As a management fee.
My first reaction to that is why don't we just cut out the middle man and go directly to you, to the one delivering the service? One newspaper article we have here says that their management fee is about 14%, which is quite generous. An architect's fee for a building is about 7%. Even in the sponsorship scandal, their standard markup fee for advertising contracts was only 16%. It seems like a very generous markup.
It almost seems like SNC-Lavalin has a monopoly on this work. It seems as if Public Works has simply off-loaded the obligation for the responsibility of all these buildings to SNC-Lavalin. To me, that's not an efficient or effective use of taxpayers' dollars. I'm very concerned.
I want to thank you for bringing this to our attention, because all of us were shocked when we saw some of these figures. Maybe they're gross examples: $1,000 for the installation of a bell somewhere, and $2,000 for the purchase of two green plants. Is it your opinion--and I won't ask you to go too far out on a limb--that perhaps we're paying more than we need to for the maintenance and administration of this building stock?