The Queen Cityâ€™s water debate has boiled over since I last blogged about it. City Council decided to build a new wastewater-treatment facility as a public-private partnership (P3), but a group of concerned citizens gathered 24,000 signatures to force a referendum on whether to â€œpublicly finance, operate and maintain the new wastewater treatment plant for Regina.â€
There has been much debate about the Cityâ€™s anti-democratic tactics as well as the substance of the P3 proposal. The City Clerk overstepped Saskatchewanâ€™s Cities Act in a desperate attempt to invalidate the petition. Since Council conceded that it would hold a referendum, the City has been pouring resources into the (pro-P3) â€œNoâ€ campaign.
Both sides of the debate seem to have accepted the premise that federal funding is tied to the project being a P3. The â€œNoâ€ campaign contends that rejecting the P3 means rejecting up to $58.5 million (a quarter of project costs)Â from the P3 Canada Fund.
The â€œYesâ€ campaign has argued that public financing, operation and maintenance is a better deal even without federal support. In Thursdayâ€™s Leader-Post, the Old Man noted that the promised P3 Canada Fund grant would not even offset the profit and higher interest charges incurred by the private partner.
Interestingly, Finance Minister Jim Flahertyâ€™s recent Leader-Post commentary did not state that the P3 Canada Fund is the only federal money available. He indicated that the City chose the P3 option and then applied to P3 Canada. That begs the question of why the City couldnâ€™t decide against the P3 option and then apply to a different federal infrastructure fund.
As I point out in the current edition of Prairie Dog magazine, the 2013 federal budget unveiled a new Building Canada Fund, which does not strictly require P3s, the month after City Council chose the P3 option.
The classic Big Lebowski line, â€œNew shit has come to light!,â€ seems appropriate to a debate about sewage. So, did City Council revisit its decision in light of this new shit?
The Mayor tells Prairie Dog, â€œThat doesnâ€™t come into play until the current Building Canada Fund is finished and that doesnâ€™t happen until at least 2014. So weâ€™re looking well into the future.â€
Itâ€™s not true that we have to wait for the existing Building Canada Fund to deplete. Already-committed money will continue flowing from it for years after the new Building Canada Fund becomes available in 2014. (See the â€œExisting program fundingâ€ line in Table 3.3.1 of the federal budget.)
The 2014-15 fiscal year is only seven months away. Itâ€™s not clear that Regina would get P3 Canada money any sooner than that, since Ottawa will not write the cheque until after construction starts.
In any case, the timing of the federal contribution is not critical. Borrowed money will cover the projectâ€™s upfront costs and be repaid from utility bills over the coming decades. Whether those multi-decade loans are locked in at the Cityâ€™s AA+ interest rate or at a private partnerâ€™s higher interest rate is far more important than whether the federal cheque arrives in 2013, 2014, 2015 or even 2016, when the new plant must be operational.
P3 apologists are trying to characterize a â€œYesâ€ vote as turning away federal funding. In fact, voting â€œYesâ€ would give the City of Regina a strong democratic mandate to seek federal funding without P3 strings attached, which is entirely possible within Ottawaâ€™s existing fiscal framework.
- New child benefit impact on child poverty overblown (December 23rd, 2016)
- Canada’s National Housing Strategy Consultations (September 8th, 2016)
- Federal Income Support for Low-Income Seniors (August 29th, 2016)
- Central Agencies in Canada (August 8th, 2016)
- Ten things to know about the 2016-17 Alberta budget (May 3rd, 2016)