When I had a chance to question the procurement ombudsman here this week, I asked him flat out if he had found any instances of fraud, and his answer was an unequivocal no.
I asked the procurement ombudsman if there was any evidence of corruption in his review, and his answer was an unequivocal no.
Then I asked him if he found in his analysis and investigation any examples of political interference, and his response was an unequivocal no.
What he did find, as you had mentioned, was a strong perception of favouritism. He was referring to the practice of changing procurement strategies midstream. The ombudsman criticized departments for changing requirements about whether they required a task-based contract or a solution-based contract.
I wanted to ask if you can explain the differences between these two types of contracts, and then speak to that criticism of the perception of favouritism that the ombudsman had found.
Can you help us understand both of those things?