Canadian public-private partnerships have come a long
way since 1992, when the federal government inked a deal with Strait
Crossing Incorporated to design, build and, for 35 years, maintain
and operate a bridge between Prince Edward Island and the mainland.
Opened in 1997, the $840 million Confederation Bridge was a turning
point for public-private partnerships (PPPs or P3s) in this country.
Since then, governments at all levels have been
increasingly relying on P3s to reduce public risk, speed up
construction timelines, improve efficiencies and give private
enterprise an opportunity to innovate on major infrastructure
projects like bridges, roads, hospitals and schools. Partnerships BC
was founded in 2002, Infrastructure Ontario in 2005, Infrastructure
Quebec in 2010 and Partnerships New Brunswick in 2011, while the
federal Crown corporation PPP Canada was created in 2009.
The Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnership lists 169 P3
projects in Canada, with 49 now under construction. Now, key players
are leveraging that experience to take the Canadian P3 model global.
“Canada has developed a mature market with a robust
deal pipeline,” says Matti Siemiatycki, an assistant professor of
Geography and Planning at the University of Toronto, who has
authored several papers on Canadian
P3s. ”When the Council [for Public-Private Partnerships] hosts
its fall conference, the whole world is at that conference.”
Since financing, contract negotiations and
procurement are increasingly taking place on a global playing field,
national borders matter much less. Robert Shouldice, a partner in
the Vancouver office of Borden
Ladner Gervais, is currently working for a Canadian client on a
light-rail project in India and last year worked on a light-rail
project in Istanbul, both P3 initiatives by local governments.
Shouldice’s associate, Doug
Saunders, has represented a German company negotiating a P3 in
Norway.
“These projects are, from a legal perspective, 95% to
98% commercial contract negotiation. Local law really has very
little impact on those negotiations,” says Shouldice. “In fact, a
lot of times, for international projects, the parties will choose to
have the contracts governed by a different law, just to have the
dispute-resolution procedure something other than the local courts.”
Each P3 deal is unique, complicated and, in many
cases, expected to spell out the roles of the public and the private
partners for decades. The private partner may just design and build
a project, or, like with the Confederation Bridge, might also
maintain, operate and own it before transferring the property back
to the government. With a relatively early start compared to other
countries, Canadian players have built a solid P3 reputation.
“The deal history gives us a database of solutions,”
says Saunders. “The same experience we’ve gained in terms of the
Canadian model is also applicable to those Canadian companies who
have understood and gotten involved in the model here. So when they
see a P3 project in another jurisdiction, it’s an easy entrée
because they know that 95% to 98% of the deal will be the same.”
Mark Romoff, president and CEO of the Canadian
Council for Public-Private Partnerships, says Canada has become
known for P3 projects that are transparent, fair and good value for
money.
“As the Canadian model gets adopted internationally,
then it puts in place provisions that should enable Canadian
companies to at least compete on a level footing in those
jurisdictions,” says Romoff. For example, working with the Canadian
Commercial Corporation, Toronto-based construction and
infrastructure giant Aecon was
chosen as lead contractor for the US$700 million project to design,
build, finance, operate and maintain the new airport in Quito,
Ecuador (the facility is scheduled to be complete in October 2012).
P3s are often associated with large, elite finance,
engineering and construction companies. That was a point of
contention when Saunders met recently with British Columbia’s Independent
Contractors and Businesses Association, an organization that
represents mostly small- and medium-sized contractors. But the
finance side and the construction side are different animals. “The
reality is that if you look at someone like Macquarie [the large
Australia-based provider of banking, financial and investment
services], they don’t have one person that has a hammer. Many of
these companies coming from overseas are bringing managerial
expertise. You’re still going to need local labour, local content
for the physical construction.”
Siemiatycki says there is some potential for
second-tier Canadian companies to gain access to P3 projects around
the world, but it’s not easy. “Because of the way these deals are
structured, because part of it is about transferring more risk to
the private sector, you need to be a relatively large and relatively
well established firm to play in this market. From an export
perspective, that raises questions about whether Canadian firms are
big enough to participate at that scale. What I have observed is
that international firms moving into local markets will partner with
domestic firms that have a reputation within the industry already
and have networks already in place.”
Canada is not the world leader in P3s. The United
Kingdom holds that title and its Partnerships UK, founded in 1999,
was a model for Partnerships BC and Infrastructure Ontario.
Partnerships UK even earns revenue by advising on P3 deals for
non-UK projects, working with more than 14 governments, according to
a 2008
working paper out of Stanford University, which looked at
similarities and differences between some of the major P3 agencies
worldwide.
Perhaps surprisingly, the U.S. has lagged behind the
Canada, the U.K., Australia, Spain, France and Portugal.
“In the U.S., this model continues to be
controversial and is still going through lots of debate and is still
being resisted at a number of different government levels,” says
Shouldice. “The P3 model hasn’t caught on there like it’s caught on
here and in Europe.” Early toll-road projects in the U.S. were
unpopular, says Saunders, giving P3s a bad reputation. Many
jurisdictions are still reluctant to change legislation to allow
them.
Although Canada’s P3 agencies and contract templates
are attracting attention, no P3 model is likely to be one-size-fits
all. “It would be misleading to think that an agency designed to fit
the rules, codes and conventions of Canada, France or Portugal could
be transplanted, say, to the United States, without considerable
reinterpretation and recontextualization,” states the Standford
working paper. “One important lesson that emerged during the course
of this study was that there is no global best practice for agency
set-up.”
This Article comes from
Business Without Borders |