Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to take a moment to thank the committee for providing the Canadian Taxpayers Federation with the opportunity to appear before you today. I would also like to thank the committee very much for this important discussion of how competition in infrastructure contracts can save taxpayers money.
My name is Gregory Thomas. I am the federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. We are a federally incorporated not-for-profit citizens group dedicated to lower taxes, less waste, and accountable government. We represent more than 84,000 Canadians who voluntarily support us across the country.
We believe that all governments need to be responsible with taxpayers' money and transparent in the way they spend that money. When governments are accountable and responsible with the money they are investing in infrastructure, every constituent benefits. We welcome this discussion of how competition can lower the costs of infrastructure expenses. With the current government deficit and Canada's level of debt, our government needs to look at more cost-effective ways of funding the development and maintenance of infrastructure. We believe the cost of infrastructure can be reduced if more competition is injected into the system.
We don't actually believe that the federal government should fund provincial and local infrastructure, but we will argue that if the federal government is going to take that course of action, then the bidding on these projects should be transparent and open. If the bidding process is not fair and open, you get higher prices and lower quality, which hurts everyone and costs everyone more money.
There are two main concerns that we'd like to address within this issue. The first concerns waste and lower costs, and the second concerns accountability and transparency.
The issue of cost can be examined in light of current developments. If you look at the daily carnage from the Charbonneau commission in Montreal, you see that federal taxpayers were sending unaccountable money to local and provincial governments in Quebec, and Montrealers and Canadians were paying inflated prices for asphalt and concrete pipe of questionable quality. We have examples in Hamilton where a water treatment plant was delivered at a much higher cost than it otherwise would have been, and also of major collapses of infrastructure in Montreal—sinkholes, flooding—that are inexplicable.
We believe that open tendering, mandated by the federal government if there are going to be federal funds involved, is a common-sense initiative. Obviously, when 70% of the construction industry is blocked from bidding on a project, there will be fewer bidders and you will likely get higher costs. It doesn't matter whether it's non-union businesses or union businesses that the government prevents from bidding; if some of the potential competitors aren't allowed to come to the table and bring their best bids, we're all going to end up paying. Allowing competition will enable decision-makers more choice about the best company, and it's the most cost-effective and the fairest way to proceed with these projects.
Transparency and accountability is another important issue in contracting. When political cronies' companies are the only ones allowed to bid, or where we have provincial or local rules that somehow impede the ability of all Canadians to bid on all Canadian contracts, again the taxpayer pays more.
This goes to the way the Canadian government tenders its military contracts, as well as the infrastructure contracts that it funds.
To conclude, we're grateful that this discussion is taking place. We believe that government should increase competition through open tendering, and we are very optimistic and hopeful that this discussion will bring about positive change in Canada when contracts are awarded.