Expropriation Law Centre Forum
Welcome to the Expropriation Forum. This is the place for discussion of expropriation related topics.
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
If the company hired to purchase property is also expected to pay the costs of expropriation - which to me means they must pay for the lawyers, expert witnesses, etc. required to appear before the ECB - it would add to their costs for performing property acquisitions. As I would imagine it is difficult to predict how many properties would go before the ECB and how much legal and expert assistance may be required, this could amount to a significant loss of profit for the company concerned.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
I would suggest that those interested in the government's plans for transportation read the Hansard report on the Transportation Investment Act found at www.legis.gov.bc.ca. The dates are Oct. 30 and 31. They do appear to want to give the power of expropriation to the private sector but along with that they want to give the "cost" of expropriation. If this becomes law the private sector may not have the choice of leaving the power of expropriation with the gov. and will have to decide if the risk of additional costs to pay for expropriation are worth the contract. It is my understanding that the gov. does not like to let properties get to the stage of expropriation because of the high costs involved - if they find the costs too high I would imagine the private sector would too.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
If the company hired to purchase property is also expected to pay the costs of expropriation - which to me means they must pay for the lawyers, expert witnesses, etc. required to appear before the ECB - it would add to their costs for performing property acquisitions. As I would imagine it is difficult to predict how many properties would go before the ECB and how much legal and expert assistance may be required, this could amount to a significant loss of profit for the company concerned.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
The costs you describe are the extra costs associated with acquiring land by expropriation over land acquisition without power to expropriate. However those extra costs would be the same no matter which party carries out the expropriation.
Were you comparing costs to the situation in which government assumes responsibility for land acquisition and the private developer contributes nothing to that cost? If so, that involves government subsidies.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
If the company hired to purchase property is also expected to pay the costs of expropriation - which to me means they must pay for the lawyers, expert witnesses, etc. required to appear before the ECB - it would add to their costs for performing property acquisitions. As I would imagine it is difficult to predict how many properties would go before the ECB and how much legal and expert assistance may be required, this could amount to a significant loss of profit for the company concerned.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
Despite what Reid said in Hansard I believe it is very improbable the extra costs associated with expropriation will be borne by the private sector. Expropriation proceedings often extend several years after completion of construction. I suspect that contractor's may be asked to facilitate the acquisition of R/W, but the actual costs excluding labor will be borne by the authority. The powers of expropriation are very strong and I can't imagine they would be passed on to the private sector where there may be the potential for indiscriminate use.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The costs you describe are the extra costs associated with acquiring land by expropriation over land acquisition without power to expropriate. However those extra costs would be the same no matter which party carries out the expropriation.
Were you comparing costs to the situation in which government assumes responsibility for land acquisition and the private developer contributes nothing to that cost? If so, that involves government subsidies.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
If the company hired to purchase property is also expected to pay the costs of expropriation - which to me means they must pay for the lawyers, expert witnesses, etc. required to appear before the ECB - it would add to their costs for performing property acquisitions. As I would imagine it is difficult to predict how many properties would go before the ECB and how much legal and expert assistance may be required, this could amount to a significant loss of profit for the company concerned.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
Is this not what was done on the vihp - with contractors acting as negotiators for property purchase? Is this Act putting into legislation those things that were successful on the vihp project? Speaking of vihp - is there a reason that the section through Goldstream was not done?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Despite what Reid said in Hansard I believe it is very improbable the extra costs associated with expropriation will be borne by the private sector. Expropriation proceedings often extend several years after completion of construction. I suspect that contractor's may be asked to facilitate the acquisition of R/W, but the actual costs excluding labor will be borne by the authority. The powers of expropriation are very strong and I can't imagine they would be passed on to the private sector where there may be the potential for indiscriminate use.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The costs you describe are the extra costs associated with acquiring land by expropriation over land acquisition without power to expropriate. However those extra costs would be the same no matter which party carries out the expropriation.
Were you comparing costs to the situation in which government assumes responsibility for land acquisition and the private developer contributes nothing to that cost? If so, that involves government subsidies.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
If the company hired to purchase property is also expected to pay the costs of expropriation - which to me means they must pay for the lawyers, expert witnesses, etc. required to appear before the ECB - it would add to their costs for performing property acquisitions. As I would imagine it is difficult to predict how many properties would go before the ECB and how much legal and expert assistance may be required, this could amount to a significant loss of profit for the company concerned.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
I agree there is potential for indiscriminate use. However, it would not be unprecedented. Powers of expropriation are held by a number of private organizations. For example, consider B.C. Gas. This is a private company which recently completed a 300km+ gas pipeline project and used its power of expropriation extensively for R/W acquisition.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Despite what Reid said in Hansard I believe it is very improbable the extra costs associated with expropriation will be borne by the private sector. Expropriation proceedings often extend several years after completion of construction. I suspect that contractor's may be asked to facilitate the acquisition of R/W, but the actual costs excluding labor will be borne by the authority. The powers of expropriation are very strong and I can't imagine they would be passed on to the private sector where there may be the potential for indiscriminate use.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The costs you describe are the extra costs associated with acquiring land by expropriation over land acquisition without power to expropriate. However those extra costs would be the same no matter which party carries out the expropriation.
Were you comparing costs to the situation in which government assumes responsibility for land acquisition and the private developer contributes nothing to that cost? If so, that involves government subsidies.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
If the company hired to purchase property is also expected to pay the costs of expropriation - which to me means they must pay for the lawyers, expert witnesses, etc. required to appear before the ECB - it would add to their costs for performing property acquisitions. As I would imagine it is difficult to predict how many properties would go before the ECB and how much legal and expert assistance may be required, this could amount to a significant loss of profit for the company concerned.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
Why was it necessary for BC Gas to make extensive use of expropriation?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I agree there is potential for indiscriminate use. However, it would not be unprecedented. Powers of expropriation are held by a number of private organizations. For example, consider B.C. Gas. This is a private company which recently completed a 300km+ gas pipeline project and used its power of expropriation extensively for R/W acquisition.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Despite what Reid said in Hansard I believe it is very improbable the extra costs associated with expropriation will be borne by the private sector. Expropriation proceedings often extend several years after completion of construction. I suspect that contractor's may be asked to facilitate the acquisition of R/W, but the actual costs excluding labor will be borne by the authority. The powers of expropriation are very strong and I can't imagine they would be passed on to the private sector where there may be the potential for indiscriminate use.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The costs you describe are the extra costs associated with acquiring land by expropriation over land acquisition without power to expropriate. However those extra costs would be the same no matter which party carries out the expropriation.
Were you comparing costs to the situation in which government assumes responsibility for land acquisition and the private developer contributes nothing to that cost? If so, that involves government subsidies.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
If the company hired to purchase property is also expected to pay the costs of expropriation - which to me means they must pay for the lawyers, expert witnesses, etc. required to appear before the ECB - it would add to their costs for performing property acquisitions. As I would imagine it is difficult to predict how many properties would go before the ECB and how much legal and expert assistance may be required, this could amount to a significant loss of profit for the company concerned.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
I suppose if the P3 does not have exprop. powers the $$ will be greater for land costs, perhaps the governamnet will give the P3 an agency agreement with the gov to do exprops.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Why would the cost of property acquisition for a project constructed under a P3 agreement be greater than if the project was constructed directly by government?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In the Hansard Report of Oct. 30th, Judith Reid stated that the cost of expropriation under p3 agreements will be borne by the private sector. This could add a great deal to the cost of property purchases - how would or could the p3 partner(private sector) recover or plan for such costs?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, know one does know what is going on... however it will probably be up to the parties to the P3 contract, as to how it is structured. If the contractor buys the land, as an agent of the crown, they will have a larger investment and therefore would sek a return on the investment, much like the return they seek on the capital project.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Not quite sure what is going on here - but the original question is interesting - does no one have the answer?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yes, it is true - not sure what it would take to convince you but I really have no involvment whatsoever - just personal interest. If I have done anything to appear otherwise I apologize. I am not sure why you think I have a different purpose than personal knowledge but I can assure you I don't.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Yeah right.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I don't have a role - not involved in any aspect of expropriation - just an interest in it.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
U seem to have alot of questions, what is your role?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
In reference to P3s - whose money is used to purchase property - is it the governments or private sectors? Does the government maintain ownership and the private sector lease it or the other way around? Also P3 do not seem appropriate for all new construction - will the government still be doing some of these projects as they have in the past? If so,what percentage?
