I don't know where the translation was at, so I'll just go back to where I was.
Finally, we would also suggest following the recommendation from the recently released report of the R and D review panel, namely, to consider not just a push approach to the project, where the firms go to the government with an idea and they determine whether it can be used, but also a pull approach, whereby government expresses a need and a desired outcome without getting too descriptive and allows firms to provide their suggested solutions without restrictions.
Our interests in federal procurement go well beyond OSME and CICP, and there's still work that needs to be done to make federal procurement more accessible to smaller firms. We hear repeatedly from small companies that government focuses only on lowest cost, which can be more difficult for smaller firms, given their smaller economies of scale. In the private sector, many have been able to compete effectively with their larger counterparts, not so much because of price but more because of other factors, such as quality of service, reliability, and reputation.
Some emphasis on the value of the product or service would be welcome. Government may pay more up front, but in the long run they may pay less as the value of the product or service increases and becomes more reliable.
We believe that the whole process of procurement must be rethought, and we are hopeful that the business lens approach cited by the red tape reduction commission and mentioned in the last budget will be applied to federal procurement so that the realities of small businesses are better reflected in the overall process. This would include allowing more flexibility within bids, reviewing larger contracts and splitting them into smaller contracts if it makes sense, and addressing issues raised during the red tape review .
Government needs to do a better job of paying small businesses on time. Our survey found that 80% of SMEs waited more than 30 days for payment, and most did not receive any interest for those late payments.
Finally, improving communications with SMEs is also critical. The OSME and the buy and sell website are steps in that direction, but more needs to be done, as neither is that well known to small firms.
A key finding of our research was the inability of small firms to contact the end-user. While we understand why there needs to be some distance between them, there has to be a better approach if an SME is not getting a technical question answered properly by the assigned procurement officer.
There continue to be sector-specific issues in procurement that are threatening the livelihood of small firms. Recently, there have been some significant concerns among those in the temporary health services and translation services. There needs to be a better way for those sectors to address these issues directly with Public Works.
We also believe that more data is needed to better understand procurement activities. It seems there is quite a bit of a data already, but it's not always well used or understood.
This year small firms continue to face challenges in trying to do business with the federal government. The same issues that have been raised for years for the most part remain. The launch of the buy and sell website was a positive development, but small firms continue to find it difficult to manoeuvre through the process. Others have actually given up trying, while still others that have traditionally sold to government have found that the rules are changing and it's having dire consequences on their businesses.
We recognize that these are issues beyond the scope of the current study. But they remain issues in the view of Canada's small firms. We hope your committee will continue to question and study these issues.
Thank you.