I'm going to go through some of this fairly quickly.
I want to say, Mr. Khan, that I agree with you and your comments about putting the horse before the cart. We've heard from the Senate reports, the PBO, the C.D. Howe and Fraser Institutes, and others about transparency and the need for a robust infrastructure plan, first and foremost, to lay the foundation and as we move forward.
I want to get into the question of the infrastructure bank, because I'm hearing that there's nothing new and innovative in it and there are no projects being built. I would remind you—and this is my question to you, Mr. Campbell—that back in 2009, PPP Canada, which is a crown corporation, was specifically set up to leverage private sector dollars, and in fact did on a number of projects. For an initial investment of $1.3 billion, it leveraged more than $6 billion.
The KPMG report that I have here, the part that's not redacted, talks about using it as a mechanism. It talks about using PPP Canada, which is already set up, saying that it could utilize an existing crown corporation such as PPP Canada. If there are some functions under it that need to be expanded, or if the mandate needs to be expanded, they could have a look at that. It would be cost-efficient. It would be efficient, effective—all of those things.
I wonder, then, why you didn't take a look at an existing mechanism already in place, which already has a track record of success, and if you wanted to expand the mandate a little bit, why you wouldn't use that existing mechanism.