Nice one.... You can go through your opponent arguments...

Fynestboi:
ABU ZARIA your time to post your argument, penplayer you team mate can still post, after 7:30pm no more submission will be accepted again.

I give up. He's not picking up. probably busy. Dunno what's wrong.

penplayer:


I give up. He's not picking up. probably busy. Dunno what's wrong.

Ehya...

7:30 – 8:30pm – Rebuttals - A debater takes on his opponent’s view, puncturing his or her points - This the debater does by quoting the said comment and then countering it with his or her own views.

Do also bear in mind that, the rebuttal stage carries 5 marks. So do well to attend to all questions raised by your opponent.

Thank you.



Penplayer, Abuklaw, Catalyst4real

You have just one hour to puncture your opponent arguments......



Let the show begin...

You have just one hour to puncture your opponent arguments......



Let the show begin...



#grabs popcorn and smoov#

Penplayer, you said and I quote

"The partnership of the public and private sector and the accountability that is demanded from investors and lenders inevitably promotes transparency and good governance."

How does private-public partnership promote transparency?

Because even to a layman, it is more transparent and stress-free to do something yourself than to pay someone to do the job for you.

No puncturing? well I wait...

Catalyst4real:
Name: Catalyst4real

School: Ahmadu Bello University

Stance: Against


A public-private partnership(PPP) is a contract between government and private sectors, under which, A private company finances, builds and operates some elements of a public service and in return, the private company gets paid over a number of years, either through charges paid by users(Known as concessions) or by payments from the public authorities or both.

I am in solemn recognition of the exquisite judges, my opponents and the uncompromising viewers

The propelling fuel of every private institution, infrastructure or company is profit making and profit maximization continuously.
And most times the profit margin of these private sectors is in no way favourable to the peasants and the insolvent masses.

Look around you; How many people can afford private hospitals? How many parents can afford to send their children to very expensive private universities, like Igbinideon, Bingham, Covenant and the likes? Only a handful.

The first and foremost objective of any private corporation is to maximize profit, it is not to help make the country a better place, it is not to supply the economy with valuable infrastructures, neither is it to make life easier for the common man, it is always about making profit at all cost

The pressure bounces back to public institutions, haven't you noticed?

There are always too many patients in public hospitals, too many university applicants striving to fit into the very meagre available slots in public universities.

Is that really what we want to promote in Nigeria?

Poverty haunts about 91.4% of Nigerians, 52.7% of Nigerians can barely feed themselves.

These high interest rates incurred by the private institutions, do not favor the masses; And indeed, the poor are getting poorer.

Are the Private sectors to be blamed for their high interest rates, which is totally unfavorable to the masses? No

Financial crisis has made it difficult for private companies to raise finance without raising the interest rates to monstrous heights.

Banks are also unwilling to offer long term loans to private corporations, In fact by mid 2009, Companies had to pay loan interest rates, 4 percent higher than governments'.

Why not leave the infrastructural developments in the hands of the government then?

One would expect that in the Public-private partnership, the private sectors help in developing a nation, thereby easing the government, while the government on the other hand, will have more time to face other national issues and less burdens to deal with.

But that is never the real situation, It is just a false hope that has meandered deeply into the hearts of the gullible.

Using the past as reference, the private corporations have a history of not meeting their end of the bargain.

Which brings us to the primary Demerit; The very issue of corruption.

Pubic-Private partnership makes up one of the most corrupt alliance in the global economy.

A certain private company in the U.S, known as Ernon, ransacked and embezzled money from the U.S government by lying about it's assets and exaggerating the estimated demand, this certain company embezzled money for years without being noticed.

This is a very common practice, and it is ongoing.

Some Private companies in charge of road construction, collect massive revenue from the government and what do they do with it?

They use only a fraction of the sum in constructing fallible roads with cheap, not-up-to-standard materials, roads with a lifespan of 6 months, instead of the standard, which is 10 years.

Then the pot holes creep in, the accidents multiply and the mortality rate gyrates

Meanwhile the greater fraction of the money gotten from the contract is channeled to satisfy their greed.

Nigeria has suffered from corruption in years past, and is still suffering from it. Quenching the flames of corruption is never an easy task, but that doesn't mean we should create more rooms for it.

Public-private partnership is definitely not the way forward for Nigeria.


Are you aware that Public-private partnership doesn't in any way generate revenue? It is not a technique to diversify Nigeria's economy.

As a matter of fact, instead of generating revenue, the private sectors play a great role in consuming the government's revenue as well as the masses.

- The government pays for taxes of these private sectors

- The private sectors still generates revenue from public consumers

- The government pays a percentage cost of running the service of these private sectors

And what does the government, financially gets in return, Nothing!

The private-public partnership may have a few unnoticed advantages, but the gap between the advantage and the disadvantage is too wide.

And I am firmly without any doubt, against the full implementation of this alliance in Nigeria.

A lot of developed countries have abandoned this system of private-public partnership due to it's fatal Demerits and embraced the new system of public-public partnership.

A fool learns from his own experience, but a wise man, learns from other people's experience.

Why should a struggling country like Nigeria be open to an economy system, soon to be exiled?




Reference
>Why Public-Private partnership don't work. By David Hall, PSIRU

( http://www.world-psi.org/sites/default/files/rapport_eng_56pages_a4_lr.pdf)

>Corruption, lies and secrets in the Public-private partnership, By Rosa Pavanelli

I'm sorry I couldnt quote each because of my browser.

You mentioned that the government pays taxes to the private sectors. The government according to what I know doesn't pay taxes. Or why would it need to. Rather the private firm pays taxes to the government on their revenue.
.
You were stereotypical when you mentioned that companies seek profit and profit alone without caring for the project quality. How will a firm make profit if it renders facilities of low qualities? There are terms of contract in a project and that requires that the private firms fulfils their end of the deal.

PPP has governments hand in it. So your stance that private services are expensive is wrong. I stand to be corrected. A partnership ensures that citizens enjoy infrastructural benefits. Do not confuse ppp projects with privately owned establishments. There are projects that is privately owned. Some are publicly owned. PPP projects are major projects like roads or bridges and are simply accrued to the government tho financed by private firms.

Make sure you reply all questions or counter arguments from your opponent..

penplayer:


Nigeria is currently listed as a developing country and requires a lot of infrastructures to ensure that its citizens have access to a quality lifestyle. When PPP gets its finance majorly from the private sector, it takes away a lot of burden off the government and makes sure a lot is done within a short time frame. It is not news that the available infrastructures in Nigeria are old, overused, poorly maintained and definitely not sufficient to meet the needs of her citizens. PPP ensures improvement in the quality and quantity of basic infrastructure such as the provision of water and its treatment, energy supply and transportation. In addition the process can be widely applied to a variety of public services such as hospitals, schools, prisons and government accommodation.

Can you cite any example of PPP that has actually remedied the problem in this paragraph?

Furthermore, Nigeria has over time been chastised with mind-boggling corruption issues where government funds budgeted for a cause get diverted into private coffers. PPP reduces such cases since profit can only be gotten when the investment performs according contractual obligations. Planned infrastructures can become a reality when they understand that the project has to work before gains are made. "The partnership of the public and private sector and the accountability that is demanded from investors and lenders inevitably promotes transparency and good governance." It also brings about swift progress and efficient dedication to projects. Logically, no one will intentionally bite his own heel especially when a lot is at stake. Transparent execution will ensure more projects are achieved for the benefit of citizens.

Don't you think companies running for profit will exploit Nigerians under the aegis of high levy? and that itself is the worst form of corruption since the taxpayers pay tax to the government and the same time pay high levy to use low standard infastructure.

Also, PPP saves taxpayers unnecessary burdens in the construction of infrastructures. Since government funds come majorly from taxpayers, a partnership with the private entities ensures that taxpayers are saved from the strain of having to pay higher taxes to finance infrastructural development in Nigeria. The infrastructural needs of this country is way beyond what the government can finance, and this is why it sometimes have to resort to borrowing to balance up where it is lacking. Such a partnership will ensure that the nation's inclination to borrowing and debt accumulation is comfortably reduced since in the long run, debts are serviced by taxpayer's money.

government cannot be relieved of her responsibility to provide social infastructure for her citizens. moreover, I don't think you actually know how PPP works. Government participation in concession is most time use as a collateral by private companies to secure loan from banks. Banks believe the government will cover up for any lapses on the part of private companies. don't you think that is still indirect debt?

Another argument for PPP is that it gives opportunities to expand local private companies by partnering with international firms to bring about infrastructural development. Nigeria alone can not solve her problems and requires support in form of resources and expertise from more experienced countries to solve the problems. Through joint partnership, local and international firms can work together to achieve and make gains. It also allows local companies to prove their capabilities in handling projects which in long run improves their image and help get more contracts. With such, it will also give a boost to industries associated with infrastructural developmentsuch as construction, equipment, support services.

sadly, the local companies enthrusted with the responsibility of providing social infrastructure failed woefully. Bi-Courtney owned by Mr. Wale Babalakin comes to mind. The Foreign companies that partners Federal Government of Nigeria in housing provision also defeat objectives.

Importantly, PPP should be adopted because the government is removed from the risk of failure and because its adoption in other countries has brought significant development. "Let us take a comparative example of India’s Vadodara- Halol and Ahmedabad-Mahesana road project undertaken to widen and strengthen the existing state highways to toll roads in Gujarat. It was the first PPP based project in India and according to their government, it saved time and money.
The Special Purpose Vehicle created, Gujarat Road and Infrastructure Company Limited completed construction in September 1999, four years after a MOU was signed; operations began in 2000 for an initial 30 year period. Construction was done in approximately one and a half years within the time allocated. Total project cost was less than budgeted with savings of Rs 140,000,000.00 or approximately $2,228,240.00 (at current exchange rate)."

Don't forget that Nigeria is our area of discussion. Mention one successful PPP project in Nigeria (if any) and I would mention ten that failed.

Catalyst4real:
Penplayer, you said and I quote



How does private-public partnership promote transparency?

Because even to a layman, it is more transparent and stress-free to do something yourself than to pay someone to do the job for you.

In this case, the reason for partnership has majorly been for finance. The PPP projects are financed by the government. If you read my essay carefully, i mentioned that the PPP will make sure that the money the lenders and private firms have invested will be monitored to make sure they earn returns. Please read thru to get the notion of PPP.

[size=3pt]Lalasticlala[/size]

penplayer:


In this case, the reason for partnership has majorly been for finance. The PPP projects are financed by the government. If you read my essay carefully, i mentioned that the PPP will make sure that the money the lenders and private firms have invested will be monitored to make sure they earn returns. Please read thru to get the notion of PPP.

Transparency- When there is nothing to hide.

You didn't really answer the question sire, if you have to monitor an operation, it is for the fear of it getting ugly.
There is no such fear in public-public partnership.

Thanks for the reply

To those in support of PPP isnt it true that public-private partnerships have fundamentally been about giving private investors and financiers high returns with low risks, at the long-term expense of taxpayers and the public. The financial backers of PPPs are able to borrow capital at lower rates of interest, thanks in large part to unregulated and often fraudulent activities in financial markets. This narrows the interest rate spread between private and public sector borrowing rates, allowing PPPs to appear more financially attractive than otherwise. They still are a bad deal for taxpayers, but low private sector costs of borrowing meant that faulty accounting didn’t have to cover up as much.

These low borrowing rates for the private sector were not based on economic fundamentals or realistic calculations of risk in the private sector. Private financial institutions engaged in systemic cover-ups, miscalculations, and passing on of undisclosed risks to unsuspecting investors. The unregulated financial markets allowed financial speculation to flourish, siphoning funds away from productive investments in the real economy. As a result, the paper economy grew, but real economy stagnated.

In your argument for PPP and the reality of Nigerias anti corruption fight don't you think PPPs will no longer thrive in our economy due to reasons given above?

penplayer:



I'm sorry I couldnt quote each because of my browser.

You mentioned that the government pays taxes to the private sectors. The government according to what I know doesn't pay taxes. Or why would it need to. Rather the private firm pays taxes to the government on their revenue.
.
You were stereotypical when you mentioned that companies seek profit and profit alone without caring for the project quality. How will a firm make profit if it renders facilities of low qualities? There are terms of contract in a project and that requires that the private firms fulfils their end of the deal.

PPP has governments hand in it. So your stance that private services are expensive is wrong. I stand to be corrected. A partnership ensures that citizens enjoy infrastructural benefits. Do not confuse ppp projects with privately owned establishments. There are projects that is privately owned. Some are publicly owned. PPP projects are major projects like roads or bridges and are simply accrued to the government tho financed by private firms.

Private-public partnership is divided into two, the full private-public partnership and the partial.
In the full, the government bears the whole financial burden and any aspect of the contract that involves finance, tax inclusive
While in the partial, the government funds the contract and the private institution pays for its tax.
The full is the most common.

Abuklaw:

Can you cite any example of PPP that has actually remedied the problem in this paragraph?

Don't you think companies running for profit will exploit Nigerians under the aegis of high levy? and that itself is the worst form of corruption since the taxpayers pay tax to the government and the same time pay high levy to use low standard infastructure.

government cannot be relieved of her responsibility to provide social infastructure for her citizens. moreover, I don't think you actually know how PPP works. Government participation in concession is most time use as a collateral by private companies to secure loan from banks. Banks believe the government will cover up for any lapses on the part of private companies. don't you think that is still indirect debt?

sadly, the local companies enthrusted with the responsibility of providing social infrastructure failed woefully. Bi-Courtney owned by Mr. Wale Babalakin comes to mind. The Foreign companies that partners Federal Government of Nigeria in housing provision also defeat objectives.

Don't forget that Nigeria is our area of discussion. Mention one successful PPP project in Nigeria (if any) and I would mention ten that failed.

"The Nigerian Infrastructure Advisory Facility (NIAF), a DfID-funded programme implemented by Adam Smith International, has been working closely with the Federal Government of Nigeria to accelerate infrastructure development by using public-private partnerships. Leveraging private finance means the government can raise additional finance, improve on the commercial viability of project proposals and enhance the performance of the existing capital budget.
Part of NIAF's engagement strategy involves installing public-private partnerships in processes and policies at both federal and state levels. One of the most significant barriers for investors is the perception of poor project governance. A crucial part of our approach has therefore been to work on, and complete, a number of flagship transactions to ensure domestic support for public-private partnerships as a financing mechanism, which also improves investor confidence in project governance.
The second Niger Bridge is one example of this type of investment. The proposed 1.6km bridge and associated approach roads and bypasses for the cities of Asaba and Onitsha will provide vastly improved connections between northern and southern Nigeria, supporting social and economic development. It will replace the existing bridge, which has limited longevity, high traffic levels and inadequate load-bearing capacity, and is notorious for its congestion and traffic delays in both cities."

www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/adam-smith-international-partner-zone/financing-infrastructure-partnership-nigeria

The government is not in any way relieved of its responsibility. It's just being supported to ensure resources can be diverted to other cause.

As for the bank issue. The terms of contract is not about borrowing. The partnering company should be finacially ready to finance the project and the government is not in any way concerned with where the funds are sourced from.

For the high levies. Such projects come under subsidy by the government. The government ensures that low charges are made towards utilizing such projects. Private firms can also render the services for free to the citizens in exchange for special privileges in the operating state.

There is a question from one of the judges up there.




Penplayer

Catalyst4real:

Private-public partnership is divided into two, the full private-public partnership and the partial.
In the full, the government bears the whole financial burden and any aspect of the contract that involves finance, tax inclusive
While in the partial, the government funds the contract and the private institution pays for its tax.
The full is the most common.

Well, if the government bears the full financial burden, then the use of partnership is meaningless. And your stance that citizens will be impoverished holds no ground. In most PPP, private sector bears most of the financial burden. If you can't agree to that stance then the basis of your argument is weak. Don't you think?

Fynestboi:
There is a question from one of the judges up there.




Penplayer
Abuklaw
Catalyst4real

He is actually corroborating our stand that PPP would not thrive in a country like Nigeria.

Fynestboi please permit me to direct this question to Abuklaw as an analytical assessment.


The financial crisis of today has brought about renewed interest in PPP in both developed and developing countries. Facing constraints on public resources and fiscal space, while recognizing the importance of investment in infrastructure to help their economies grow, governments are increasingly turning to the private sector as an alternative additional source of funding to meet the funding gap. While recent attention has been focused on fiscal risk, governments look to the private sector for other reasons:

1) Exploring PPPs as a way of introducing private sector technology and innovation in providing better public services through improved operational efficiency

2)Incentivizing the private sector to deliver projects on time and within budget
Imposing budgetary certainty by setting present and the future costs of infrastructre projects over time

3)Utilizing PPPs as a way of developing local private sector capabilities through joint ventures with large international firms, as well as sub-contracting opportunities for local firms in areas such as civil works, electrical works, facilities management, security services, cleaning services, maintenance services

4)Using PPPs as a way of gradually exposing state owned enterprises and government to increasing levels of private sector participation (especially foreign) and structuring PPPs in a way so as to ensure transfer of skills leading to national champions that can run their own operations professionally and eventually export their competencies by bidding for projects/ joint ventures

5)Creating diversification in the economy by making the country more competitive in terms of its facilitating infrastructure base as well as giving a boost to its business and industry associated with infrastructure development (such as construction, equipment, support services)

6)Supplementing limited public sector capacities to meet the growing demand for infrastructure development

7)Extracting long-term value-for-money through appropriate risk transfer to the private sector over the life of the project – from design/ construction to operations/ maintenance.

Please Abuklaw since you say PPP is dead on arrival can these not be married into Present day Nigeria even as corruption is being given a death grip?

Abuklaw

Nigerian government most time imitate successful initiatives from the international scene without carefully studying the intricacies involve in such initiative. The ignorance of rules and regulations, ethics and practices involve in PPP is an enough reason for Nigerians to campaign against its adoption because the taxpayers are always at the receiving end of government’s inadequacies.

Are you saying that the masses should condone the ignorance of the government and reject an initiative which by your own admission has been successful internationally?

How about the taxpayers demanding that our government should educate themselves by "carefully studying the intricacies involved in such initiative" (to use your own words)

Should we continue to deprive ourselves of good things because the government that we voted in is not ready to learn the rules and regulations, ethics and practices applicable in PPP?

What is your response to this?

penplayer:


Well, if the government bears the full financial burden, then the use of partnership is meaningless. And your stance that citizens will be impoverished holds no ground. In most PPP, private sector bears most of the financial burden. If you can't agree to that stance then the basis of your argument is weak. Don't you think?

Not so fast Bro.
Yes you're right, the purpose of the partnership is meaningless and unpragmatic in a struggling society like Nigeria

Even after the government confers the financial burden, it doesn't get to the right source, the loss in revenue would have been overlooked if it is able to achieve its purpose, But it doesn't.

PPP is not the way Forward

I say a big weldone to the contestants. You guys did lots of research on this topic. I'm impressed.

Ermmm, Penplayer, I have a question for you. We've seen PPPs where the private firm is in the monopoly. Do you think such partnership is healthy for the citizens?

Catalyst4real, you said PPPs don't generate revenue. How about the likes of Remita? Please clarify.

Weldone once again guys.

Debaters ensure you tidy up all questions direct to you from the judges before 9:00pm so we can give room for questions from the audience...








Penplayer
Abuklaw
Catalyst4real

naijadeyhia:
To those in support of PPP isnt it true that public-private partnerships have fundamentally been about giving private investors and financiers high returns with low risks, at the long-term expense of taxpayers and the public. The financial backers of PPPs are able to borrow capital at lower rates of interest, thanks in large part to unregulated and often fraudulent activities in financial markets. This narrows the interest rate spread between private and public sector borrowing rates, allowing PPPs to appear more financially attractive than otherwise. They still are a bad deal for taxpayers, but low private sector costs of borrowing meant that faulty accounting didn’t have to cover up as much.

These low borrowing rates for the private sector were not based on economic fundamentals or realistic calculations of risk in the private sector. Private financial institutions engaged in systemic cover-ups, miscalculations, and passing on of undisclosed risks to unsuspecting investors. The unregulated financial markets allowed financial speculation to flourish, siphoning funds away from productive investments in the real economy. As a result, the paper economy grew, but real economy stagnated.

In your argument for PPP and the reality of Nigerias anti corruption fight don't you think PPPs will no longer thrive in our economy due to reasons given above?

Well, there is always an MOU between the government and the Private firm. Contained in this Memorandum of understanding are the term and duration of contract, Cost of project amidst others. Note that the private firms are held accountable by the government and their integrity and ability is tested before granting contracts. If the private firm will embezzle their own money, there will be no need to initiate a project that won't meet deadline. It is a moral judgement call. The Private sector bears all the risk in PPP which ensures that the government is free from incurring debt and contract failure. Most of the risks are eliminated when the private firms keep to their end of the deal. They can only gain when the project works. As per financial institutions covering up their fraudulent activities and all that.It can only be reduced not eliminated.

penplayer:


Well, there is always an MOU between the government and the Private firm. Contained in this Memorandum of understanding are the term and duration of contract, Cost of project amidst others. Note that the private firms are held accountable by the government and their integrity and ability is tested before granting contracts. If the private firm will embezzle their own money, there will be no need to initiate a project that won't meet deadline. It is a moral judgement call. The Private sector bears all the risk in PPP which ensures that the government is free from incurring debt and contract failure. Most of the risks are eliminated when the private firms keep to their end of the deal. They can only gain when the project works. As per financial institutions covering up their fraudulent activities and all that.It can only be reduced not eliminated.

Very good attempt

penplayer:


The government is not in any way relieved of its responsibility. It's just being supported to ensure resources can be diverted to other cause.

which other cause if the infastructure is being taken care of? recurrent expenditure right?

As for the bank issue. The terms of contract is not about borrowing. The partnering company should be finacially ready to finance the project and the government is not in any way concerned with where the funds are sourced from.

The political implication of failed PPP goes beyond monetary term. The image of a country would have been already punctured and denizens won't even have an iota of believe in subsequent agreement.

For the high levies. Such projects come under subsidy by the government. The government ensures that low charges are made towards utilizing such projects. Private firms can also render the services for free to the citizens in exchange for special privileges in the operating state.

who is subsidising lekki toll free? unless you want avoid this question, you would be aware of media outrage and criticism targeted at lagos sate government due to high fee.

Penplayer


One of the ways the private company recoups its investment in a PPP is through the collection of tolls. You also mentioned this in one of the examples you gave in your essay.

Now the question is this; don't you think this brings about a form of institutionalized segregation, when the poor masses who can't afford the tolls are forced to find and use the bad alternative routes, while they helplessly watch the rich ones enjoy the benefits of the PPP.

How does this help the country considering the fact that both the poor and the rich pay taxes?

Obinoscopy:
I say a big weldone to the contestants. You guys did lots of research on this topic. I'm impressed.

Ermmm, Penplayer, I have a question for you. We've seen PPPs where the private firm is in the monopoly. Do you think such partnership is healthy for the citizens?

Catalyst4real, you said PPPs don't generate revenue. How about the likes of Remita? Please clarify.

Weldone once again guys.

Such monopolistic partnerships are not healthy if it causes unreasonable strain on them. It all lies with government. If the partnership causes a strain on citizens (which it is meant to aid) then the government has the right to review terms of contract and bring up a worthy competitor to balance it up. The government should seek the interest of its citizens and thus will not allow any partnership to hamper its people unless of course the government is crazy. Pardon my language.

Obinoscopy:
Catalyst4real, you said PPPs don't generate revenue. How about the likes of Remita? Please clarify.

Weldone once again guys.

On a more speculative note, yes private institution generate funds, which is neither beneficial to the economy, the masses or the government. But for the sole growth of the private institution.

So as far as generating revenue that could be useful in increasing a nation's wealth is concerned, ppp do not generate revenue.

adeaks:
Penplayer


One of the ways the private company recoups its investment in a PPP is through the collection of tolls. You also mentioned this in one of the examples you gave in your essay.

Now the question is this; don't you think this brings about a form of institutionalized segregation, when the poor masses who can't afford the tolls are forced to find and use the bad alternative routes, while they helplessly watch the rich ones enjoy the benefits of the PPP.

How does this help the country considering the fact that both the poor and the rich pay taxes?

Again I must mention that such tolls are subsidized to make sure all and sundry benefit from the project. Such projects are not always local projects, it's mostly nationwide and the term of tolls are set by the government and not the private firms.