Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses.
I want to pick up again on the examples. Although I'm going to talk about some specific examples--and I appreciate that you may not be able to talk about the specifics of them--I want to get your reaction to how we fix the problem more generally, using the examples as an example of the problem, if that makes any sense.
Specifically, there was a promise to reform the procurement process because it was found that in many instances either the money allocated was inadequate or the process was such that you would start and stop. So there were a lot of disappointments. There was a statement that it was going to be revamped and revitalized. But we have several projects where we have major ongoing problems. In fact, two of the highest-profile major capital projects that are currently being undertaken have been wrought with a number of problems.
I'll start with the upgrade to Canada's 12 Halifax-class frigates, which is a $1.1-billion contract. Essentially, most of the bidders dropped out. One of them said that the contract was unviable in commercial terms and conditions. So that led to the exit of General Dynamics and others, leaving Lockheed Martin as the sole bidder. That puts us in a rather vulnerable position, if they're the sole bidder and they start demanding more money as the contract goes along.
I appreciate that you may not be able to comment on the specifics of that, but what are we doing to make sure we are adequately costing these projects and putting them in a place where they're competitive? We don't want people getting rich off them, but we want them to be able to make a fair profit. We want a competitive process where we're not left with one bidder that says they're willing to accept the conditions.