Mr. Bartlett also articulated this. What we've found about the transfer of risk is that basically all the P3s in Canada have been justified on the basis of transferring risk to the private sector. We haven't been able to get the details on that because they keep them secret. That's a real concern. When the Ontario auditor general reviewed 74 P3s in Ontario, she found that there was not one shred of evidence that the risk was being transferred, and she found that at least $3 billion of the risk was double-counted. There was not one shred of evidence on that. They're all justified on it. I could make up those numbers to show risk was being transferred, but the risk was not transferred. The private sector generally has only about 10% to 50% equity in it, and they assume that a lot more risk is being transferred.
Another thing is that if these are public infrastructure projects, if they're delivering a public service, the public sector will be responsible for keeping the projects going. Just about all of these projects, all P3s, are set up as what they call SPVs, special purpose vehicles. They're separate. There may be big companies behind them, but they're set up as limited liability corporations. The people backing these projects can walk away from them with little at risk. Who has to pick up the pieces to provide the service? It's the public sector, if they want it to keep on operating. That's how it has operated in a number of different places.
This whole idea about risk transfer, I don't think there's a lot of credibility behind it. It's a real problem. It might sound good in theory, but in reality it doesn't happen.