to the PPP Private Build Private Operate and PSC options.Para 4.6.5:Unless the PPP Private Build Public Operate option is more fully specified it is not practicable to develop cost estimates which provide significantly more accuracy than the scenarios outlined above.' Accordingly, the requested calculation could not be meaningfully undertaken and would involve disproportionate cost.

I have asked Tony Cameron, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) to respond. His response is as follows:SPS has no formal archive system. We keep such information as is necessary to run the business economically, efficiently and effectively and for audit purposes.

The costs were calculated by reference to the relevant headquarters and college costs and allocated on the basis of estimated usage of the various support services.

I have asked Tony Cameron, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service to respond. His response is as follows:Yes.

The privately built and operated prison would not utilise the headquarters and college support services included in the cost of the public sector prison models.

The Net Present Value (NPV) of each risk was not calculated in isolation in the PSC model. However, the NPV of each category of risk was calculated using a 6% discount rate and may be summarised as follows:

Risk Category	Total Cash Value Real (£000)	NPV (£000)
Site Planning and Construction Risk	19,294	17,802
Facility Risks	34,329	15,458
Strategic Risks	21,031	8,327
Total	74,654	41,587

The detailed information in respect of each risk identified in the document in cash value real terms is as follows:

PwC Report Reference	Base Cost (£000)	Impact	Probability	Cash Value Real Impact (£000)
2.7.1.1	883	> 25%	80%	176
2.7.1.2	200	n/a	90%	180
2.7.1.3	100	n/a	100%	100
2.7.1.4	250	n/a	80%	200
2.7.1.5	6,935	3 month delay	90%	6,242
2.7.1.6	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
2.7.1.7	112,657	15% uplift in costs	30%	5,070
2.7.1.8	900	n/a	40%	360
2.7.1.9	1,067	2 week delay	60%	640
2.7.1.10	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
2.7.1.11	112,657	10% uplift in costs	30%	3,380
2.7.1.12	1,500	n/a	70%	1,050
2.7.1.13	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
2.7.1.14	112,657	1% uplift in costs	10%	113
2.7.1.15	50	n/a	100%	50
2.7.1.16	6,935	3 month delay	25%	1,734
2.7.2.1	57,150	10% uplift on costs	25%	1,429
2.7.2.2	145,870	10% uplift on costs	25%	3,647
2.7.2.3	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
2.7.2.4	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
2.7.2.5	5,013	Years 2, 12 and 22 of the operational phase	70%	3,509
2.7.2.6	429,067	10% uplift on costs	60%	25,744
2.7.3.1	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
2.7.3.2	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
2.7.3.3	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
2.7.3.4	15,327	Years 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 of the project	100%	15,327
2.7.3.5	11,408	n/a	50%	5,704
2.7.3.6	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a

I have asked Tony Cameron, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) to respond. His response is as follows:Counselling is a day-to-day function in all Scottish prisons for which there is no programme accreditation. Offending behaviour programmes at HMP Kilmarnock are accredited through the same processes and to the same standards as in any other Scottish prison, viz by the Scottish Prison Service Programme Accreditation Panel, the majority of whom are external to SPS. The Kilmarnock Anger Management Programme received accreditation in 2001.

I have asked Tony Cameron, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service to respond. His response is as follows:No payment is made for accreditation of the offending behaviour programmes described in Schedule D. Counselling is a day-to-day function in all Scottish prisons for which there is no programme accreditation.

I have asked Tony Cameron, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) to respond. His response is as follows:Sections 12.4.1 and 12.4.2 of Schedule D requires the operators of HM Prison Kilmarnock to provide offending behaviour programmes based on induction and assessment processes aligned to those employed by SPS. That is being done.

No such cost has been included in any of the options outlined in the Estates Review. Since there is no additional risk any associated cost would be applicable equally to both public and private sector prisons.