Dear Editor:
Thank you for the opportunity to correct numerous factual errors in Murray Mandryk’s column, “By-pass Bad Election Issue.”
Some errors are as simple as cost. Building the Bypass costs $1.2 billion, not $2B. And that’s firm. One benefit of a P3 is that builders agree to a price and it’s final - so unlike many government projects through history, it won’t go over budget.
Other statements, describing the Bypass as a “20-kilometer stretch of road,” raise more serious questions about the objectivity of his reporting. Between new highways, service roads, interchanges and repaving, the project reaches 464 single lane kms – the distance from Herbert to the Manitoba border.
He calls our P3 partner a “Paris-based conglomerate” when its lead builders are Graham, founded in Moose Jaw, and its designers are four companies out of Regina or Saskatoon.
In fact, P3s are good for business. The Swift Current Chamber of Commerce praised our P3 for Swift’s new long term care centre because it’s giving work to 28 Saskatchewan companies.
And lastly, our numbers have no $680M “risk fund” cushion. Financials were prepared by Ernst & Young. We’ve asked the builders to do more than just construct a Bypass. They must also accept most project risks (labour issues, bad weather, etc.), operate it (mowing, snow removal, lights), and maintain it in “like new” condition for 30 years. All of these make up the difference between pure construction costs ($1.2B) and the total value of the 34-year contract ($1.88B). E&Y says the P3 saves us $380M – not counting $200M from the P3 Canada Fund.
People in Yorkton know how much traffic moves on Highway 1. Jobs, savings, safety. Those are the facts and why our government will continue to support the Bypass.
Gordon Wyant, Q.C.
Minister responsible for SaskBuilds
