I do agree that when 70% of the contracts awarded were done so in a non-competitive way it raises concern. Competition should be the default. Competition ensures that you hopefully get a better price for taxpayers. That doesn't always mean that it is the lowest bidder. There could be business reasons for why you might choose a different bidder, but again, I would expect that kind of a judgment call is well supported and documented.
I think, often, that's what we're missing here. The rules aren't being followed, and then there is no demonstration for what business decision drove that. I would really like to see everyone across the federal government have more rigour in their procurement processes. This isn't a big burden that we're asking. It is about just being transparent and being able to answer to Canadians 10 or 12 years down the line why a decision was made. It starts with understanding the rules, and then documenting all of the judgment calls that are made along the way.