House of Commons Hansard #38 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was foundation.

Topics

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

March 28th, 2001 / 3:35 p.m.

Scarborough—Rouge River
Ontario

Liberal

Derek Lee Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member for New Brunswick Southwest will be pleased to know that written Questions Nos. 1 and 2 will be answered today. .[Text]

Question No. 1—

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Greg Thompson New Brunswick Southwest, NB

With regard to the selling of 40 Bell 212 Huey helicopters by the Department of National Defence through the brokerage services of Lancaster Aviation Inc.: ( a ) what was the asking price for each helicopter; ( b ) what is the list price for a Bell 212 Huey helicopter; ( c ) how many of the helicopters were successfully sold by Lancaster Aviation Inc.; ( d ) how much was each helicopter sold for; ( e ) what was the value of the cheque paid to Lancaster Aviation Inc. by the federal government for the commission on the helicopters' sale; ( f ) what was the value of the cheque the Government of Canada paid to Lancaster Aviation Inc. to cover any expenses Lancaster may have incurred while trying to find buyers for the helicopters; ( g ) when this contract was advertised in the Government Business Opportunities magazine, how many companies bid on it; and ( h ) what criteria made the Lancaster Aviation Inc., bid the best overall proposal?

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

York Centre
Ontario

Liberal

Art Eggleton Minister of National Defence

(a) No asking price was set for the helicopters. The price obtained was dictated by the prevailing market conditions at the time of sale. Interested parties were invited to submit offers for the helicopters, which is the standard practice employed by the department's marketing agent.

(b) According to the Canadian Government catalogue of Materiel, the list price at the time of acquisition, in 1971-72, for a twin Huey helicopter was $634,000 Canadian.

(c) 40

(d) The aircraft were sold in lots. Consequently no prices were assigned to individual aircraft. The helicopters and a large quantity of spare parts were sold for a total price of $19,752,352 U.S.

(e) Lancaster Aviation was paid a commission to cover its marketing services. The amount of the commission is not releasable under the Access to Information Act, section 20(1), as the disclosure of this information would compromise the competitive position of the company.

(f) Lancaster Aviation was compensated for sevices rendered through the payment of a commission. No expenses were separately chargeable under the terms of the contract.

(g) Bids were received from six of the thirty-eight companies who had responded to the Letter of Interest advertised on the Open Bidding Service and has been sent a Request for Proposal.

(h) Lancaster's proposal met the mandatory experience, resource and financial requirements and they submitted the lowest responsive bid.

Question No. 2—

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Greg Thompson New Brunswick Southwest, NB

With regard to the selling of up to ten Challenger 600-1A11 aircraft by the Department of National Defence through the brokerage services of Lancaster Aviation Inc.: ( a ) what is current market value for a Challenger 600-1A11 airplane; ( b ) how many Challengers were sold by Lancaster Aviation Inc.; ( c ) what was the selling price of each Challenger; ( d ) what was the value of the cheque paid to Lancaster Aviation Inc. by the federal government for the commission on the Challenger sale; ( e ) what was the value of the cheque the Government of Canada paid to Lancaster Aviation Inc. to cover any expenses Lancaster may have incurred while trying to find buyers for the airplanes; ( f ) when was the Challenger contract advertised in Government Business Opportunities magazine; ( g ) how many companies bid on the Challenger contract when if was advertised in Government Business Opportunities magazine; ( h ) how many points did Lancaster Aviation Inc. receive in each section of the proposal evaluation and contractor selection criteria for the Challenger contract; and ( i ) what criteria made the Lancaster Aviation Inc. bid the best overall proposal?

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

Scarborough—Rouge River
Ontario

Liberal

Derek Lee Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

I am informed by the Departments of National Defence and Public Works and Government Services as follows:

(a) According to market surveys conducted prior to the sale of the DND Challengers, the value of aircraft of this type ranged between $3 million U.S. to $8 million U.S. depending upon aircraft condition and interior configuration.

(b) Eight.

(c) The aircraft were sold as a lot. Consequently no prices were assigned to individual aircraft. The total selling price for the lot was $30 million U.S.

(d) Lancaster Aviation Inc. was paid a commission to cover its marketing services. The amount of the commission is not releasable under the Access to Information Act, section 20(1), as the disclosure of this information would compromise the competitive position of the company.

(e) Lancaster Aviation Inc. was compensated for services rendered through the payment of a commission. No expenses were separately chargeable under the terms of the contract.

(f) There is no record of this requirement having been published in Government Business Opportunities , GBO, magazine. However, the requirement was widely advertised by means of a Notice of Proposed Procurement, NPP, for a Letter of Interest which was published on the Open Bidding Service on October 30, 1996, and closed on November 20, 1996. The NPP stated that only firms which responded to the Letter of Interest would be invited to submit a proposal.

On February 19, 1997, a Request for Proposal, RFP was sent to 38 firms which had expressed an interest in the requirement. The RFP closed on April 16, 1997, and six bids were received. On June 27, 1997, a contract was awarded to Lancaster Aviation Inc.

(g) Bids were received from six of the thirty-eight companies that had responded to the Letter of Interest advertised on the Open Bidding Service and had been sent a RFP.

(h) Five out of the six bids received, including the bid from Lancaster Aviation Inc., were found to be compliant with the requirements of the RFP and were awarded full points for the technical component. The selection of Lancaster Aviation Inc. as a contractor was made on the basis of it having offered the lowest price from among these five firms. One of the six bids did not meet the requirements of the RFP and was disqualified.

(i) Lancaster's proposal met the mandatory experience, resource and financial requirements and they submitted the lowest responsive bid.

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Derek Lee Scarborough—Rouge River, ON

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

The Speaker

Is that agreed?

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Greg Thompson New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the generosity of the parliamentary secretary but my belief is, based on a conversation we had, that the questions are complete insofar as a number of them have been answered. However not all the questions on the order paper that I submitted have been answered. Does that constitute a completion of this file? In other words, I am not sure that I will be completely happy once this is tabled. Do I have a point of order?

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

The Speaker

I suggest that the hon. member read the answers when they are printed in Hansard tomorrow and see how happy he is. If he has a point of order, we will hear about it, I am sure. If he does not, I hope that will be the end.

Motions For Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

Scarborough—Rouge River
Ontario

Liberal

Derek Lee Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers be allowed to stand.

Motions For Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

The Speaker

Is that agreed?

Motions For Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The House resumed from March 23 consideration of Bill C-4, an act to establish a foundation to fund sustainable development technology, as reported (with amendment) from the committee and of the motions in Group No. 1.

Canada Foundation For Sustainable Development Technology Act
Government Orders

3:35 p.m.

The Speaker

Is the House ready for the question?