Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
News

Failing grade for public–private partnership hospitals

Erika Gilbert
CMAJ February 17, 2009 180 (4) 380; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.090065
Erika Gilbert
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Ontario could have saved hundreds of millions of dollars if the Brampton Civic Hospital had been built and operated publicly rather than under a public–private partnership (P3), Ontario Auditor General Jim McCarter says.

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Ontario Auditor General Jim McCarter Image by: Ashley and Crippen Photography

The government could have saved almost $100 million on the cost of design, construction and provision of nonclinical services if it had followed traditional procurement methods. Because the government can obtain lower interest rates, another $200 million in savings could have accrued had the government, rather than industry, borrowed money for the project, McCarter wrote in his 2008 annual report (www.auditor.on.ca/en/reports_en/en08/303en08.pdf).

The Brampton Civic Hospital was the first built in Ontario using the P3 funding model, under which the government pays a private consortium to design, build and finance a hospital, and in some cases to provide nonclinical services such as laundry, food and security (CMAJ 2008;179[9]:883-5). Ontario has planned or started construction on more than 30 such health-related P3 projects, which have drawn considerable criticism (CMAJ 2008;179[10]:991-4).

McCarter's report, the most thorough review to date of a P3 hospital done by an auditor general, supports some of the criticism, saying that costs and benefits weren't adequately assessed.

The “value for money” assessment was overestimated by $634 million, while the cost of construction using the P3 model nearly doubled. The value of “risk transfer,” the estimate of what it will cost the consortium to deliver the project on time, was also overestimated by a wide margin, according to McCarter. Proponents of P3s say risk transfer is one of the major benefits of this funding model.

P3 opponents, such as Natalie Mehra, director of the Ontario Health Coalition, say they've been vindicated by the findings. Paul Moist, Canadian Union of Public Employees national president, adds that the report “confirms our worst expectations that this was a boondoggle.”

The government agency responsible for overseeing P3 projects says all problems have since been solved, while recommendations for improving transparency, accountability and value-for-money assessments have been adopted.

Infrastructure Ontario Manager of Corporate Relations Doug DeRabbie also says summaries of value-for-money assessments are available on the crown corporation's website, although full reports aren't posted because they contain sensitive material (www.infrastructureontario.ca/en/projects/index.asp).

But these summaries, which are short and have some information blacked out, indicate only a lack of openness and transparency, says Mehra, who says its disingenuous to claim that value-for-money assessments are publicly available. “All they do is compare the bottom lines. That is not a value-for-money audit.”

The Ontario Health Coalition is calling for a moratorium on P3s, pending a public review. The British Columbia chapter of the Canadian Union of Public Employees has renewed calls for the province's auditor general to closer scrutinize P3 projects. “We think it's an equally bad story,” Moist says.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 180 (4)
CMAJ
Vol. 180, Issue 4
17 Feb 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Failing grade for public–private partnership hospitals
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Failing grade for public–private partnership hospitals
Erika Gilbert
CMAJ Feb 2009, 180 (4) 380; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.090065

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Failing grade for public–private partnership hospitals
Erika Gilbert
CMAJ Feb 2009, 180 (4) 380; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.090065
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Saying goodbye to CMAJ News
  • How Canadian hospitals are decreasing carbon emissions
  • National survey highlights worsening primary care access
Show more News

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Health economics
    • Health policy

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

CMA Civility, Accessibility, Privacy

 

Powered by HighWire