Within Public Works, is there a sense that moving from 26 suppliers to 10 presents a problem in assuring that the supply of these products will be available? That's the first question.
Also, is there a sense that significantly limiting the number of standing offers available to these businesses through this process is a problem, and if so, are there efforts being made to rectify that problem?
I look at what's been brought forward today, and my sense is that there seems to be a problem. We may have a problem today in that we're not going to have sufficient capacity within the businesses that have been supplied standing offers to supply the federal government in a timely manner, especially when you consider the testimony, which we all know to be true, that so much of the purchasing of the federal government happens only in the fourth quarter. That's another issue that I think many people around this table have problems with.
We're also concerned about the long-term effects of this. Essentially mini-monopolies for government procurement for certain companies are being created, and possibilities for other companies to ever be competitive in that process are being limited. It's just the nature of the business that if you're not supplying, you get out of the process of even competing for these contracts. The government then essentially creates a situation in which there are not nearly as many people who can move into this competitive process, thereby driving up the cost of procurement for the federal government.
Is that a concern for Public Works?