Thank you, Mr. Moist, Mr. Sanger, and Ms. Cameron.
I'd like to return to maybe a bit of the substance of what we're debating: public transit. The Conference Board of Canada 2010 report, Dispelling the Myths, talked about P3s, saying that they had certain “efficiency drivers”. However, governments continue to treat them in an ideological way by claiming that they save taxpayers money, sometimes even claiming that they cost the taxpayer nothing through such discredited practices as off-book accounting.
Can you outline how P3 projects--maybe specific to transit--sometimes are more costly to the taxpayer and can actually decrease economic activity?