Depending on the deal I certainly would. Clearly the governments in charge are having trouble finding the money so why not look at private funding.
This is the hard truth for a lot of projects pending. Do I like it? Feelings don't matter. It's the present reality and going to be a point of contention if we get things built or not.
Many countries have already accepted this, and have a lot more modern and efficient infrastructure as a result. Oz, UK, many EU nations, Eastern Asia...the list goes on.
The question isn't if we have to start accepting more Private Enterprise, the question is how, and how to 'get in front of it' to get the best situation for the public.
How many people actually own their homes? Bit of a trick question, Brits will say (and quite honestly) "The bank does". Canadians will answer "I do". What is common to both is that they're using private capital to gain a 'good'. And there's a massive amount of capital available to do that with.
In the absence of public monies being available to develop the Port Lands, it stands to reason that if the desire is to develop it (and I have some caveats to that, but that's beside the point) and Private Investment wants to do it, then the best way to satisfy all is to look for solutions with what's presented.
I do think the way Sidewalk has approached this is beyond clumsy. But I also think the way WT has couched the situation is also awkward.
We now have the Infrastructure Bank in Canada, attuned for situations exactly like this. It will allow maximum benefit for all and if done under the umbrella of a federal agency such that the light of day shines in far more, then the legitimate fears of many about Sidewalk's present proposal are better addressed. Sidewalk doesn't have a good record of handling this well. Secrecy and stealth have been their modus operandi. Here's an opportunity to take a step back, everyone take a step back, and examine a better way to do this.
I honestly think from what we know so far that Sidewalk should approach this more along the lines of the way any large developer would, and be open to the standard (albeit somewhat wanting also) process of application.
Addendum: On transit, Sidewalk could score a massive goal "For the People" by scooping the responsibility, let alone the capital investment needed, for building transit not just in the Port Lands, but for all of Ontario by
pioneering the use of the Can Infrastructure Bank to build needed transit infrastructure (one of the prime raisin d'etres for the Bank) by being, at least initially, the prime investor in a scheme to build it for the Port Lands. Other investors will follow! And Sidewalk would be a
champion in public eyes, not a shadowy figure. The Feds would be very favourable to invest also, it would 'seed' the Bank's purpose, as well as also showing the flag to the public, and if possible, the Bank could apply for a 'federal charter' for the project. It's "For the general advantage of Canada" and thus eligible under various Acts (Transportation, Railway, etc) and Section 92 of the Constitution.
Ontario would also be welcome to participate...but that's a whole other discussion at this point in time. The point is that Sidewalk have some excellent cards to play. The ones they've laid down already won't win. They have the ones that will still in their hands. They might need better counsel in how to play them.
The advantage of being "federally chartered" means that the Province has no claim or authority to impose jurisdiction on the consortium/corporation. Amongst other things, this would greatly help attracting capital to a project, especially a transit one. QP at this time is very unpredictable (I'm being diplomatic) and investors need stability.
See:
https://www.iisd.org/sites/default/...astructure-banks-solutions-best-practices.pdf
