Definition

http://www.pppcouncil.ca/resources/about-ppp/definitions.html

The term "public-private partnership" carries a specific meaning in the Canadian context.
First, it relates to the provision of public services or public infrastructure. Second, it necessitates
the transfer of risk between partners. Arrangements that do not include these two concepts are
not technically "public-private partnerships" and do not fall within the scope of the work being
done by CCPPP.

The definition embraced by The Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships is as follows:

A cooperative venture between the public and private sectors, built on the expertise of each
partner, that best meets clearly defined public needs through the appropriate allocation of
resources, risks and rewards.

Public-private partnerships span a spectrum of models that progressively engage the expertise or
capital of the private sector. At one end, there is straight contracting out as an alternative to
traditionally delivered public services. At the other end, there are arrangements that are publicly
administered but within a framework that allows for private finance, design, building, operation
and possibly temporary ownership of an asset.

The term "privatization" is used in the case of full divestiture or when a specific function is
turned over to the private sector and regulatory control remains a public sector responsibility.
Unlike our American counterparts who tend to use the words "privatization" and "public-private
partnerships" interchangeably, in Canada "privatization" refers to the furthest point on the PPP
spectrum, where most or all assets are held by the private sector. This Canadian definition more
closely resembles the terminology used in countries other than the USA.

Models of Public-Private Partnership

http://www.pppcouncil.ca/resources/about-ppp/models.html

The following terms are commonly used to describe partnership agreements in Canada, although
this should not be considered a definitive or complete listing:

Finance Only: A private entity, usually a financial services company, funds a project directly or
uses various mechanisms such as a long-term lease or bond issue.
Operation & Maintenance Contract (O & M): A private operator, under contract, operates a
publicly-owned asset for a specified term. Ownership of the asset remains with the public entity.

Build-Finance: The private sector constructs an asset and finances the capital cost only during
the construction period.

Design-Build-Finance-Maintain (DBFM): The private sector designs, builds and finances an

asset and provides hard facility management (hard fm) or maintenance services under a long-
term agreement.

Design-Build-Finance-Maintain-Operate (DBFMO): The private sector designs, builds and

finances an asset, provides hard and/or soft facility management services as well as operations
under a long-term agreement.

Build-Own-Operate (BOO): The private sector finances, builds, owns and operates a facility or
service in perpetuity. The public constraints are stated in the original agreement and through on-
going regulatory authority.

Concession: A private sector concessionaire undertakes investments and operates the facility for
a fixed period of time after which the ownership reverts back to the public sector.

Other terms used in the PPP field:

RFEI: Request for Expressions of Interest

RFQ: Request for Qualifications

RFP: Request for Proposals

Scale of Public-Private Partnerships

The options available for delivery of public infrastructure range from design-build to outright
privatization, where the government transfers all responsibilities, risks and rewards for service
delivery to the private sector. Within this spectrum, public-private partnerships can be
categorized based on the extent of public and private sector involvement and the degree of risk
allocation. A simplified spectrum of public-private partnership models used in Canada follows:
Why Choose PPP?
http://www.pppcouncil.ca/resources/about-ppp/why-choose-ppp.html

In an increasingly competitive global environment, governments around the world are focusing
on new ways to finance projects, build infrastructure and deliver services. Public-private
partnerships (PPP's or P3's) are becoming a common tool to bring together the strengths of both
sectors. In addition to maximizing efficiencies and innovations of private enterprise, PPP's can
provide much needed capital to finance government programs and projects, thereby freeing
public funds for core economic and social programs.

There are several active PPP markets around the world, including Canada, Australia and the UK.
What tends to distinguish the leader countries is that PPP activity is conducted through a
comprehensive government program rather than on a one-off basis as has been the case in the
USA.

Canada has developed considerable expertise in the PPP field, both domestically and
internationally, and increasingly this is being done through coordinated provincial programs.
Canada has many high profile projects, such as the Confederation Bridge and Highway 407
Electronic Toll Route, as well as numerous other projects at the provincial level. They
demonstrate that PPP's continue to be valuable contributors to our country's economic health. For
a current list, see the Canadian PPP Project Database.
Criticism of Public-Private Partnerships

Those opposed to public-private partnerships most often cite the loss of public control that
occurs when a private sector company is involved in financing, building or delivering public
services. Public-private partnerships are often seen by organized labour as resulting in job loss,
poor quality and lack of oversight. These objections are overstated and often misrepresent fact-
based research in this field. Publications by CCPPP and others address such issues. We have
posted speeches and presentations from public and private sector leaders that have shared their
views and expertise with a variety of audiences on the subject of P3's. Along with the links on
this website, The Council has endeavoured to provide as much information as possible from a
wide range of areas to inform the debate.