We are hoping to undertake such a study. What is needed is a counterfactual, of course—and I don't want to get into scholarly debate in this.
What's key to note is that there are two things at play here. One is that the City of Hamilton estimate, which was 40%, for instance, is based on comparing the number of bids that it used to receive for a similar project and for other ones. It is thus not a perfect, counterfactual study that would gain peer review, but neither is it a study that we can just ignore, because it's the city that actually has to pay for this work at the end of the day.
The cost increase on their water treatment plant, for instance, came in 83% over budget as a result of this. The standard is not what we would like to see as a think tank, but I don't think we can ignore that. The preponderance of evidence would suggest that it's over.
The second point is that if you're looking for value, the question of justice and whether this is a question of justice for all Canadians actually matters in this case. Why is it that a taxpayer who chooses to join the CEP or another affiliated or alternative union, or who decides that he or she would prefer not to be unionized, should be disqualified? I have not yet heard a good response to that.
So there are the economic issues, and then there are the democratic issues. I think the two are married.