In the report, A Policy Built on Sand, UNISON disproves the claim that the extra costs of PFI are offset by increased efficiency and thereby undermines the government's arguments for its continued use to build hospitals, schools and other major public sector projects.

The report disputes Treasury claims, that 88% of PFI schemes are delivered on time, whereas 70% of non-PFI projects are delivered late and 73% over budget.  Five research studies, cited as the source of the cost and overun data, are fatally flawed, says the new UNISON report and therefore not credible.  Up to 677 projects have been approved since 1992 but the Treasury has not fulfilled its objective of a sound evidance base for a rigorous investigation of PFI.

General Secretary of UNISON, Dave Prentis explained that UNISON has always argued that PFI is a waste of taxpayers money.  "This report knocks out another of government's chief arguments for its continued use, namely that it generates value for money by improving the efficiency of construction procurement" he said.  "This report shows that the evidence used to justify this claim was not only selective but fatally flawed.

"The government has relied on this "efficiency" arguement to such an extent that they have forced non-PFI projects to add up to 24% extra onto their bids to take account of national cost and time overruns".

Dave Prentis said the effect of this adjustment, intended to counter "optimism bias" is to make non-PFI schemes look even more expensive and therefore less attractive.  "This false argumenthas not only been used to promote PFI schemes in the UK but also to export PFI across the world.

"It is time for the government to say enough is enough.  PFI is a discredited system and should be stopped right now, before more taxpayers money is wasted".