Evidence of meeting #88 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
Okay.
I would like to talk about the relationship among the departments. I am talking about the Treasury Board, National Defence and the RCMP.
How do you ensure that those three departments will follow the process, that all the information they disseminate will be transparent and that they will be held accountable?
11:35 a.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Acquisitions Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
I have to work with my counterparts from all three departments. The reason we work separately with the three departments is that they all have different workforce adjustment policies.
My counterparts are also assistant deputy ministers. We have to meet in a committee. Technical requirements are their responsibility. We prepare the contract that validates those technical requirements. I need my counterparts to give bidders clear information about the contracts or proposals. I also need them to provide information on usage, as it is very important for bidders to know about the volume.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
No. I don't want to ask any questions. I want to raise a point of order, if I may.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
11:35 a.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC
It could also be a point of privilege. I feel limited in my ability to ask questions, as we have not been able to summon the minister who is in charge of this program.
With all due respect, I must say that this is an ethical issue, since our topic of discussion has to do with a much higher level of authority. If I put questions to the officials before us, they will clearly just tell me that they cannot answer. I understand them, as I would do the same if I were them. It's too bad we cannot put our questions to the minister in charge of this issue.
Thank you.
11:40 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
I think I've heard enough, Monsieur Ravignat. I understand your point and it's not a point of order. It's a grievance, perhaps, but it's not a point of order.
Next we are going to Mr. Andrew Saxton.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Thank you, Chair, and thanks to our witnesses for being here today.
Here's my first question. The Auditor General, in her report, found that the steps with regard to the tendering process were not sufficient to offset an unfair advantage to the incumbent bidder, and that the process needed to ensure that all bidders in the tendering process had access to correct and complete information.
Can you please tell us what your department has done to ensure that the 2009 contract addressed these issues and concerns raised by the Auditor General?
11:40 a.m.
Director General, Services and Specialized Acquisitions Management Sector, Acquisition Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
In fact, one of the points that was mentioned was the accuracy of the information provided in the 2004 process.
In 2009, as we said, we put in place a certification process at the assistant deputy minister level in all the departments. But in fact in 2009 this was not something that we included in the process, so the property management that was in question in the AG report was not part of the evaluation process for 2009. With the revised data, it was felt that it was insignificant in terms of impact on the evaluation, so it was not included in the 2009 process.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
In 2007, the government responded to the public accounts committee's report on chapter 5 entitled “Relocating Members of the Canadian Forces, RCMP, and Federal Public Service” from the November 2006 report of the Auditor General. In the public accounts committee's report, it recommended that the departments involved in the contract develop a detailed action plan for the implementation of each of the recommendations that applied to them.
Did Public Works and Government Services Canada do this, and is it available?
11:40 a.m.
Senior Director, Professional Services Procurement Directorate, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Public Works did do this, and actually it was the subject also of a letter in June 2009, if I'm correct, written by the deputy minister at the time, Mr. François Guimont, to the chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Thank you very much.
Did you find that monitoring the performance of the IRP in the development of the next RFP, as recommended by the public accounts committee, dramatically changed the contract?
11:40 a.m.
Senior Director, Professional Services Procurement Directorate, Department of Public Works and Government Services
There have been a number of changes. I think the largest one has been to move to a statement of requirements as opposed to a statement of work, which is basically defining the outcome the government is seeking as opposed to defining exactly how the work is done.
That has two benefits. The first one is that we allow the industry to find different ways of providing the work. It allows an organization that has a different way of performing the services to still meet our requirement without changing their business practices, and typically, in a request for proposal process, this would result in greater value for taxpayers.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Thank you.
In 2008, Public Works posted an RFP to seek input from relocation service providers on best practices for the IRP.
First of all, was this a recommendation issued by the Auditor General or the public accounts committee, and can you tell us what significant industry feedback was received?
11:40 a.m.
Senior Director, Professional Services Procurement Directorate, Department of Public Works and Government Services
It actually was not a recommendation from either the AG or the standing committee. However, it's a result of best practices that we do have with regard to industry engagement.
We have received significant feedback that has been analyzed by both our fairness monitor, who was attending the meetings, and, towards the tail end, the independent expert advisors as well.
There was a recommendation around, for example, the number of moves that any prospective bidder must have as experience, and there was a recommendation actually to lower it, which the government accepted and implemented in the RFP.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Can you say, therefore, that all relocation service providers were aware then of the possible selection criteria for the new relocation program contract?
11:45 a.m.
Senior Director, Professional Services Procurement Directorate, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Yes. The information was published a year in advance, or around that.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
NDP
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Thank you, and welcome to you all.
Have you established a timeline for the next contract?
11:45 a.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Acquisitions Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Not per se, because we have several engagements to carry through. As the engagement informs us, we either may have to go back to industry or we may be able to move to the next step. My estimate would be about 18 months to get us to a bid closing, and then we'll be able to move to the process for contract award after that.