4 minute read

The UK infrastructure industry needs to face up to its failings and act in the best interests of all stakeholders. Developing a code of conduct would be a good place to start, argue Darryl Murphy and Mirza Baig.

The UK, like many countries around the world, is facing the complex challenge of ensuring there is sufficient investment in infrastructure to keep pace with social, economic and technological changes and needs. The Government National Infrastructure Delivery Plan in 2016 stated that over £480 billion of investment was required in the period to the end of this decade and beyond1. Of this, 50 per cent is proposed to be financed and delivered by the private sector.

On July 10, the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) launched the eagerly-awaited National Infrastructure Assessment (NIA), which will provide a pathway to infrastructure investment to 2050 to build our future society2. The assessment makes a series of recommendations, including a switch to low-carbon and renewable sources for power and heating; a nationwide broadband plan; flood defence; and the move towards electric vehicles.

With the Commission stressing its recommendations are not ‘an unaffordable wish list’ for the government, the private sector features heavily within the NIA as part of the long-term delivery and investment plan. The NIC also asserts that “both government and arms length independent state institutions can help to support this investment, by absorbing risk that the market finds hard to manage and supporting due diligence functions for innovative projects”.

However, despite the centrality of private finance to the current and future provision of essential public services, the sector is facing an unprecedented lack of trust that risks derailing the UK’s modernisation strategy.   

How did we get here?

One of the key issues that has influenced the fluctuating stance and policy of government is the long-term nature of infrastructure investments, which can often sit uncomfortably within a shorter political cycle. Ministries charged with providing funding and oversight are often different to the ones who approve projects. Furthermore, megaprojects and services with a direct impact on local communities regularly become hot button topics for opposition parties to contrast their economic and ideological positions.

In this context, Conservative ministers, select committees and the current Labour opposition have all felt compelled to look at how private finance operates, with Labour calling for the termination of Private Finance Initiative (PFI)/ Public Private Partnership (PPP) contracts and the nationalisation of privately-owned utilities2. The demise of Carillion has only intensified the scrutiny around placing essential public projects in the hands of the private sector.

Beyond politics, private investors and operators of public services have scored a series of own goals with the way they have priced and structured contracts. Every headline of a school or hospital being closed under the weight of long-term inflexible PFI payments further cements the perception that the public are being ‘ripped off’ by unscrupulous private operators. This conclusion was drawn more formally in the National Audit Office report on PF2 in January 20183, which raised serious questions over the value for money delivered through the historic use of PFI/PPP. The report estimated the government could have saved between 40-70 per cent on the value of contracts awarded if they had financed the projects directly.

The current debate extends well beyond PPP as a delivery tool and goes to the heart of the infrastructure market that has been shaped over the last 30 years, dating back to the privatisation of state-owned companies in the 1980s. The infrastructure industry has a short window to face up to and address this trust deficit or risk undermining both its own long-term viability and the UK’s ability to remain a leading economy.

Addressing governance failures

The private sector has tried to respond to increasing criticism by pointing out the positive impact its investment in infrastructure has had across many industries, including water, energy, schools, hospitals and transportation. However, the real value to the public has neither been clearly articulated nor sufficiently promoted. This is in part due to a failure of robust and transparent engagement with all stakeholders during the life cycle of the project or service.

Traditionally, private operators of infrastructure and public services have focused on demonstrating their environmental credentials as the primary measure of their responsible practices. While this remains a critical consideration, similar importance has not been given to the governance of their operations, which provides the overarching framework of their conduct and behaviour. This is in part due to a misconception that governance is an issue for public rather than unlisted private companies and entities.

However, good governance is essential in the delivery of long-term value. For businesses to remain sustainable and flourish, they must acknowledge their role in the broader environment in which they operate, and endeavour to develop deep and positive relations with customers, government agencies, suppliers, employees and communities. The revisions to the UK Corporate Governance Code4, which emphasise social purpose, culture and stakeholder relations as foundational principles, are welcome. While the Code is directed towards public companies, lessons from the collapse of BHS have already resulted in demands to raise governance standards in private companies.

There are other long-term trends that will inevitably have an impact, including demands for a fairer distribution of value and wealth in society and the rise of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing. Although infrastructure remains a unique asset class, the impact of these phenomena to the sector is inescapable. In due course, it will mean that the myopic pursuit of maximising short-term profits at the expense of ‘stakeholder value’ will likely result in business failure, while entities unable to demonstrate strong ESG credentials will be starved of capital or be required to pay a substantial risk premium.  

The way ahead

Despite the obvious challenges, constraints on public budgets mean that private finance will continue to have an important role to play in the future of infrastructure and public services. Although the threat of hard and soft regulation looms, private players have an opportunity to proactively shape the reform agenda. This will require the industry to move beyond the outdated approach of viewing projects exclusively through the lens of contractual obligations, and recognise their primary objective is to deliver high quality, cost-effective public goods and services.

Regaining public trust will require industry leaders to set clearer standards; to create a culture that places public interest at the top of board and management agendas; and to engage with critical stakeholders in an honest, transparent and responsive manner. Reading across from the experience of publicly-listed companies, the evolution of the idea of ‘enlightened’ shareholder value should result in a fairer and more balanced distribution of value and benefit. Outsized profits should be exchanged for more considered long-term profitable partnerships. This will help rebase the industry on a more sustainable footing.

A possible mechanism to demonstrate the commitment of the industry to change would be the development of a voluntary code of conduct to address the key issues highlighted, including social purpose, robust board governance with suitable levels of independence, and a detailed framework for engaging stakeholders. The credibility of the code would require the establishment of an oversight committee that monitors compliance and can demonstrate meaningful behavioural change within the sector.

Meeting the UK infrastructure needs over the next 30 years will require effective relations between private investors, the public sector and the public. These relationships have been materially damaged and it will take time and effort to repair the trust deficit.  

The private sector must now show itself capable of acting swiftly, decisively and responsibly in redefining how it connects with the government and wider public and seek to overhaul its mission statement, culture and conduct. This would help shift the narrative of the dynamics of private capital and public interest projects from a zero-sum game to an essential and mutually-beneficial partnership for all stakeholders.

An edited version of this article first appeared on The Daily Telegraph

 

1 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-infrastructure-delivery-plan-2016-to-2021

2 https://www.nic.org.uk/publications/national-infrastructure-assessment-2018/

2 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43014861

3 https://www.nao.org.uk/report/pfi-and-pf2/

4 https://www.frc.org.uk/consultation-list/2017/consulting-on-a-revised-uk-corporate-governance-co

Important information

Except where stated as otherwise, the source of all information is Aviva Investors Global Services Limited (Aviva Investors) as at 12 July 2018. Unless stated otherwise any views and opinions are those of Aviva Investors. They should not be viewed as indicating any guarantee of return from an investment managed by Aviva Investors nor as advice of any nature. Information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but has not been independently verified by Aviva Investors and is not guaranteed to be accurate. Past performance is not a guide to the future. The value of an investment and any income from it may go down as well as up and the investor may not get back the original amount invested. Nothing in this document, including any references to specific securities, assets classes and financial markets is intended to or should be construed as advice or recommendations of any nature. This document is not a recommendation to sell or purchase any investment.

In the UK & Europe this document has been prepared and issued by Aviva Investors Global Services Limited, registered in England No.1151805. Registered Office: St. Helen’s, 1 Undershaft, London, EC3P 3DQ. Authorised and regulated in the UK by the Financial Conduct Authority. Contact us at Aviva Investors Global Services Limited, St. Helen’s, 1 Undershaft, London, EC3P 3DQ. Telephone calls to Aviva Investors may be recorded for training or monitoring purposes. In Singapore, this document is being circulated by way of an arrangement with Aviva Investors Asia Pte. Limited for distribution to institutional investors only. Please note that Aviva Investors Asia Pte. Limited does not provide any independent research or analysis in the substance or preparation of this document. Recipients of this document are to contact Aviva Investors Asia Pte. Limited in respect of any matters arising from, or in connection with, this document.  Aviva Investors Asia Pte.  Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of Singapore with registration number200813519W, holds a valid Capital Markets Services Licence to carry out fund management activities issued under the Securities and Futures Act (Singapore Statute Cap. 289) and Asian Exempt Financial Adviser for the purposes of the Financial Advisers Act (Singapore Statute Cap.110). Registered Office: 1Raffles Quay, #27-13 South Tower, Singapore 048583.In Australia, this document is being circulated by way of an arrangement with Aviva Investors Pacific Pty Ltd for distribution to wholesale investors only. Please note that Aviva Investors Pacific Pty Ltd does not provide any independent research or analysis in the substance or preparation of this document. Recipients of this document are to contact Aviva Investors Pacific Pty Ltd in respect of any matters arising from, or in connection with, this document. Aviva Investors Pacific Pty Ltd, a company incorporated under the laws of Australia with Australian Business No. 87 153 200 278 and Australian Company No. 153 200 278, holds an Australian Financial Services License (AFSL 411458) issued by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. Business Address: Level 30, Collins Place, 35 Collins Street, Melbourne, Vic 3000

The name “Aviva Investors” as used in this presentation refers to the global organization of affiliated asset management businesses operating under the Aviva Investors name. Each Aviva investors’ affiliate is a subsidiary of Aviva plc, a publicly- traded multi-national financial services company headquartered in the United Kingdom. Aviva Investors Canada, Inc. (“AIC”) is located in Toronto and is registered with the Ontario Securities Commission (“OSC”) as a Portfolio Manager, an Exempt Market Dealer, and a Commodity Trading Manager. Aviva Investors Americas LLC is a federally registered investment advisor with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Aviva Investors Americas is also a commodity trading advisor (“CTA”) and commodity pool operator (“CPO”) registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), and is a member of the National Futures Association (“NFA”).  AIA’s Form ADV Part 2A, which provides background information about the firm and its business practices, is available upon written request to: Compliance Department, 225 West Wacker Drive, Suite 2250, Chicago, IL 60606

RA18/0741/01072019