Evidence of meeting #9 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was office.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Pauline Rochefort Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
I expect that is my whole five minutes right there.
That was an excellent response. Thank you. I like the balanced approach in comments. I think that words are so important. Thank you for that.
Conservative
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to go back to the defence investment agency. Will your important mandate and the considerable expertise you have developed over the past seven years apply to this new organization?
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
Yes, but it will be different, because there should be no more bait-and-switch practices. We'll see if any unintended consequences materialize. If not, then great. However, this recommendation requires transparency. Otherwise, I don't think….
It's important to understand that the work doesn't end when we table our report. In two years, we'll be going back to all the departments to look at their documents and see whether they have implemented our recommendations or whether there are still problems. After the follow-up review on the recommendations, we will fill out a report card for each department. These will be included in our annual report, which will be presented to Parliament.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Looking at your report, I noted a few key points. In six of the 17 files reviewed, the resources initially proposed had not done the work set out in the contract. In addition, in 16 of the 17 files reviewed, there was no evidence that suppliers were involved in developing the requirements.
I'm thinking of taxpayers who are wondering where their money is going. How can the government show accountability, transparency and sound management of public funds?
At the outset, you mentioned that you were understaffed and underfunded. However, what you do is extremely important, and we want you to be able to do your work properly.
If we truly value transparency and accountability, what should we do?
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
I am very frustrated with our office's budget. I've been trying for four years to get more money to do the necessary procurement reviews.
As a public servant, I find it incredibly important to be a prudent, fiscally responsible steward of taxpayer dollars. I can assure you that while I've been with the organization, that has been a driving mandate. Nonetheless, I think we also understand that the expenditure of $37 billion per annum requires a significant review function. We have a number of works in the queue that cannot be pursued because we do not have the resources. I have tried and tried, using different methodologies, including writing to all members of Parliament, meeting with ministers and meeting with deputies. Everyone understands the need for the money; nonetheless, I've never been successful.
I hope my next job isn't as a fundraiser, because I can tell you I've been ineffective at raising the funds. That doesn't change the fact that our office desperately needs these additional funds to do the reviews that are absolutely essential.
The second part of your question speaks to the taxpayers' trust in the system and being able to read the outcomes of this report and be confident the Canadian government is spending taxpayer dollars effectively. Again, a balanced answer is appropriate, because the report identifies two worlds. One is where bait and switch was possible. Controls existed and they weren't fully leveraged. We should ask ourselves why they weren't fully leveraged.
Then we have the transition point. A decision was taken that we were no longer looking at the basis of evaluation to be based on resources; we're now looking at the corporate entity. That does address the problem, but it changes it. We're no longer saying that what was valuable to us before is valuable to us moving forward.
Let's not kid ourselves. We can call them solutions, but they're still being delivered by resources. There is that component of this analysis that I think also requires some contemplation.
That being said, it's important to have safeguards, such as our office being involved in the process, because our involvement is to make the system better. My involvement isn't to create a scandal. I want the system to work better for future participants in the procurement process.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Chair, I know my time is up, but I want to make sure that the interpreters heard correctly.
You've been fighting for four years for what you're talking about. Is that right?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Thanks very much.
We have Mr. Gill, please, and then Ms. Sudds.
Conservative
Harb Gill Conservative Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Thanks to the folks for being here.
I have a quick question following up on what Mr. Patzer was talking about regarding the bait and switch report in The Globe and Mail.
Have you been asked to remove sections of your reports in the past?
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
The structure of the back-and-forth with the department is actually contemplated as part of the procurement ombudsman regulations, so there is an aspect of us providing the recommendations and the reasons therefor to the department for 30 days for its comment. It's not unusual for departments to come back and make suggested revisions. I would suggest that oftentimes those revisions are made outside of the formal response of the department.
In this instance, the department chose to include it as part of its formal response, so what you see is a verbatim transcript of its response to the draft report in the organizational response section.
Your question was whether that's unusual. It's not unusual to request changes. I would say that a full redaction of sections of the report is not common. That's less common.
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
I wouldn't say it's never happened before, because that's a standard where I'm sure that if I went back to the office, I would find that it has happened before, but it's not common.
Conservative
Harb Gill Conservative Windsor West, ON
Did they provide you with any substantive evidence to support their claim that these paragraphs were speculative and outside your scope?
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
What was reflected in the report is the rationale provided for the removal.
As I've mentioned in a few answers, we believe that the information contained in the RFI that is included makes it directly relevant. That's compounded by the fact that other small and medium-sized businesses were contacting our office while the review was ongoing and indicating similar concerns. As an ombud office, we felt it particularly relevant to include it. For reasons of accountability and for reasons of transparency, we included it in the report.
Conservative
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
We have evidence to demonstrate that the potential for these unintended consequences exists.
Conservative
Harb Gill Conservative Windsor West, ON
You said that this request was made formally. By whom was it made?
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
It would come from the departmental contact. We would write to the deputy to launch the review; however, we also asked for a departmental contact to be the main spokesperson for the department throughout the process.
Conservative
Harb Gill Conservative Windsor West, ON
Is this included in the report as to the back-and-forth you had, the email chain?
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
The email chain is not. There is a formal component, a section entitled “Organizational Responses”, so the departmental response that was provided by the department is what you see reflected in the report.
Conservative
Procurement Ombud, Office of the Procurement Ombud
If there is an email chain that is in addition to the formal response, we can absolutely provide that to the committee.