Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am going to cite a specific case in Quebec, that of the bridge on Highway 25. This bridge had been needed for some time. It was an immense project and the risks were high. Decision-makers opted for a PPP. It was one of the first in Quebec.
Many promises were made. We were promised a user fee of $2.40. There was an overrun of $226 million over the promised cost. Initially, in the PPP agreement, the cost estimate was $204 million. Four years later, in 2011, right after the bridge was completed, the bill was $500 million. What a great buy! Not only that, the current toll of $2.40 could go up to $7.40, because the agreement with the company responsible for maintenance and pricing indicates that as the number of vehicles using the bridge increases, so does the price. One could almost say that this is a hidden tax.
I have used the bridge many times, and I have noted infrastructure problems. Engineering did not take certain elements into account. For example, the exit was badly thought out; it is a nightmare. People are outraged.
There is no more talk of concluding more PPPs. However the Eastern train line project is almost done. The cost of the project was estimated to be $500 million, but the final bill is $800 million, and there is still no PPP in place.
Let's come back to the bridge project. The final cost is 245% of the estimated cost. A class action lawsuit has been launched to challenge the hidden car fees, the higher than expected tolls, and the loss of control by the public sector for 30 years.
Risk-sharing has been discussed, but the same problem keeps cropping up: when it comes to acquiring the bridge, there is no guarantee that a beam will not fall off. Furthermore, there is no control whatsoever.
My question is for both of you. Is the public sector really coming out ahead when it comes to costs?