This week we continue
our discussion on P3's (Public Private Partnerships) with
longstanding NAIOP Vancouver member and current Vice President,
Graeme Silvera. Read on to find out his views on the Government's
decision to pursue P3 projects in spite of public opposition, as
well as the environmental sustainability of these types of
projects.
Be sure to catch Part 1 and Part 2
to get the full scoop on this method of project delivery.
Isn't there a lot of public opposition to P3's?
Why should Governments use a method of project delivery that is
controversial with voters?
At the outset of the development of the first
P3's, which actually started in the UK in the early 1990's as the
PFI, or Private Finance Initiative, they were controversial for the
reasons stated previously; perceived higher
cost, contracting out public sector jobs and loss of control.
Early success in the form of projects delivered on-time and
on-budget, with proven independent value-for-money reports and
refinements in the Project Agreement structures, including posting
of contracts and key procurement documentation on-line, has managed
to quell most of the opposition over the years. P3's are now not
only recognized for delivering significant value for money, but
also providing much greater transparency in delivery when compared
against other traditional methods.
The current opposition to P3's
remains primarily with the larger public sector unions who continue
to assert that P3's will result in the contracting out of
high-paying public sector jobs. I believe that this last objection
is also soon going to be removed, as the majority of our company's
projects are required to take over existing unionized staff and
contracts within the context of our operational plans. From
the public perspective, I believe that P3's are now seen as a
winning delivery method that see large public infrastructure
projects being completed on-schedule and on-budget and being
maintained over the long term, with clear reporting and
transparency to the taxpayer. But don't take my word for it; a 2011 poll commissioned by the national
non-partisan Canadian Council for Public Private
Partnerships showed public support for P3's at 70%, continuing
the upward trend from 60% in
2004.
What about the environmental impact; are P3's an
environmentally sustainable method of project
delivery?
Over my varied career I have
worked in both the public and private sectors using many different
project delivery methods ranging from Design-Bid-Build Stipulated
Sum contracting to Construction Management at Risk. I am also
LEED certified and am familiar with sustainable construction
methods. Before I started working on P3's I used to believe
that sustainability was primarily related to the energy efficiency
of a building, dealing with construction wastes and the types of
materials used in the construction. After working in the P3
delivery method for the last 5 years I can now say that my
definition of sustainability has widened
considerably.
I now believe that P3's are
among the most sustainable method of delivering projects for the
following reasons:
- "Super integrated" Project Delivery - All sustainable
projects have at their core an integrated design team process, but
on a P3 the design team is forced to consider all aspects of the
design in every decision made. Contractual obligations
between the Designer, Operator and Builder cause the design team to
consider each design decision from the perspective of what I like
to call the RECOMMEND protocol; that is the decision that considers
the aspects of Replaceability, Energy use, Constructability,
Operational efficiency of the spaces, Maintainability, Material
suitability, Efficiency and Durability.
- The inclusion of a long term guarantee of durability and
life cycle with the P3 structure literally forces the team to
consider the overall best solution for the project that produces
the "lowest overall life cycle" cost. The lowest overall life
cycle cost is also inherently the most sustainable solution.
P3's, with their requirements for guaranteed maintenance and
handback, are the only project delivery solution that can deliver
these types of results time and time again.
-----------------
What are your thoughts on P3's? Do you support or oppose this
method of project delivery in British Columbia? Share your thoughts
in the comments sections below.
Thanks to Graeme Silvera for taking the time to sit down with us
and discuss this growing form of project delivery. Don't forget to
tune in next week for more instalments in the Industry Leaders
Blog.