I'm sure you'll imagine I have a differing view. I agree completely, however, that there should be greater transparency. I have no problem whatsoever, John. I'd be more than happy to come and see you in Winnipeg and show you how we do our risk analysis.
Obviously, we're doing it from the side of the private sector, and we do a very detailed risk analysis on every aspect of the projects in which we get involved. We're pricing it in competition, contrary to an earlier comment you made that there's no competition on any of these projects. I've never bid on a project in Canada with fewer than four competitors. Recently, we've been short-listed to reconstruct Iqaluit's airport. We were facing eight bidders at the RFQ stage.
We're typically seeing eight or nine bidders and some extremely strong companies bidding to compete for this work. We are pricing that risk ourselves in competition. I'm satisfied this risk transfer is being priced very competitively. The government is benefiting from that.
In terms of the transparency of contracts, as I say, I agree completely. I'm surprised you can't find demonstration of that risk transfer. For instance, if you look at the Partnerships BC website, all of their contracts are published there. You can see in fine detail exactly what risk we're taking on, say, Golden Ears Bridge or the Kelowna and Vernon hospitals project.
I can point you to those if you wish.
In terms of how we have—