TheTigerMaster
Superstar
That would mean admitting that IO/P3 is failing, and would have political implications at provincial and federal levels (not least given that arms of government other than transport use P3 to deliver)
Remember the Harper Tories pushing hard to link federal project help to P3s?
Hon. James M. Flaherty Honoured Posthumously as 2014 P3 Champion
/CNW/ - The Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships (CCPPP) is proud to announce that the late Honourable James (Jim) Michael Flaherty has been...www.newswire.ca
I found the orthodoxy of P3 being automatically better somewhat questionable anyways - especially in the context of multi-decadal projects that will be reliant on learnings from earlier phases - and clearly risk transference (one of the major rationale of P3) isn't happening at their price in this case. The interpretation of IO/P3 is failing is only true if one isn't flexible enough to accept that there are exceptions.
AoD
With Christine Elliott in the cabinet (see end of that press release) do you see any flexibility forthcoming?
Both the Liberals and the CPC/PC have spent the last two years acting as if only the private sector can deliver results when it comes to public infrastructure. I don't see them changing their tune anytime soon, even if it costs us billions upon billions upon billions of dollars