Government Operations Committee on Oct. 28th, 2010

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I understand that.

Why is it that the other companies did not get the contract and an American one did?

[Alain Séguin]

Under free-trade agreements, we cannot take American companies out of the running. A process was held.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

That company ended up winning the contract.

[Alain Séguin]

It won, yes. The process was open, and someone oversaw it to—

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

That is fine.

Mr. MacNeil, you were in charge of renting the accommodations for the police village. You were in charge of the police village. When you found out that trailers were being sent in from Alberta—760 trailers left Alberta to come here—did you see whether it was possible to cut costs by bringing in the trailers from somewhere closer, such as Ontario, Quebec or some other large municipality that was closer? Did anyone call Aramark to say that the cost of doing that would be huge? Was there a phone call?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Monsieur Séguin, you have about half a minute.

[Alain Séguin]

It is not for us to tell them where to get their resources—

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

But you are footing the bill.

[Alain Séguin]

We pay, but the company put in an excellent bid. We had tried something else the summer before, and it ended up costing twice as much. We got permission from Treasury Board directly, and we went with a different bid, and the cost dropped by half. In light of that, we did not need to know where they were pulling their resources from.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Séguin and Mr. Vincent.

Mr. Holder, you have the final five minutes.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you very much to our guests.

I want to clarify the record. Earlier, my Liberal friend referenced some $1.2 billion. I want to say clearly that what we have here in terms of security costs for the 2010 G-8 and G-20 is just over $900 million. I want to clarify that for the record.

I've heard from our friends at the OPP that you want your invoices settled by December 1.

What's your timing? I need to ask this of the CBSA, please, and also of the RCMP. I want to get a sense of timing. You have your deadline of December 1 to have all of your invoices in. Then you'll put your final invoices together and present them to the government for payment.

How long will that take? I need to ask so that we have a sense of timing, so that we get the full sense of what all the costs are from a final accounting perspective.

First, the OPP.

[Janet Davis]

Thank you.

As I mentioned before, our deadline is December 1 to present our final claim to the Government of Canada. Following that, there will be an intensive audit of all eligible costs. I can't speak to the timeframe of Public Safety Canada, but under our cost contribution agreement, we have agreed to have the matter reconciled by March 31, 2011.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you very much.

Mr. St-Laurent of CBSA.

[Sylvain St-Laurent]

Given the size of the expense we have, we pretty much have all the invoices. We expect one more, probably, from CRA. This should be done within the next few weeks after that.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Upon receipt, you'll send it in forthwith to the federal government?

[Sylvain St-Laurent]

Yes.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

The RCMP, please.

[Alain Séguin]

That's a difficult question, given the volume. We'll have most of our expenditures in over the next few months. That's about as much as I can confirm. We have a good portion of them in now. Certainly by the end of the fiscal year, we'll have all our costs in. We have to deal with MOUs with other police agencies, etc., so I figure that in the next few months we'll be in good shape.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Mr. Séguin, you see why this is important. One thing we have heard repeatedly from members opposite in the House is about having our final numbers delayed, not knowing what our costs are at this point. Respectfully, if we don't have all of our numbers from all of our participants, it's hard to know precisely what those numbers are. It's not a question whether or not the Government of Canada would pay its bills; it's obviously a function.... I respect that you need to ensure that you have all your costs in, but I'd like to point out, for the purpose of this dialogue, that until we have your final numbers in--and you are key players in all of this--it's very hard for us to say definitively what precisely those are.

I'm not here to tell you to do it forthwith; obviously you understand that as well as I do. But I'd say that's the difference here: when we get all of your numbers in.... I would also say that for the Metro Toronto Police and any other players who were involved in the security and any other aspects of this as well.

Ultimately, if I may ask, do you believe that this undertaking was, from the standpoint of security, a success? I know we all say in general terms that you did a great job, but if you deemed that it was a success, on what basis would you define that it is a success?

Perhaps we could start with you, Chief Superintendent MacNeil.

[C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil]

Yes, I definitely would say it was a success. As I've said in the past and will say again, I'm very proud of the integrated security unit and the job that was done in securing both of these summits. If you look from the outside looking in, from the standpoint of people who are involved in security around the world, they saw it as a monumental task. We saw it the same way, but we broke it down into small pieces, as I described earlier, and I think everyone was very efficient in doing their job.

We go into this with the objectives I spoke to this morning. The mandates we have are to protect the IPPs, to protect the public, and to protect the conference itself so that it can continue. Not one meeting was late and not one IPP was threatened or felt uncomfortable. When you're housing something like this in a huge city with a large population, with thousands of people who came to express their right to free speech, which we expected and which went as expected—many people came—I feel it was a definite success.

[Ray Boisvert]

Perhaps I could speak for a moment from a CSIS perspective, with a security intelligence view. We had a very much smaller role to play than did our law enforcement colleagues, but I think it's due to their great planning, their fortitude, their presence of mind on the ground, and their abilities, tactically and strategically, to deliver these very secure gains. I think the credit goes to them particularly, because in our view it was wholly successful.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Boisvert.

Thank you, Mr. Holder.

I'm going suspend for a moment while I give our witnesses a moment to leave. We have committee business to the end of the time.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Mr. Chair, is it possible to continue asking the witnesses questions? We still have some questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You want to do it now?

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Yes.