Evidence of meeting #4 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was million.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
I won't, Mr. Speaker, burden you with offering an opinion on this--
12:50 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
--but I thank you for your candour. We'll see what happens.
12:50 p.m.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
Mr. Chairman, I would like to come back to my earlier question. Mr. Bard may be in the best position to give me the information I am seeking. Many times the purchase of computer equipment is problematic if we want to buy equipment that is not on the list recommended by the Information Technology Operations Service. I must say that sometimes, even though we may not be thinking bad thoughts, it is difficult not to conclude that one company is receiving preferential treatment, to the detriment of another.
One example would be digitizers. The only company you suggest we purchase from is Hewlett-Packard. Their price for a scanner ranges from $243 to $300. I personally bought a Cannon for $89. We are not talking about a local brand here; this is Cannon. IT technicians tend to refuse to install it for me if it is not on the list.
So this is what I am asking: if you want us to purchase equipment that is on your list—because you test these products and then make recommendations—you have to offer us a competitive price range. We can buy a good scanner with an extended warranty for less than $100. There is no reason why I should devote $300 from my budget to that. That is my first point. I referred to scanners, but the same applies to computers and all the other accessories.
Please answer that question, and if I still have time left, I will address one to Ms. Kennedy.
12:50 p.m.
Chief Information Officer, House of Commons
Thank you for your question.
There is obviously a distinction to be made between equipment purchased for your riding office, as opposed to your office on the Hill. For your riding office, as a Member of Parliament, you have all the necessary latitude, except if you make use of your MP improvement fund; in that case, you must follow House of Commons standards. In that case, if the MP has equivalent equipment that meets the standards, is cheaper and provides the same service, he can purchase it. Where we do make a major distinction is with respect to equipment used on Parliament Hill. The primary reason for that, as you know—and this is good news—is that the systems on the Hill are highly integrated, which means that there has to be a certain discipline and rigour applied to equipment that we authorize and install in MPs' offices.
The difference, for example, when you buy a recommended scanner—in other words, the only one you are authorized to purchase for your office on the Hill—is that we provide a total guarantee: you do not have to purchase any maintenance contract. We have what is called the Depot Service and we are the local provider representing the company. We give you the assurance that you will never be left to deal with equipment on your own and that we will provide cutting edge service. We understand how important the work of MPs is. My role is, first and foremost, to ensure that Members of Parliament can perform their parliamentary duties. In no case would I want them to be distracted by deficient technology, to be unable to access the network, to have a dysfunctional schedule, to be unable to go to the House, to not receive a copy of debates, and so on. Security considerations are huge at the House of Commons, because of the impact—there are cyber attacks on the scale of the entire campus—it's huge!
Having said that, we provide quality service which includes support and this flexibility. Every piece of equipment has its own characteristics, in terms of the microcomputer chip and what are called drivers. It is very difficult for us to guarantee quality service if we are dealing with 25 different companies that produce scanners, printers, computers, and so on. It's a little like a garage mechanic saying that he repairs every imaginable make of car.
12:55 p.m.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
We are not talking about 50 companies; you only have one.
12:55 p.m.
Chief Information Officer, House of Commons
Just to complete my point with respect to standing offers; in fact, why do we choose this or that piece of equipment? The fact is that the House of Commons regularly renews its standing offers, and we always choose the best price when the purchase is made. That is pretty much the approach.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Mr. Cuzner, if you have a really quick yes-or-no kind of question, I'll take it.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
It's quick. It's in conjunction with Mr. Lukiwski's line of questioning. I don't know whether or not the question is in order.
Am I to assume from the response we got from the last one that there hasn't been a precedent-setting case on either side of the argument with regard to the motion? Have any precedents been referred to?
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
A motion of the House to the Board of Internal Economy; I believe that's the question.
12:55 p.m.
A voice
Has there been any precedent?
12:55 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons, House of Commons
No, not that I'm aware of.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
We are finished with that today, but we still have to vote: this is vote 5c of the House of Commons under Parliament.
PARLIAMENT House of Commons Vote 5c--Program expenditures..........$5,712,988
(Vote 5c agreed to)
Shall the chair report vote 5c of the House of Commons under Parliament to the House?
12:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
I thank you all for your help.
Is there anything else for the good of the committee today?
Seeing nothing, we are adjourned.