I do not believe we are here to absolve governments of any liability or to take on the planners' responsibility for all P3 projects, but rather to make sure that different tools are at legislators' disposal for the purpose of providing services to the public.
There is no monopoly on knowledge. I do not believe that singling out someone as being responsible for good or bad planning would add anything to the debate. Last year, we toured the 10 largest cities in Quebec and realized that there were enormous needs, a significant lack of liquidity and an obligation to work jointly to improve the situation for users.
I believe the institute works more on those issues. We are not dogmatic. We want to add an accountability tool to the toolbox and to ensure that there are ultimately no major cost variances, as you can currently see. These are surprises that have occurred because a number of people along the way said that they had bought a suit but that it didn't have a tie, belt or suspenders. We launched the project and failed to realize that there were other options that we should look at.
So I think that is why we recommend that all these risk analyses should be conducted before starting a project.