from the NS News:
It is likely that a condition for federal and provincial funding is for the project to be structured as a “public/private/partnership” or “P3” project. This refers to an arrangement for shifting a significant portion of the construction, financing and operating risk to the private sector. There are a number of practical reasons for doing this. Risk apportionment and shifting is always a feature of major construction projects of this nature whether or not they are called “design/build” or “P3” and the devil is always in the details. But, as far as a name goes, we should care less if it is called a “P3” or a raspberry – so long as the federal and provincial government dollars are brought to the table.
Will your party require local governments to use public-private partnership (P3) agreements to finance future large infrastructure projects, or will you allow them to secure funding arrangements that best meet the needs of local taxpayers?
NDP: will end the requirement that projects receiving provincial government funding, at any amount, must use a public-private partnership. The BC NDP will improve local government autonomy, and work in partnership with local and regional governments to meet the service and infrastructure needs of their communities. The BC NDP would be happy to meet with Metro Vancouver representatives to explore your priorities, solutions & concerns around funding arrangements.
The BC Conservatives are always on the look out for the best interests of local taxpayers. We will encourage public-private partnerships, and are open to discussion with Municipalities on how to best serve local taxpayers.
The Green Party of BC would not impose P3s for large infrastructure projects. We support local control over funding arrangements assuming the needs for accountability and transparency are met.
No response to date