Madam Chairman, I am trying to ensure that I clearly understand what the hon. gentleman is arguing. I would reserve the opportunity to come back to him on another occasion to discuss this in further and better detail.
Clearly there is an implication in that last question that somehow the contracting strategy with respect to this helicopter does not in some way respect the treasury board contracting policy with respect to best value. I believe our strategy is consistent with the contracting policy which states, and I will quote this phrase:
--the objective of government procurement contracting is to acquire goods and services and to carry out construction in a manner that enhances access, competition and fairness and results in best value or, if appropriate, the optimal balance of overall benefits to the Crown and the Canadian people. Inherent in procuring best value is the consideration of all relevant costs over the useful life of the acquisition, not solely the initial or basic contractual cost.
The best value and the lowest price are not necessarily mutually inconsistent, as I said, when we are dealing with something as complex as this transaction.
I would like to better understand exactly the point the hon. gentleman is making. Perhaps we are talking about the same thing and just using different phrases or perhaps we are on fundamentally different pages, but I clearly want to understand his point. I certainly would entertain the opportunity to carry on the dialogue with him because I treat the point seriously.
