Government Operations Committee on Nov. 26th, 2009

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

But who needs it? If only two departments, HRSD and Immigration, need it, and it sounds like that only involves a few of those 124 networks, why has this become such a huge process that may or may not--it sounds like it may not--end up being used for the majority of those 124 networks?

[John Rath-Wilson]

We anticipate that with the provision of a contract, which we've been talking about in terms of GENS, with the value added that it can provide to departments, other departments will want to use this vehicle. It's something that we've done in the past, for example, with our wireless service, where we put in place a vehicle for one or two departments--which provided such benefits that in the end all departments used that particular vehicle.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Isn't it a bit backwards to build this whole thing on the assumption that once they see it, they'll get it and they'll buy in, as opposed to having their involvement and their expression of interest in building it in the first place? I'm very worried that all this effort and this huge amount of money are not necessarily going to solve what I think may have understandably been a bit of a problem. It seems backwards.

[John Rath-Wilson]

In responding to the question, Madam Chair, I would indicate that--again I repeat--we spent about $1.2 million in this process to put in place the SOIQ for the GENS initiative. It has been targeted to the Department of HRSDC and CIC, with Public Works as a possible backup to it, although it's not something that we can do immediately at Public Works.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

So we're not even sure that Public Works would take advantage of it?

[John Rath-Wilson]

Public Works would if it was in place, but it's not something we need to go to immediately. The other two departments are at the end of life for their current contracts. We need to renew the contracts available to them, and GENS is seen as the next generation for those networks. We see it as almost a pathfinder where we can establish the contract for the anticipated volume that those departments will be able to generate, and then based on the resulting costs and performance, we'll be able to use that as a basis for providing service to other departments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

A very brief question.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

We've spent so much time in this committee. Before I even got here time was being spent by a lot of people in worrying about whether SMEs were going to be given opportunities to participate in this business. It seems as though we've missed a significant piece here, and that's the business itself.

It's not really a question. I'm still just expressing a bit of frustration that an entire process seems to have developed without actually asking the customers you're purporting to solve a problem for. So I leave more questions to my colleagues, but I've been left with a bit of a question mark in my own mind.

[John Rath-Wilson]

I don't hear a question in that particular remark; however, I'd be happy to comment--

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

No, no, I know my colleague has more questions.

[John Rath-Wilson]

I would like to reinforce the fact that we have in fact consulted broadly with the IT community within government on this particular initiative, and we have specific players interested in it initially, and others who would like to partake of it later on.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Warkentin, you're the last questioner.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the opportunity.

I just want to follow up, actually, on the comments of my colleague across the way. When she uses the word “shocked” to describe the fact that there are three departments looking at utilizing GENS, that has always been the testimony that we've heard before our committee. I think all through the reports, the questions have been asked. I know that the honourable member joined us late in terms of the consideration of GENS, but it's always been my understanding that there were HRSDC and Immigration specifically who were looking because they're at the end of their current contracts and there has to be something to replace that. There has to be a standing order that would allow them to move forward.

I'm in the process of moving right now, so I'm looking for my cable to be renewed, and all these things that need to be renewed. I go to the different websites of the different companies that offer these services, and they have the bundled contract. If you go to the bundled contract, of course, you can often find that things are less expensive. Oftentimes it means a single cable coming to the new property rather than multiple folks showing up and connecting at different times. I can see the benefit in our own local households, I can see it for the average person, and that's what we see in this GENS initiative.

Just to get clarification, there are 124 networks the government manages right now. I don't think there's any intent from the department to limit that to a single network. You've commented again and again that this is optional, that it may or may not happen, but that if we can limit that number of networks from 124 to somewhere less than that, I think that's where we're going.

I guess we have HRSDC, Immigration, and possibly Public Works. Do you have the number in terms of the combination of the three different departments as to the current number of networks that those three departments utilize?

[John Rath-Wilson]

That would be a technical detail, and I'd perhaps like to get back to you in writing. I do know that it's certainly more than three, because they have different.... It's not the network itself, Madam Chair, but more the number of contracts that are in place and necessary to support those networks. When you have multiple players in a building trying to figure out how to troubleshoot or solve a problem, it adds complexity to the environment.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

As the requirement comes up for departments to renew different contracts, they'll be looking at GENS as an option. Obviously it's important that only three departments are considering it at this time. We know that in any IT initiative, if you're going to have the entire government doing something that relates to IT, I can just imagine that it would be an impossibility. Let's be frank. Let's be honest. Three departments is already a large task.

What other departments are coming up for renewal of their contracts in the next number of years? Would the majority of departments be in that position? Do you know what the renewal process looks like?

[John Rath-Wilson]

A number of vehicles are in place already and are obviously being used. Each of them has a specific lifetime. As we've seen with this particular initiative, it has taken us four years to get to this stage, so we begin to plan early for these things. There are certainly more than four vehicles that we have in place to provide networking technology in the government today, and the first of those are coming due in the next year to 18 months. We can anticipate that most of our vehicles will be expiring over the next five years, and therefore most of the vehicles for government networks will need to be renewed.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

So there's a clear necessity for vehicles to be renewed, and GENS is part of the process.

We appreciate your work thus far. We know you've taken on a huge initiative and we see the necessity for rationalization and modernization. This committee wishes you the best of luck, because we know that any of these big IT projects can be complicated. When you're dealing with high tech and IT, there's always a possibility of problems. We appreciate your testimony and we wish you luck.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I'd like to thank you for being here. I know that what we were trying to study confuses a lot of people, and what we were really trying to study was how SMEs can participate in large IT projects. Looking at the Auditor General's report, the AG demands that IT projects have business cases before they start, so you have a list of deliverables that we would like from you.

Do you have any closing remarks? Madam Charette, you asked me to ask you a question on the secure channel, a question that you wanted to respond to. If you wish, you can do that.

[Corinne Charette]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I will address your question as to how and when SMEs can be used by government departments and agencies in the project process. First of all, they can be used to assist departments in analysis prior to any project or prior to any solicitation or procurement process under way. Government departments exercise the standing offers and the vehicles available to them to do that quite regularly. When a department comes forward to the board with a project, the department generally has its business case and the proposed way forward, but if it's coming to the board with a project of an application nature, then it hasn't yet necessarily picked the solution. It may be going out for the selection of a COTS product, and at that point it could structure the project and the request to include SMEs.

In other cases, if they are renewing an application that's already existent and they have come forward to the board for project authority for renewal, once they have the authority to proceed on that renewal, again, they can go back and exercise the procurement vehicles available to them and use SMEs. There are many good ones, and according to the Public Works figures that I've been told, I believe we use SMEs quite extensively.

There's no specific guidance. I think all departments are very careful to find the best value for money in whatever services they contract for. Often that can be SMEs, because sometimes they are smaller and more nimble than very large organizations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Mr. Rath-Wilson, do you have any closing remarks?

[John Rath-Wilson]

Yes. I'd just like to say that the GENS initiative is really an attempt for us, as we've mentioned in the past, to renew our contracting vehicles and to do it in the most cost-effective way for departments and citizens. I might add that we have also been somewhat puzzled by the committee's depth of interest in this process. We're very happy to provide the information that you've requested of us, and we will be pleased to provide any other information that you require.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you very much.

We will now call on the other witnesses for estimates purposes.

We'll suspend for 30 seconds while we transfer over.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Committee members, we're continuing with our review of the estimates. From Public Works and Government Services Canada, we have before us Mr. John McBain, Mr. Alex Lakroni, and Madame Renée Jolicoeur.

Welcome. We're going to do something we've really not done before, which is to study the estimates and ask questions. This is going to be a really fun exercise.

Do you have any opening remarks, or are you just going to take us through the figures?

[Alex Lakroni, Acting Chief Financial Officer, Department of Public Works and Government Services]

They are very short opening remarks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Fair enough. Thank you.