Evidence of meeting #105 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was businesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Erin Weir NDP Regina—Lewvan, SK
Am I correct in remembering that Canada covered our subnational governments under the GPA as part of a bilateral deal with the United States?
Director, Procurement, Trade and Environment, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
We did include our provinces and territories in a bilateral agreement with the United States. That dates back to 2012, I believe.
Director, Procurement, Trade and Environment, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Yes, as part of that, we also included provinces and territories under the revised GPA that entered into force in 2014.
NDP
Erin Weir NDP Regina—Lewvan, SK
Might it have been a mistake to include our subnational governments under the GPA when it seems that the United States didn't do so, or did so in way that they are still able to pursue Buy American policies?
Director, Procurement, Trade and Environment, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Well, I won't weigh in on whether it was a mistake or not, but in the United States we got access to those 37 states.
Director, Procurement, Trade and Environment, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
No, we have access to them today, and that's very important access, given the number of measures that are being introduced at the state level in the United States currently.
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I would only add one thing. The GPA covers 47 countries, right? It's not just the United States; there are a number of others. It's an overall balance of concessions, so we got some access in the U.S., as mentioned by my colleague Pierre, but we also got access to a number of other countries.
NDP
Erin Weir NDP Regina—Lewvan, SK
Because of its “most favoured nation” status, does the United States effectively have access to all the commitments that Canada made under CETA?
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
There's no MFN on government procurement in FTAs in that sense.
NDP
Erin Weir NDP Regina—Lewvan, SK
Okay, so when you make the point that Canada couldn't have a “buy Canadian” policy at the subnational level because of CETA, are you saying Canada could have procurement preferences as long as it included European suppliers in them?
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
That's right, so it wouldn't be “buy Canadian”; it would be “buy Canadian and European”. You could also have “buy Canadian” as long as it's not covered procurements, so again it would be in areas not covered or under thresholds.
NDP
Erin Weir NDP Regina—Lewvan, SK
To the extent that it would be allowed, are you saying that our federal government could do what the U.S. federal government does, which is essentially attach those “buy Canadian” or “buy Canadian plus European” conditions to transfers to provincial and local governments?
Member, Canadian International Trade Tribunal
Read the annex on regional development.
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Regional economic development is a little different. Does the trade agreement prevent it? The easy answer is it won't prevent it as long as it's not covered procurement. Other than that, it really.... I would have to ask my colleagues to answer.
Director, Procurement, Trade and Environment, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Yes, and as Matthew pointed out, we included our provinces and territories in the GPA, so we're bound. The U.S. is a party to the GPA—as are 46 other countries—so we would have to respect those obligations.
You're talking about conditions associated with transfers of federal funding to provinces or territories. The GPA puts some limits around what is allowable, but it also includes several exceptions that would allow us to have such policies in place for certain types of procurement, certain types of goods, if those federal departments had any inclination to do so, which is outside the scope of Global Affairs.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Thank you very much.
Before we go to our final seven-minute intervention with M. Drouin, just so I don't forget to tell our witnesses, should any of you after your appearance here today have any additional information you think would be of benefit to our committee, I would suggest that you please send that information in to our clerk. Subsequent to that, should any committee members have additional questions they would like to ask of you, I would expect that you would welcome their questions and respond in a timely manner to our clerk to those questions.
Go ahead, Mr. Drouin, for seven minutes, please.
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Thank you.
I want to touch on some of the barriers for SMEs that I've heard about over my short life as an MP and how we ensure the promotion of the procurement strategy for aboriginal businesses.
I know it's an INAC thing, but does PSPC work with INAC to ensure that other suppliers are aware of this particular partnership with aboriginal businesses?
I want to touch on the IT side. In PSPC—it's SSC now—corporate references was one of the barriers we mentioned. We know that in the past few years aboriginal businesses have been on the rise, especially on the IT side. We find limits in terms of experience in some of the RFPs, which state that you have to have a minimum of 10 or 15 years of experience. That puts a limit on young businesses, on millennials such as me. I'm just wondering how we mash this all up together. Is an analysis done with PSPC, and how do we promote PSAB, the procurement strategy for aboriginal business, better with other suppliers?
Executive Director, Strategic Policy Development and Integration, Department of Public Works and Government Services
It's a loaded question. The questions are very good.
First of all, yes, of course Public Services Procurement Canada does work with Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada. We do work closely on a number of fronts, not to mention the outreach efforts that we have, not only regionally through our OSME offices, the office of the Office of Small and Medium Enterprises, but also through our counterparts over at INAC, who do outreach efforts into the aboriginal communities themselves. Part of that is ensuring that government procurement is part of those outreach efforts, that they understand what government procurement opportunities there are, how PSAB could apply, and so forth.
We do have to be a little bit careful, though, in some of those outreach efforts, because we also have comprehensive land claim agreements in place in respect of certain geographic locations. I believe there are 20-something land claim agreements in place, so we do have to make sure our interactions are measured, but of course we do conduct those outreach activities.
Could we do more? I think we could always do more in terms of trying to make sure that we understand government business and how it works, and to promote indigenous businesses. We're working with INAC to develop a plan on how to move forward in that regard.
In terms of the reference levels that you've stated, it comes down to your technical specifications for qualifying suppliers and ensuring that those suppliers are eligible to perform the work you're asking of them. The more complex the work, the more risk there is to the work. It's an interaction between PSPC as the contracting authority, the common service provider, and the client department to identify what those procurement requirements truly are and what that client department needs in terms of eligibility for a qualified supplier. Yes, inherent within that there could be possible barriers to SMEs, so part of our effort is to look at reducing those barriers and at how we can reduce them as part of our procurement modernization efforts.
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
At the last meeting—and you weren't here, obviously—we talked about more of a outcome-based procurement model and the procurement process that you've explained to Mr. Peterson before this. How would an outcome-based procurement—and it's probably too early to ask you this question—change the procurement process? How would identifying the need rather than identifying technical requirements change the mindset in terms of that client department to move toward an outcome-based procurement?
Executive Director, Strategic Policy Development and Integration, Department of Public Works and Government Services
I think the use of outcome-based procurement, agile procurement methodologies, and so on and so forth, is fairly new to federal government procurement. It's not new necessarily to the marketplace, but fairly new in terms of how we can go about incorporating it as part of our day-to-day business. Our effort is ensuring that we understand, first of all, what it means, and second, how it can be deployed in our day-to-day business and how we work with our client departments so that they understand that you're not looking for a pencil to that nth-degree size, with that lead in it: you're looking for something that writes, and you're looking for something that writes and doesn't leave ink, as an example. Then ensure that those are reflected within the procurement requirements and technical requirements such that bidders can have a fuller landscape in order to bid and tender against those processes.
It is a culture change. It is something that we are going to have to institute across PSPC and across our client departments, and we are going to have to educate both ourselves and our client departments on how to move forward in that regard.
We're moving forward with pilots as baby steps and we're trying to see where those pilots lead us and how we can more fully employ that in our day-to-day activities.
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
For my friends at CITT, have you guys done an analysis in other jurisdictions where outcome-based procurements may be used? It's not clear in my mind. When you have technical requirements, it's easy to argue in a tribunal in some respects, but....
Senior Counsel, Secretariat to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada, Canadian International Trade Tribunal
That's not something we study. We're very aware of the needs of small and medium-sized businesses. This goes beyond your question a little bit, but we recognize that the whole system is there for the Government of Canada to get the best value for its money for taxpayers, and that small and medium-sized enterprises play a very important role in maintaining the integrity of the competitive procurement system. We try to make sure that it's as easy as possible for SMEs to come before us. We have a form on our website. We have a three-minute webinar on how to bring a complaint to the tribunal.
I used to be the secretary of the tribunals, and my colleague now, who is the registrar, will take calls on a daily basis from companies asking how to access the tribunal. “I have a complaint. This is how I feel aggrieved. I want to access the tribunal.” My colleague will walk these people through the complaint process and offer assistance in that area. The process is then very quick. It's a 90-day process for us, up to 135 days if it's a little bit more lengthy, but there is even a provision for these complaints to be heard in 45 days. We offer, we think, a remarkable and unparalleled access to justice. We know of no other counterpart elsewhere in the world or in Canada, so we're very proud of that.