Ralph Goodale

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, first, I will deal with the first part of the hon. gentleman's question. He is going to considerable lengths to leave the impression that I am not being forthcoming, that I am declining to disclose information or that I am hiding something. The record in the House for the last nine days discloses exactly the opposite.

I have indicated very clearly that where there are administrative mistakes we will find them and root them out. Where there are overpayments we will recollect and ensure the Government of Canada is reimbursed. If there is any evidence of illegal or criminal activity it will be instantly referred to the RCMP. I have said that over and over again. Any implication on the part of the hon. gentleman to the contrary leaves the misimpression that there is an effort to hide something. I know enough about being House leader that I cannot use unparliamentary language, but I would appreciate that he not do so because on my part it is flatly untrue.

Second, with respect to the advertising question, the global amount on an annual basis is in the neighbourhood of $200 million. I do not have a province by province breakdown with me tonight but I will try to obtain the information and provide it subsequently if it is available.

The hon. New Democratic member from Manitoba raised the issue of regional balance and fairness in government programs. I would indicate again my absolute commitment to that. Coming from a region of the country I am very anxious to see a balance from coast to coast to coast.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, the sections of the Financial Administration Act I referred to a moment ago are by no means passive or reactive. They impose a positive duty on public officials to make the kind of disclosure the hon. gentleman has referred to. The duty exists in the law already.

However as I have said on many occasions in the House, there will be full co-operation on my part and on the part of all my officials with any investigation that may go forward whether by another government department, the auditor general or the RCMP. The proof is that we have already made references to the RCMP as we are obliged to. We will continue to do so.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, this is my first formal opportunity for an encounter with the hon. member for St. Albert. I do not know whether that is good or bad but it will certainly be interesting. In any event, I am pleased that we are in our respective roles. I hope we will have a constructive relationship pursuing what we both want in terms of the public interest.

On the issue of disclosure, it is an operating principle and practice of my department and my officials. Complete co-operation with the auditor general is a fundamental dimension of what my department does and would do in all circumstances. The auditor general has a function to perform and it is the obligation of government departments to co-operate and collaborate with her. There are specific provisions in the law including the Financial Administration Act that require collaboration and disclosure when certain kinds of information come to the attention of officials.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, what the hon. member has described is an important concept. Part of what we contract for in terms of the various goods and services we acquire on behalf of the Government of Canada is related to upfront capital costs, and part of course is related to operating costs over time.

Earlier this evening we had a good example of the distinction when a question was asked about the federal buildings initiative. By and large, if we install energy efficient equipment in either new buildings or retrofits the upfront capital cost will be higher. However after a while it is amortized and we make savings on lower energy bills. The way we have done this through the federal buildings initiative has been so successful it is now entirely financed by the private sector which gets paid back over time on the savings that come from energy efficiency. The upfront capital cost is higher but the ongoing operating costs are sufficiently lower that we are ahead of the game and the private sector makes a profit.

I refer to this to underscore the member's point that there are two elements: initial cost and operating cost. We should be prepared to look for the best long term value because a cost is a cost whether it is initial capital or operating costs over time. Both are important from the taxpayer's point of view.

The whole issue of procurement reform is something we take seriously. I will try to make it a priority in finding better ways to achieve value for taxpayers.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, this whole subject area is a fascinating field of technological development that 10 years ago was essentially unheard of. In this day and age we are right in the thick of the so-called e-commerce, e-government phenomenon. It is revolutionizing the way in which governments around the world do business. Those governments that are the most successful and those that are prepared to lead the pack will be the ones that have a decidedly significant competitive advantage in this knowledge based, technology driven, highly skilled world in which we live. Both of the things the hon. gentleman mentioned in his question are a part of that.

For the benefit of some hon. members and perhaps anybody who may be watching this evening, the MERX system, the government electronic tendering service, advertises procurement opportunities subject to national and international trade agreements and is provided under contract by the Bank of Montreal using the service called MERX. That is where the acronym comes from.

The previously existing MERX contract was to expire at the end of May 2002 and it was extended under certain procedures. For the information of members I would note that a complaint has been received about the contract extension by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, which is a trade resolution dispute mechanism in Canada. Because that complaint has been raised and referred to the CITT, it is not possible for me to comment in detail about anything else having to do with the contract extension because the CITT will deal with it in a quasi-judicial process in due course.

On the point about the fee that was charged, the evidence was pretty compelling that at the previous level the MERX system was losing money. If we were to continue this service on this broad based electronic basis to companies all across the country, a fee increment was required to keep it viable. I appreciate that moving from $5 a month to $30 a month is a hefty increase, but even at $30 a month it is less than some newspaper subscriptions and less than the average cable bill. It is a reasonably small amount of money.

Nevertheless, because the hon. gentleman has raised it and, as he mentioned, it has been raised in a committee of the House, I will certainly make some inquiries about the reasonableness of the fee increase and whether there is any possibility of any recourse with respect to it. However, it is important for this system to pay its way so that it can be available on a broad basis across the country.

With respect to the secure channel that the hon. gentleman referred to, this is another dimension of e-government and one in which my department is playing a leading role in establishing. Once it is completed, the secure channel will serve as a fundamental component to enable highly secured, responsive and economical online access to Government of Canada information and services, services such as: registering a business online; obtaining a federal business number; paying corporate taxes online; giving a company the ability to securely view its accounts with the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency online; and status requests for immigrant applications on behalf of Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Those are some examples of the kinds of transactions that we want to be able to do online.

Because of the nature of the information involved in just those few examples I referred to or in other cases with respect to veterans' benefits or commercial transactions and so forth, I think colleagues in the House would see why security on this channel is an extremely important thing. In order for Canadians to have confidence that they can use this new technology to its maximum advantage, they need to be assured about its security, therefore we are leading the way in establishing this secure channel.

Services such as registering a change of address with the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency should be available online by the end of the summer of this year. Services such as an individual between jobs being able to apply for employment insurance benefits or for job training approvals online with HRDC, Human Resources Development Canada, should be available by the fall of this year.

Services from Veterans Affairs, such as applying for veterans' benefits online, services such as being able to competitively bid for federal government contracts online with my department, services such as the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Export and Import Controls Bureau's online system, all those services where privacy and security are key elements, are on the future agenda, which we hope to accomplish at the earliest possible date.

We have a schedule of how we intend to move forward in this regard. We want to do it right. We want to get the security right and we want to get the service right so that Canadians can deal with their government efficiently and in the absolute confidence that their information will be safe and secure. We want to make Canada the leader in the world in e-government and we are moving in that direction.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Nine days.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, I know that the hon. gentleman has a very passionate interest in this subject. I dealt with one dimension of it when I was House leader in terms of the answering of questions so I understand his interest and sincerity.

The information I have before me is that the value of the assets that would be remaining in that particular warehouse would be something less than $1 million and that they have been disposed of in the proper manner for proper value received.

I will undertake the commitment this evening, even though I have not had a chance yet to fully explore this issue, to review it with my officials. Previous questions and answers notwithstanding, I will do my very best to provide as much information as I possibly can to alleviate the concern that the member has expressed.

My understanding is that there is nothing at all untoward about these circumstances, but because of the member's persistence on the subject I will try to be as forthcoming as I can as rapidly as I can as soon as I have the details.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, there were a remarkable number of questions in a very short space. If the member could bear with me, I suspect there may be a supplementary.

The creation of cabinet committees, the staffing of cabinet committees and the chairing of cabinet committees is the prerogative of the Prime Minister. Since I have been in this role now for only nine days, I must confess I have not had an opportunity to discuss this particular matter with him or with the new Minister of National Defence. We will no doubt get to that very shortly because we understand the importance and the magnitude and the urgency of the situation.

I am at a bit of a disadvantage tonight. I really have not had an opportunity to canvass this fully with the Prime Minister or other members of cabinet.

I can tell the hon. member that a process is moving forward with respect to the procurement of the maritime helicopter. She will know that on January 29 we did post a draft pre-qualification letter and the latest specifications for the basic vehicle on the MHP website.

The deadline for industry feedback on that draft was March 15. We are now in the process of reviewing all of the comments received. We continue to dialogue with industry on this matter to ensure that when the process is formally launched, it is open, fair and transparent and not subject to challenge after the fact.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, obviously during election campaigns candidates for all political parties are trying to make the most aggressive, convincing and compelling cases that they can make on behalf of their respective political affiliation.

Whether it is during an election or otherwise, I am sure the member for Saint John has a very colourful inventory of arguments as to why her electors would want to vote for her, not the least of which is that very exciting blue Santa Claus outfit that she wears every Christmas.

Let me say that all of us in this place have a duty to rise above our partisan considerations. When we are in this Chamber, which is a remarkably privileged place in our democracy, we have a duty to act on behalf of all Canadians.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, my best information this evening is that it deals with the GST in the normal fashion. If the hon. gentleman would just bear with me on that rather technical question, I will check further to see if I can get him some better information, if not tonight, then in the next day or so. However my information is that the normal GST applies.