Evidence of meeting #32 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was sauvé.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
At the time, there was an assistant deputy minister called Yvette Aloïsi, but, in the past, several other people were also in charge.
9 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
9 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Thank you for the question. As we have explained, in 2007, a different, separate branch, the Parliamentary Precinct Branch, was established, and Mr. McGrath had no connection with it.
9 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
At the time, there was a desire to give the projects on Parliament Hill the importance they deserved. The projects were tremendously important and needed special attention. Also, at the time, in 2007, we had funding approval for the next five years. That gave us the money we needed to continue to put projects in place for the next five years. So we really needed a branch to get things done.
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Mongeau, were there any links between the minister's office and the branch at that time?
9:05 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
No, there were no... The only...
9:05 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
No, I was not there at that time.
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
So you do not know. You do not personally know if there were any links.
Mr. Ring?
9:05 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Acquisitions Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
No, sir, but perhaps I could add that we have reviewed all of our files and interviewed all of the personnel who were involved, both in the parliamentary precinct branch and in the acquisitions branch, and there is neither any record nor any recollection of any phone calls, any correspondence, or any communications between the minister's office--
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
If things were done by phone, as the circumstances surround the awarding of this contract lead us to believe, I doubt if anything is written down anywhere. We will check.
You mentioned security clearance. Did you know that Mr. Sauvé's company was infiltrated by the Hell's Angels? How were checks done at the time?
9:05 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Thank you for the question.
At the time the project was awarded to LM Sauvé, there were no allegations along those lines. We did security checks on all the employees and we got no hits, as they say. Perhaps my colleague, Mr. Wright...
9:05 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Yes.
I am going to ask Mr. Wright to explain the security procedures to you more clearly.
October 26th, 2010 / 9:05 a.m.
Robert Wright Director General, Major Crown Projects, Department of Public Works and Government Services
For all the contractors, in fact all the individuals, involved in the projects on Parliament Hill, the Commons security clearance process that is used is called the site access security clearance. It involves three elements. There's a background check; there is a criminal name check conducted by the RCMP; and there is a loyalty assessment conducted by CSIS. Every employee, contractor or otherwise, who worked on the project received a security clearance.
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
9:05 a.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, gentlemen.
In September 2007, one week before the end of the qualification process—that was when Michael Fortier was Minister of Public Works, as we know—the procurement documents for the rehabilitation of the North Towers on the West Block were apparently changed.
A number of firms involved in the process state that, without that change, LM Sauvé would never have won the contract and would never have qualified.
Is it true that, without that change, LM Sauvé would never have won the contract?
9:05 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Since that question is about contracts, I am going to let Mr. Ring answer it.
9:05 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Acquisitions Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Thank you for the question.
Mr. Chairman, there were two amendments that were made just about eight days prior to the closing of the contract. I'll refer to them as they are posted on MERX, as amendments 3(a) and 3(b). Amendment 3(a) was at the request of LM Sauvé, and the request specifically was that a general contractor—keep in mind there was a general contractor and six subtrades—supply the names of two subcontractors in each subtrade. The question from LM Sauvé was, as a masonry company and as a general contractor, would they have to submit the name of a second subcontractor--in fact what would have been a competitor--on their bid in order to pre-qualify.
The second amendment was based on a request from a masonry design centre to reduce the level of experience on previous masonry contracts. The experience that you had to submit...[Technical Difficulty--Editor]
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Mr. Ring, we seem to be having some...
Okay, we'll see if we can go ahead.
9:05 a.m.
Bloc