Government Operations committee  On the value-for-money analyses per se, the summaries are provided publicly. I can't speak for every jurisdiction. I don't think the risk matrices per se are publicly available.

Government Operations committee  I guess the question then becomes what other controls are involved in that process. We started off by saying that we have several people at the table participating in these risk analyses. The business case per se, including the risk analysis, goes up through—if we look at the approval process and I can speak to Quebec—Infrastructure Quebec, Treasury, and eventually cabinet.

Government Operations committee  Your question is very interesting because Canada is now recognized as a leading country in the area of P3s and infrastructure development. We are now seeing Canadian businesses, including SNC-Lavalin, Fengate and other builders in Canada, bidding on infrastructure projects in Chile, Mexico and elsewhere in the Americas and around the world.

Government Operations committee  For example, during the construction phase, we might have 20 or 30 risks, each broken down and evaluated in order to put a dollar amount and a probability on it. Once we've done that work, it's all run through a Monte Carlo.... I don't mean to sound really technical. I mean that it's run through a simulation that produces a distribution of the probabilities.

Government Operations committee  If we look at the methodology that's used in Quebec, we see that there is no standard risk premium. The approach, which is one that is used in other jurisdictions as well, is to undertake a detailed risk analysis for the specific project. What do we mean by that? We hold risk workshops.

Government Operations committee  And the evaluation of the implementation method has to be adapted to the specific characteristics of each project.

Government Operations committee  That depends on the level of risk transfer we want to accept. In the case of an NPO, where the public and private sectors are investors, the public portion is exposed to certain risks. Ultimately, the question is really whether, for a particular project or asset, the model seems to enable us as investors to manage our risks and the contractual parameters with our private partner.

Government Operations committee  I have a job. Mr. Légaré is on salary, but I am a volunteer.

Government Operations committee  To whom are you putting that question?

Government Operations committee  Our organization is in fact really an association, somewhat like the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships, whose representatives were here two or three weeks ago. We do not provide any services. We simply form an association that brings together public and private sector stakeholders who have an interest in P3s.

Government Operations committee  I will answer you as a person who works in the sector. We at the institute obviously have a more general viewpoint. We promote P3s. However, as you say, we do not do so at all costs because the P3 model does not apply to all projects. So that is how I would answer you. As for the process used in Quebec to evaluate implementation methods, I would like to confirm that our comparison is not limited to P3s as regards design, construction, financing, maintenance and repair.

Government Operations committee  Yes, if I may. Thank you. There was a rather timely article in the Quebec press yesterday—I'm not sure if any of you had a chance to take a look at it—about some of the experiences that we are having on infrastructure projects. The statement was that we are seeing cost overruns in the order of 80% on some of our capital projects; it talked specifically about a road project that is under way currently, in conventional mode.

Government Operations committee  Thank you. I would invite my colleague, Roger Légaré, who is the managing director of our institute, to perhaps just say a few words of introduction in terms of our association and our mission, and then I'll chime in with my presentation right afterwards.