Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormer
They may be considering a P3. This stretches the capital cost over 30 years or so. The biggest advantage is risk transfer to the private sector. The Regina Bypass will be fully open in October. It is $2 billion. After 30 years they must turn over the project to the Government in “like new” condition. As a result they have used cutting-edge pavement tech and better bridge structures than the Government may have used. I will let you know how it is when it opens.
P3's have received criticism in Saskatchewan from the NDP and unions, but I have no doubt that some of them would have had massive cost overruns if the Government did them. One P3 hospital has a bad roof, but that is the contractor's problem for 30 years. If it was not a P3, it may have been on the taxpayer dime.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by craner
The fact that P3's get criticized by the NDP & unions probably means they are a good thing.  |
I’ve been arguing in favour of P3 for Perimeter Highway Upgrade a few pages back. I’m glad I’m not the only one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet
I'm somewhere in the middle on P3's. The innovations and outside the box thinking are usually pretty good. It reduces the costs. But it's all about minimizing everything to win the job. You need really good specs and control from the governments. Otherwise you'll end up with some stripped down version of what you want.
|
The O Train fiasco must serve as a warning nonetheless.
Threaded Mode