Government Operations Committee on April 10th, 2008

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a number of concerns. I raised this to the minister, but I didn't want to get into it too much because it's estimates. It wouldn't have been appropriate for me to get into procurement concerns, really, when we're dealing with estimates.

I will be seeking in the not-so-distant future to have the committee look at procurement generally, because a number of different concerns have been raised in this case and elsewhere. There have been some concerns raised as to whether or not the Auditor General will actually proceed with an investigation. That's obviously up to the Auditor General.

I do have some concerns with respect to this particular item, so I don't have a problem supporting it. If the Auditor General makes a determination that she doesn't want to pursue it, that's fine, but I do think the committee's going to have to come back to the issue of procurement more broadly.

I'm sure other committee members have heard this. Individuals have come forward who have a lot of concerns, so I think it's an area that we need to take a look at more than just to say this one-off motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

I certainly recognize the spirit of this motion. At the end of the day, it is the Auditor General's prerogative to accept or reject. I'm wondering if we as a committee should be looking at a couple of meetings--I don't think a huge study--on the general issues of procurement.

I'd asked at what threshold does the fairness monitor.... I'm hearing very differing factors, like what Mr. Casey raised this morning. I think we need a general picture of how transparent, how accountable, that we can look at to say that these are the rules applied. I would certainly ask for some witnesses, whether it's from the submarine case or from TPG, to come forward to explain their understanding of what happens in the procurement process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

You realize--I believe if he hasn't been named already, he's about to be named--there is going to be a person named as a procurement ombudsman, and that would be a good starting point. If he hasn't been named yet, he is on the verge of it. We have to review the nomination, so we'll start with that. He will be the ombudsman on procurement, and that should be fairly shortly.

Mr. Angus, yes.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I think that would be an excellent step forward. What I would suggest is that we have a couple of meetings. I would like to invite the procurement ombudsman. There are issues that have to be addressed. It's not our decision at the end of the day to decide in favour of CGI or TPG or the submarine contract, but I think it is incumbent upon us to hear witnesses on questions about how the procurement process is going, so we can raise those questions. We can ask at what thresholds, at what standards, at what guarantees, so that we have a sense of this, and that could be tied in to having the ombudsman appear before us.

I would prefer to have a number of those questions raised and then meet the ombudsman to say, “Listen, this is what we've been told. What are your standards? How will you approach it?” Then we actually will come out of this, after perhaps three meetings, and I think we'll all actually be a lot further ahead because of it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Madame Bourgeois, Monsieur Kramp, and then Mr. Casey.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

I've introduced this motion, which specifically questions the contract of October 31, 2007 granted to CGI, simply because it seems that this contract is for an extremely large amount. The committee has just put questions on the subject to the minister. Another business claims it was adversely affected by the manner in which the contract was awarded. I'm focusing on CGI because we have that very specific example. Madam Chair, it is quite possible that you will receive a letter from the president of TPG Technology Consulting asking you to look into what happened.

I've asked a number of questions during the hearings of this committee on the way in which Public Works awards contracts. In the past, a great many contracts have been let by contract award. The minister probably didn't know the number. At one point, we were told that, of 50 contracts, only nine had been awarded through calls for tenders or through the normal process, which means that 41 contracts were let by contract award. I find that quite peculiar.

I don't want to tell my colleagues to throw stones at anyone, but I would urge them to learn how Public Works operates with regard to the contract award process, in order to ensure that everything is done to standard. When the Auditor General examines this kind of problem, it can take a year or a year and a half before she can get back. Let's stop any bleeding immediately. At least we'll know what the contract award process is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Kramp and then Mr. Casey.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I don't think anybody at this committee has a problem with advancing scrutiny on the appropriations process. I think that's fair ball. If we need to do that by calling various witnesses to try to find a way to improve the system, then I see a great opportunity in bringing in the new ombudsman officer. I think that's great. That's under the purview of this committee. Let's go ahead and do it.

To look at this issue right now, in the midst of a court proceeding, would be to deal with an absolute specific rather than a general sense of where we need to go. Once again, the timing is wrong. It would make us look like absolute fools before the Auditor General. I'm not prepared to denigrate the intelligence, capacity, and capability of this committee in deference to this general principle of perception.

We have Mr. Holland, Mr. Angus, Mr. Moore, and we're all amenable to seeing if there is a better way to do this. Should there be scrutiny at some point for the overall process? Yes, but this motion is wrong right now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Casey and then Mr. Angus.

[Bill Casey, Independent, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

I appreciate this motion, and I've asked the Auditor General to review the submarine contract because I believe there are irregularities. I believe they misrepresented the contract.

I think this should go ahead. I will be supporting it. It's exactly the same—you could exchange the submarine contract for this contract. There was also a lawsuit with respect to an alleged conflict of interest on the part of somebody associated with DND who got the contract.

I believe you should call witnesses. If the submarine story was heard, I think you would come to the conclusion that there is something wrong with the system.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I don't want to throw us off track. I would ask my colleague to sit on the motion for now. But we should bring forward witnesses because of the ombudsman we're going to have. I think we should be looking at the submarine contract and the CGI-TPG contract. If there are other issues or questions, we need to examine the general issue of procurement. If we come out of that and find there are serious problems, then this motion is ready to go.

Mr. Casey has already moved forward with the submarine motion, and I think that is something we would want to look at. This would be a way of allowing us to maintain leadership in our own house before going outside. That's my only concern. We still have a few things to put in place here.

I'm not against my colleague's motion, but I would prefer that we hold it in abeyance until we can actually bring in some witnesses. Then we'll have a much better sense of where we need to go.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

We're not in camera.

Next speaker, Madame Bourgeois.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Madam Chair, I want us to really study the way contracts are awarded.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

You've won.

Why are we debating?

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

I want us to ensure that that's done. How can you, clerk or the people here, give me assurances that the way in which contracts are awarded will be examined and that we'll look at this particular contract? We'll probably invite the president of TPG Technology Consulting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

We can certainly examine the matter. We'll probably be able to do it in May. I believe we'll have time to do it. I think it's a good idea.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

If I withdraw my motion, will all committee members assure me that we'll begin the study on such and such a date? If not, I'll keep my motion because I don't want it to fall through. I'm willing to withdraw it, but—

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Ms. Bourgeois, we need unanimous consent for you to withdraw your motion. In response to your other question concerning the absolute guarantee that we'll study the procurement matter, I can tell you that there are no absolute guarantees in this life. As you know, we never know what will happen from one vote to the next. I can tell you that we could intend to do it. I think this is important.

Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I think the guarantee, as we've all expressed here, is that this is where we want to move forward. We could bring forward a motion with the exact dates, but I would like to get a list of witnesses and we could bring it back. If we have to vote on it, we will vote on it, but I would like to extend to my Conservative colleagues that we've said that we're interested. We will do this. We have a few things that we need to address. Certainly next month there are dates open, and right now I'm thinking possibly three days.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Is there unanimous consent to allow Madame Bourgeois to withdraw her motion?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Okay, we will vote on Madame Bourgeois' motion.

Oui, Monsieur Ménard.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I have a problem and I need your advice. I'm not sure, but my wife may have shares in CGI. If she does, the number is very small, like someone who invests money in an RRSP. I know CGI; as many people know CGI in Montreal as Ogilvie or Mr. Fortier's other company, Bombardier. I don't really know whether I should abstain. I'm replacing someone today, and I have no idea—