Mr. Chair, Madam, let me go back to your examples. You correctly mentioned that, for free-standing and office furniture, we once had 40 suppliers and the number has dropped. This is the reason. After analyzing the needs of the federal government, and having listened to representations from the private sector and the clients, we worked with industry to come up with an approach. The problem that we had previously was that any company seeking a tender, a deal with the government, could have access to that tender. As a result, we could receive 40 or 50 of them. It is not just furniture. It cost the bidders effort and money, and there was no need. Following that analysis, we proceeded to develop procurement methods with specific needs and specific analysis.
In the case we are discussing, with the 40 furniture suppliers, we did not limit the number of tenders, we limited the number of products. Ten companies qualified, five regular ones and five Aboriginal ones. When we made the [Note to Editor: inaudible] just beforehand, before the new approach, 20 companies qualified. After the competitive process, 18 companies qualified. So we did not limit the numbers as part of the procurement process, we evaluated them against required criteria.