Report on Public Private Partnerships (PPP)
Duty Visit to Canada (19 – 28 June 2006)
The government is committed to making best use of the private sector to deliver high
quality public services whilst maintaining value for money. Public Private
Partnerships (PPPs) are one means to achieve this. With its flexibility and vigour,
the private sector can inject new thinking and initiatives to enhance the quality and
efficiency of public services.
To remain competitive in the global environment, Governments around the world are
focusing on better ways to finance projects, build infrastructure and deliver services to
attract capital and talents. PPPs are becoming a worldwide tool to bring together the
strengths of both public and private sectors, and they are providing to be both feasible
The Hong Kong Government supports the use of PPPs to deliver public services. In
the Policy Agenda 2004/05, it said “make wider use of alternative approaches such as
Public-Private-Partnership in the delivery of large scale projects under the Public
The Policy Agenda 2005/06 also stated that the government will “re-engineer
methodology for planning and implementing infrastructural projects with a view to
deriving better efficiency and cost-effectiveness by various means, including the
wider adoption of a partnering approach, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms,
alternative designs and procurement methods, as well as systematic risk management
Background to the visit
As part of its on-going efforts to promote the understanding and application of PPPs
in delivering public services, the Efficiency Unit has in the past organized
PPP-oriented duty visits to Australia in 2004 and the United Kingdom in 2005. A
third PPP duty visit to Canada was arranged in June 2006 to provide more
opportunities for government officials to study the application of PPPs.
Canada has developed considerable expertise in the PPP field. In fact, the visit
revealed that Canada is doing considerably more than we had realized from our
pre-visit research. The PPP approach has become a successful and widely accepted
vehicle to deliver public services in different sectors at federal, provincial and local
levels of government. In some areas such as sports and culture, Canada is probably
leading the world. A number of dedicated authorities, such as Partnerships British
Columbia (www.partnershipsbc.ca), have been set up by different governments within
Canada to promote and develop effective use of PPPs.
The Hong Kong SAR Government has used the PPP approach to implement various
projects and currently some bureaux and departments are examining whether the PPP
approach is the right approach for their projects. The Hong Kong delegation took
this opportunity to learn from the experience of its Canadian counterparts, to find
what has worked and what has not, to facilitate consideration and development of its
own programmes and projects.
The delegation, led by Mr Steve Barclay, Assistant Director
of the Efficiency Unit, consisted of 19 directorate and senior
professional officers from 14 policy bureaux and departments.
A list of participants is attached at Appendix 1.
Hong Kong delegation in front of the Toronto City Hall
The eight-days long programme included 40 site visits / briefings / meetings /
workshops conducted in Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver and Victoria. The Efficiency
Unit included in the visiting programme those services that are closely related to the
professions of delegates, including:
city and building revitalization
energy and waste treatment/recycling
water and wastewater treatment
sports and entertainment
arts and cultural
parking system and driving examination
airport, rapid transit and highways maintenance
A visit to Brampton sports and entertainment centre A visit to Peel incineration facility
A visit to Toronto Waterfront Revitalization project A visit to Royal Ottawa Health Care Group
In addition to site visits, the programme also included some experience sharing
sessions for participants to meet with officials at different government levels and
private sector practitioners who are responsible for managing and coordinating PPP
An experience sharing session with private sector practitioners A PPP workshop with representatives of federal government
A meeting with members of a consultancy firm A meeting with representatives of Ontario Ministry of Transport
A list of programmes is attached at Appendix 2.
What did the delegation wish to achieve?
The purpose of the duty visit was for the delegates to meet officers and contractors
who have been involved in the initiation, planning and implementation of projects and
to understand the difficulties and key success factors in adopting PPPs. In particular,
the Hong Kong delegation wished to establish –
Why was the PPP approach selected?
Were alternative approaches considered?
What were the anticipated benefits/disadvantages of the PPP approach?
How to gain confidence from senior management and secure support from
the public, staff and other stakeholders?
What were the main difficulties faced in each development stage?
What lessons were learned from the procurement process?
Have the anticipated outcomes actually materialized?
What have been the experiences/perceptions of the client and/or the
customer during the service delivery period (after the construction is
What were the critical success factors in using the PPP approach?
What would clients / contractors do differently with the benefit of
During the visit, the delegation not only had opportunity to visit successful projects
but also those encountering difficulties. Benefiting from the real experience of our
Canadian counterparts, delegates were able to develop a better understanding of
what was feasible and what was not. This will help us to avoid similar pitfalls when
adopting PPPs on our own programmes and projects in future.
Reasons for using PPP in Canada
A wide range of public services has been delivered through PPPs in Canada, most of
them have proved to be successful. To summarize, the strengths and advantages of
using PPPs in Canada are:
(a) Reduce initial capital investment
As Canada has recorded an infrastructure deficit since 1994, its funding deficiency
has grown over time. In some extreme cases, the useful life of infrastructure
assets has been cut short due to shortage of funding for maintenance. Canadians
complain that they suffer from aging infrastructure and have raised strong requests
for infrastructure renewal. Facing financial constraints, PPPs have become one
of the most feasible solutions.
In most PPPs, private consortia comprising of financial institutions, construction
firms and facility management companies are established. They are responsible
for contributing startup capitals and will be paid back through servicing fees and
other sources of income during the contract periods, which are usually more than
20 years. Governments are not usually required to pay initial capital and/or
provide debt guarantees.
A shift from traditional model of fully relying on public funding favours
sustainable development, particularly when governments are facing budget
constraints and at the same time are under strong pressure to improve service
(b) Risk Sharing
In traditional tendering projects, the public sector (i.e. the taxpayer) absorbs
virtually all the risks involved. PPPs enable us to allocate many kinds of risks
associated with projects to the parties who are best equipped to deal with them.
The successful PPPs in Canada appear to have eliminated most of the risks on
over-budget, project delay and unsatisfactory service standards. In most PPPs,
the private sector will be paid in full only when pre-defined standards have been
achieved. Also, since financial institutions usually provide capital for the
projects, they introduce strong discipline on monitoring the projects` progress.
Service quality throughout the life of the projects can also be secured through
clear output-based specifications, linking payment to performance and paying
service fees by installments.
Below is a typical broadbrush risk distribution table under different delivery
Traditional Design & Build PPP
Capital cost overrun Public Contractor Shared
Delay in completion Public Optional Shared
Construction performance Public Contractor Shared
Operating Life Cycle Costs Public Public Shared
Operating Performance Public Public Shared
Legislative changes Public Public Shared
Political support Public Public Shared
Asset Management Public Public Shared
Debt Payment Public Public Shared
Having said that, risks should be shared among public and private sector fairly.
It is not sensible to transfer all risks to the private sector, otherwise the private
sector will simply not bid for projects or will increase its bid prices
disproportionately to cover the risks that it is unable to manage. We heard many
comments from the private sector regarding the risk sharing arrangements. In
one case, a PPP water and wastewater treatment facility was brought back to
in-house service as the original contractor refused (or either requesting for 50%
risk premium) to absorb all risks requested by the government during contract
(c) Improve service quality and reduce operating costs through innovation
Compared with the public sector, the private sector is more capable / flexible to
apply new technologies. One of the major pitfalls of the traditional
design-and-build model is that construction companies are not responsible for
on-going operation or maintenance of the facilities. They usually fail to take a
whole of life approach i.e. to consider the impacts on long term operation and
PPPs allow contractors to incorporate new design and technology from scratch.
For example, to prevent suicide, fire sprinklers (left) installed on the roof in a
psychiatric hospital managed by Royal Ottawa Health Care Group will fall off
automatically when the loading exceeds 11kg. A wireless network (right) is
installed in the same building to minimize the number of ducts and cables. This
not only facilitates better information management but also helps to reduce future
operation and maintenance costs.
Fire sprinkler with suicide-prevention design Wireless network hubs
(d) Increase revenue through new source of income
The private sector is more capable of generating revenue. PPPs obviously can
make full use of their strengths. Many PPP projects in Canada, especially culture
and sports facilities sell the naming rights of buildings to private sponsors. For
example, 20% of the total construction cost of the Four Seasons Centre for the
Performing Arts (left) was covered by selling the naming rights of the building
and auditorium. In addition, the naming rights are usually not permanent, that
means these intangible assets could be sold again after a period of time.
“Four Seasons” centre for the performing arts “Save On Foods” memorial centre
Since the private sector is already involved at the beginning, many “revenue
generating” designs / plans could be incorporated at the design/construction stage.
For example, many private suites have been built in the Save-on-Foods Memorial
Centre (below), a PPP ice hockey arena in Victoria. These luxury facilities
command a much high premium than ordinary seats.
Ordinary seats Luxury suite with pub and sofa
To generate more revenue in the low season, the operator of another ice hockey
arena converts the ice rink to basketball courts in the summer.
(e) Access to secure, long-term investment opportunities
With the growing emergence of pension funds around the world (including in
Hong Kong with the introduction of the MPF), there are strong demands for long
term, low risk and low return investment opportunities in the market. Private
financiers welcome access to secure and long-term opportunities from contracts
with governments that have a solid reputation for integrity and financial
(f) Integration of organisation and decision making
The creation of consortia to bid for and operate PPPs integrates the finance, legal,
engineering and operation disciplines into a single team. This strategic linkage
enables integrated thinking and fast responses in tackling difficulties.
Current (June 2006) conditions of PPP in Canada
Developing policy to promote contemplating PPP options
Emphasis on PPP as a preferred choice for delivering public infrastructure
Focused use of PPP for capital construction
Many authorities have been set up at federal and provincial levels to promote and
adopt PPPs. At the federal level, the following authorities are involved in promoting
(a) Infrastructure Canada
(b) Industry Canada – P3 office
Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec have their own ministries of
infrastructure where PPPs are explored on a case-by-case basis.
(a) Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation
(b) Partnership British Columbia
(c) Infrastructure Ontario
(d) Quebec PPP
Alberta has indicated that around 25% of new infrastructure will use PPPs. With
regards to major capital projects in British Columbia, ministries and agencies are
required to review all possible alternatives to deliver a capital asset, including PPPs.
In Ontario, the province launched ReNew Ontario, which is a five-year infrastructure
plan. The plan includes a number of major projects using the PPP approach,
primarily in the health and justice sectors.
A list of some PPP projects in Canada apart from those included in the visit is at
Apart from governments, there are member-sponsored organizations, such as The
Canadian Council for Public-Private-Partnerships (www.pppcouncil.ca), which
conducts research, workshops, seminars and publishes findings on PPPs.
The main service sectors that the provinces are contemplating are transportation,
electricity, health, prisons, municipal facilities, social housing, water/waste,
universities and schools. Most projects visited by delegation are adopting
Design-Build (DB) to Design-Build-Finance-Operate (DBFO) arrangement.
Public Private Private Design Design Private
Build Operate Design Build Build Build
Own & Build Operate Finance Own
Operate Maintain Turnkey Operate Operate
Public O&M DB DBO DBFO Private
< Projects included in the visit >
Legal framework for PPPs in Canada
There is no specific PPP legislation in Canada. However,
at the federal level the Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund Act promotes
the use of partnerships between the public and private sectors.
there are no national standards for contracts, guidelines and documents,
although some federal/provincial bodies are developing such documents.
At the provincial level there are Procurement Frameworks and Agencies
that seek to achieve value for money, protection of the public interest and
fairness and probity.
at the municipal level, governments are constrained from entering into
contracts longer than 5 years without seeking a mandate from their citizens.
There is also no legislation covering staff transfer from public to private sector
employers. Any such arrangements are dealt with by contracts.
The governments must, when engaging in a PPP project, ensure that existing
legislation are not being violated. In Maple Ridge, a town near Vancouver, the Court
of Appeal decided that a proposed 25-years PPP agreement was not lawful because all
public liabilities exceeding 5 years should seek public approval. This had not been
done. As a result, the district was required to renegotiate the agreement and obtain
Court of Appeal decided PPP agreement in Maple
Ridge not lawful
Staff relations and responsibilities
Public sector workers are typically highly unionized and there are usually agreements
between employers and employees. PPP and other private sector involvement
arrangements need to avoid infringing these agreements. This often means that
using PPP approaches to develop existing facilities has to be avoided. Despite these
constraints, many PPP projects have been taken forward successfully.
In fact, the role of government officials in PPPs has changed from operational to
overseeing and monitoring. Instead of hands-on operating skills, public officers
should be well equipped with negotiation and contract management techniques.
Commonly used financial structures in Canada
Public funding – government borrowing, grants or contributions and capital
allocation, and property development rights
Public sector support – government guarantee, monetization of government
receipts or payments, credit enhancement and revenue bonds
Private sector financing – capital markets and bank borrowing
Commercial contributions e.g. payment for naming rights
Ownerships arrangement of assets under PPP
Unlike privatization, governments only transfer components of capital asset
procurement and management, including design, building, financing and operation, to
the private sector. Governments maintain ownership of the land and the fixed assets.
Such arrangements can bring more confidence to the public on PPPs. At the same
time, public and private sectors still maintain an on-going business relationship.
The Canadian contracts usually stipulate that the whole operation is handed back to
government in a prescribed condition at the end of the agreement period.
Complexity of the PPP process
We received a number of comments on the time and complexity involved in
processing PPP proposals. This is seen as a necessary evil, but it was stressed that
every effort should be made to accelerate progress through having readily available
experience, standard documents / procedures and programmes of similar projects.
To further facilitate the project, it is worth to consider bundling similar PPP projects
and allow proponents to submit one set of qualifications for multiple projects.
Experts in governments can also develop standardized documentation and templates.
As a new method to deliver public services, the government should pay sufficient
efforts in addressing public concerns and clarifying any misconceptions. The main
public concerns we saw in Canada are :
(a) Increases in service fee and changes in service standards
To reduce worries of the public, service fees, policy, service standards of many
PPP projects tend to remain at governments‟ discretion. This is not always the
case. For example, sports facility operators set their own fees and charges. It
was believed that there was sufficient competition in the market place to prevent
charges rising to unacceptable levels.
While the driving examination centre is fully operated by a
private operator, the level of examination fee remains
(b) Fairness, probity and transparency
Due to PPPs‟ complexity, fairness and transparency are usually the main public
concerns on PPPs. While confidentiality is important in business deals, great
stress is placed on the openness of selection processes and transparency of all
relevant information. Well-established public scrutiny mechanisms, together
with outcome-based PPP agreements, foster high levels of PPP accountability.
(c) Explanation of benefits to public
Governments should provide clear, articulate and precise explanations on the
public benefits that projects will bring to a community and be able to demonstrate
how these benefits are enjoyed by the broadest base of the community as possible.
(d) Consultation at early stage
Many Canadian counterparts emphasized the importance of consultations.
Government officials should ensure all stakeholders are well informed, consulted
and experience no surprises when proposals emerge into the public arena.
Although the processes may be painstaking, consultation should be
comprehensive and include all stakeholders at an early stage. Some of the
federal / provincial PPP bodies employ full-time „communication‟ staff.
A public consultation for Toronto Waterfront
(e) Avoid relating law enforcement to profit making
In Hamilton, a town near Toronto, a private company enforces illegal parking for
the government through a PPP agreement. This does not enjoy public support as
the revenue of the company is linked to the number of penalty tickets issued.
There is a public perception that “revenue sharing” precludes disinterest and may
undermine the course of Justice. When law enforcement is involved in a PPP (or
other forms of private sector involvement), pegging of profit/revenue to the
number of enforcement actions should be considered very carefully.
Expertise within government
Dedicated organizations have been set up at federal (e.g. Infrastructure Canada) and
provincial (e.g. Partnerships British Columbia) levels to facilitate the consideration
and implementation of PPPs. The roles of these institutions are :
to establish recognized centres of PPP expertise
to strengthen the PPP knowledge base
to assist other ministries / departments in negotiating, concluding and
managing PPP contracts
to provide project and contract management services to other ministries /
departments for complex infrastructure projects
to conduct independent public sector comparator studies
to advise on financing arrangements
In British Columbia, Partnerships British Columbia (PBC) is a company fully owned
by government responsible for bringing together ministries, agencies and the private
sector to develop projects through PPPs. Its mandate is to develop partnerships on
behalf of public sector agencies. On the other hand, PBC also serves as a resource
for the private sector looking for opportunities to invest in British Columbia.
Meeting with officials of Partnerships BC
Potential problems / risks of PPPs
Apart from the keys to success, our Canadian counterparts also indicated some risks
and pitfalls that need to be addressed :
Communications / misperceptions of the public
Opposition by unions
Political commitment insufficient
Long term nature of PPP contracts gives rise to uncertainty
Complexity of transactions
Different cultures between public and private sectors. Different views on
implementing PPPs, practices differ across different jurisdictions
The programme fully met, if not exceeded, our expectations and provided us with
many insights and fresh ideas for developing our own PPP programmes in Hong
Kong. In particular, the delegation appreciated the willingness of our Canadian
hosts to give us detailed explanations and assessments, to answer our questions
candidly and to highlight both their successes and the pitfalls to avoid.
Hong Kong is in a favourable position as we can build our PPP models learning from
the experience of other countries that have been using PPP extensively like the UK,
Australia and Canada.
Detailed information on individual programmes
A list showing project names, websites, contact persons and email addresses of all
programmes is attached at Appendix 4 for reference.
To disseminate delegates‟ experience to a wider civil service and private sector
audience, an experience sharing seminar was held on 31 July 2006. Delegation
members shared their experience, insights and ideas with the audience. Directorate
and professional level civil service colleagues and private sector representatives were
invited to attend the seminar. The powerpoint presentations by delegates , which give
more details on individual visits/meetings, can be seen at the EU website at
http://www.eu.gov.hk/english/psi/psi_course/psi_course.htmlFor more information
about the seminar, please contact Mr. Harold Chan (email : firstname.lastname@example.org or tel :
If you have any questions about this duty visit, please contact Mr. Steve Barclay
(email : email@example.com , tel : 2810 3408) or Mr. Alan Lo (email :
firstname.lastname@example.org , tel : 2810 2630).
How EU can help ?
The Efficiency Unit (EU) has established a dedicated team to assist government
bureaux and departments to enhance private sector involvement (PSI) in the delivery
of public services, in particular using the outsourcing and PPP approaches. Please
visit our website (http://www.eu.gov.hk/english/psi/psi_how/psi_how.html) or give us
a call at 2165 7255 for more information.
Appendix 1 - List of delegates
Bureau/Dept Name Post
ArchSD Ms. Chung, Uson Senior Project Manager
CEDD Mrs. KWOK TAM Yuk Ying, Joanna Chief Engineer (ST)
CSD Mr. Ying Kwok Ching Deputy Commissioner
DOJ Mrs. WONG CHAN Fong Yee, Rita Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law)
Principal Environment Protection Officer
EPD Mr. Lau Ming Ching, Lawrence
HA Ms. Li Wai Yuen, Lucia
(Administrative Service / NTE Cluster)
Mr. CHAK Ting Che Senior Manager / Procurement
Mr. Siu Chun Keung Senior Maintenance Surveyor / SS
Principal Assistant Secretary
HAB Mr. LAU Kam Chuen, Danny
(West Kowloon Cultural District)
Mr. Yau Kwan Wai Chief Highway Engineer (NT/E)
Mr. Ng Tak Wing Chief Highway Engineer (HK)
Principal Immigration Officer
Mr. Leung Kwok Hung
(Visa Control) Policy
Principal Immigration Officer
Mrs. Poon Leung Kit Ching
(Registration of Persons)
Chief System Manager
Mr. Cheng Leung Kit, Timothy
OGCIO (Industry development)
Ms. Chung Lai Ching, Terry Senior System Manager
Assistant Principal Valuer
RVD Mr. Siu Kam Wai, Wilson
WSD Mr. Chau Chi Wai, David
(Mechanical and Electrical)
Mr. Steve Barclay Assistant Director
Mr. Lo Kin Hing, Alan Consultant
Appendix 2 - Visiting Schedule
Day 1 (19 June) – Toronto
(1) 7:30 – 9:15 Meeting with PPP private sector practitioners
(2) 9:30 – 10:30 Toronto energy distribution and cooling system
(3) 10:30 – 12:00 Toronto Better Building Partnership
(4) 13:30 – 15:30 Toronto Waterfront Revitalization
(5) 16:00 – 17:30 Highway maintenance and use of PPP
Day 2 (20 June) – Toronto
(6) 8:45 – 10:15 Guelph Recycling Program
(7) 9:00 – 10:30 Halton Water Delivery Project
(8) 11:00 – 12:30 Brampton Centre for Sports and Entertainment
(9) 14:00 – 15:30 Peel incineration facility
(10) 16:00 – 17:30 William Osler Health Centre
Day 3 (21 June) – Toronto
(11) 9:00 – 10:30 Hamilton-Wentworth Water and Wastewater Treatment
(12) 11:00 – 12:30 Hamilton Municipal Parking System
(13) 14:00 – 15:30 Drive Test
(14) Full Day Ontario Correctional Facility Modernization
(15) 9:00 – 12:00 Four Seasons Centre for Performing Arts/
(16) Toronto International Film Festival Group
(17) 14:00 – 17:00 Affordable Housing Program
Day 4 (22 June) – Toronto / Ottawa
(18) 8:30 - 10:00 Ontario Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal
(19) 8:30 - 10:00 Legal meeting with Director, Project Legal Services of
(20) 14:00 – 15:30 ByWard Market Building Revitalization
(21) 16:00 – 17:30 Royal Ottawa Health Care Group
Day 5 (23 June) – Ottawa
(22) 9:00 - 11:00 Ray Friel Recreation Complex
(23) 11:30 - 12:30 Meeting with Counsel, Legal Services of Industry Canada
(24) 14:00 – 17:00 PPP Workshop
Day 6 (26 June) – Vancouver
(25) 7:30 – 8:30 PwC experience sharing
(26) 9:00 – 10:00 Academic Ambulatory Care Centre
(27) 9:00 – 10:00 BC Online
(28) 11:15 – 13:30 Sea to Sky Highway Improvement Project
(29) 14:00 – 16:00 Britannia Mine Water Treatment Water
(30) 15:00 – 16:30 Vancouver Landfill Cogeneration Project
Day 7 (27 June) – Vancouver
(31) 8:15 – 9:45 Vancouver International Airport
(32) 8:15 – 9:45 Canada Line
(33) 11:00 – 12:30 Maple Ridge's Downtown Development
(34) 14:00 – 16:00 Abbotsford Regional Hospital and Cancer Centre
(35) 15:00 – 17:00 Downtown Commercial Law Court Project
Day 8 (28 June) – Vancouver
(36) 8:30 – 9:30 Partnership BC experience sharing
(37) 10:00 – 11:15 Canada Place Corporation
(38) Ballantyne cruise terminal
(39) 14:00 – 17:00 Royal British Columbia Museum / IMAX theatre
(40) Save On Foods Memorial Centre
Appendix 3 - More PPP projects in Canada
Water / Wastewater
Yukon waterfront projects
Saskatchewan water supply systems
Winnipeg flood protection
Thunder Bay wastewater
St.John‟s harbour cleanup
Charlottetown wastewater plant
Summerside wastewater plant
Montreal water infrastructure
Stratford wastewater plant
Halifax harbour cleanup
National satellite initiative
Nova Scotia broadband access
Newfoundland broadband access
Fiber optics cable for broadband access in Magdalen Islands
Alaska highway upgrade
Corridors for Canada
Edmonton Ring Roads
Kicking Horse Canyon
Banff national highway
Calgary ring roads
Winnipeg Kenaston underpass
Trans-Canada Highway 6
York Regional transit system
GO transit system
Toronto Transit Commission
Highways 1,2,50, 95,104,104,175,185, A-30
Tourism and Urban Development
Saskatoon river landing
Regina urban revitalization
Regina urban revitalization
Ottawa congress centre
Niagara people mover
Lower mainland border crossing
Saskatchewan Highway 39 / north portal border crossing
Niagara and Sarina regions
A-35, A-55, H-173/A73
Appendix 4 – Contact information of individual projects
Project Name Website Contact person email
Meeting with PPP private practitioners www.mcmbm.com David I. Matheson, Q.C. email@example.com
Toronto energy distribution and cooling www.enwave.com Dennis Fotinos firstname.lastname@example.org
Toronto Better Building Partnership www.torontobbp.on.ca Heinrich Feistner email@example.com
Toronto Waterfront Revitalization www.towaterfront.ca John W. Campbell firstname.lastname@example.org
Highway maintenance and use of PPP Linda Ambos, M.P.A. Linda.Ambos@mto.gov.on.ca
Guelph Recycling Program guelph.ca/wetdry Dean Wyman email@example.com
Halton Water Delivery Project www.region.halton.on.ca Joyce Savoline firstname.lastname@example.org
Brampton Centre for Sports and Entertainment www.brampton.ca Dennis Cutajar email@example.com
Peel incineration facility peelregion.ca Andrew Pollock firstname.lastname@example.org
William Oslar Health Centre williamoslerhc.on.ca Ian C. Marshall email@example.com
Hamilton-Wentworth Water and Wastewater www.hamilton.ca Jim Harnum firstname.lastname@example.org
Hamilton Municipal Parking System www.hamilton.ca/parking Paul Buckle email@example.com
Drive Test http://www.drivetest.ca/en/home Linda Ambos, M.P.A. Linda.Ambos@mto.gov.on.ca
Ontario Correctional Facility Modernization http://www.centralnorthcc.ca/ Peter Mount firstname.lastname@example.org
Four Seasons Centre for Performing Arts http://www.fourseasonscentre.ca Michael Langford email@example.com
Toronto International Film Festival Group http://www.tiffg.ca/ Michele Maheux firstname.lastname@example.org
Affordable Housing Program Dino Radocchia
Ontario Ministry of Public Infrastructure www.infrastructureontario.ca John McKendrick John.Mckendrick@InfrastructureOntari
Legal meeting with Director, Project Legal www.infrastructurecanada.ca Graham McLeod
Services of Infrastructure Canada
Byward Market Building Revitalization http://www.byward-market.com/ Philip Powell Philip.Powell@ottawa.ca
Royal Ottawa Health Care Group http://www.rohcg.on.ca Maureen G. Moore, C.G.A. email@example.com
Ray Friel Recreation Complex www.rayfriel.com Ken Marentette firstname.lastname@example.org
Meeting with Counsel, Legal Services of Walter Di Cesare Dicesare.email@example.com
PPP Workshop www.infrastructurecanada.gc.ca Gerry Maffre firstname.lastname@example.org
PwC experience sharing www.pwc.com/ca Esther M Tse email@example.com
Academic Ambulatory Care Centre http://www.partnershipsbc.ca/fil Terry MacKay firstname.lastname@example.org
BC online https://www.bconline.gov.bc.ca/ Sue Park email@example.com
Sea to Sky Highway Improvement Project www.seatoskyimprovements.ca John Cavanagh, A.Sc.T. john.Cavanagh@gov.bc.ca
Britannia Mine Water Treatment Water http://www.partnershipsbc.ca/fil Sue-Anne Fimrite, CFA firstname.lastname@example.org
Vancouver Landfill Cogeneration Project http://www.cityfarmer.org/Landf Rick Hopp email@example.com
Vancouver International Airport www.yvr.ca Tony Gugliotta firstname.lastname@example.org
Canada Line www.canadaline.ca Jane Bird email@example.com
Maple Ridge‟s Downtown Development www.mapleridge.org Rick Laferriere firstname.lastname@example.org
Abbotsford Regional Hospital and Cancer www.pcl.com Alfred Tsang email@example.com
Downtown Commercial Law Court Project Peter Monteith, MCIP firstname.lastname@example.org
Partnership BC experience sharing www.partnershipsbc.ca Larry Blain email@example.com
Canada Place Corporation www.canadaplace.ca Brian T. Yamaguchi firstname.lastname@example.org
Ballantyne cruise terminal Brian T. Yamaguchi email@example.com
Royal British Columbia Museum / IMAX www.royalbcmuseum.bc.ca Faye Zinck, CGA firstname.lastname@example.org
Save On Foods Memorial Centre http://www.saveonfoodsmemori Sierd Hortsing email@example.com