Okay, thank you.
I want to move on to your comments on P3s and the P3 fund, on a desk in the federal office for P3s. You have mentioned here in your comments $1.3 billion for a new national fund for public-private partnerships, plus $25 million for a new federal office for P3s.
The first question is this. Why do we need to have these arrangements if in fact government can presumably go to market and get money for a better rate than, often, corporations can? A value-for-money argument....
Secondly, what happens when you get into a P3 and the company goes south on you? In other words, are taxpayers going to be left holding the bucket here for arrangements that are made? Presumably we're all hoping that an arrangement with a P3 goes well, but what happens if a company goes bankrupt or overextends itself? Presumably the taxpayer then has to foot the bill, because there's a contract to build, whatever, a bridge, etc.
My question, then, is, why do we need these? Everyone knows that when a government goes to build a bridge, you don't have people in your department go out in trucks and build a bridge. You contract that from the private sector. So it's not like we're talking about the private sector not being involved; it's how they're involved. I know many people are concerned about this P3 arrangement.