PFI/PPP is mainly applied by governments to projects which require regular, on hands maintenance. However, PFI/PPP may not be used for any kind of projects.

As mentioned before, where there are pros, there are cons. Some say that the advantages and disadvantages of PFI/PPP cancel each other out. Others beg to differ. The first argument that shows how complex a PFI/PPP may be to operate is the very famous example of Health Trust. Many find is unwise for the Health Trust to enter itself into such a long-term contract. Changes in individuals demand and unforeseen events that will occur in the future, may result in severe restrictions in resources used and provided if health authorities are tied down to a PFI/PPP contract. The PFI system is globally criticized for the commercial confidentiality that is commanded by the private sector. This makes it difficult to compare publicly financed and privately financed schemes. As mentioned before as a positive point that PFI/PPP motivates individuals and promotes innovation, this is also a complex issue. It is extremely complicated for private sectors to be motivated and spontaneous with ideas as large contracts become complicated and nearly 100% of the time involve a head contractor. He/She then has subcontractors who had subcontractors and so on. This leads to miscommunication between the different levels of operators, making it a challenge and an inconvenience to change any aspect of the contract when problems arouse in the construction phase. Additionally, the links between for example, hospitals and schools may not be very strong and in some cases, dishonest. Refinancing is an issue that may never be solved. Once the consortium has built what they planned on, they obviously had to borrow to finance their project, can go back to the finance and refinance their loan taken out. This then results in a lower interest rate because the investment risks are now extremely less. This – in most cases, leads to the consortium making a profit. Another issue relating back to the consortium is the issue of ownership. Many consortiums often cash in their contract to make a profit. The problem here is that the trading of the asset ownerships is that the public interest or the effects on the public is not even considered. Another issue is that of transparency. Many of the activities that take place in the private sector are kept behind closed doors. It is a common principal that private companies always try to minimise their tax bills and attempt to hide their identity in some way. The problem here is that government departments feel that as they are the ones paying for the project over a number of years, they should be involved in the idea making process behind these plans. The last issue is that of contract complexity. The times set in a contract can be very problematic. Take a famous example of hospitals; if the contract is over a period of 30 years, then the government is forced to pay a yearly amount over that long period. Say 20 years down the line, the hospital needs a refurbishment, then the government is still required to pay for the old hospital for an extra 10 years until it meets the 30 years originally agreed. So for the next 10 years, the government would just be throwing away money. To conclude, the PFI/PPP contract is debated about the fact that such large time gaps should not be put on the contract.