Evidence of meeting #37 for National Defence in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was boeing.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Congratulations, Minister. Last month, Mr. Bernier was Boeing's employee of the month, and it looks like you are in line to receive the honours this month.
You've heard about the statement of requirements? Do you know what it is, the SOR?
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
The assistant deputy minister for materiel is a former general. The person who is in charge at the end of the day, of course, which is normal, is the CDS, who is General Hillier. The Minister of Defence is a general.
When you develop that SOR there is no civilian oversight, so it's among themselves.
It seems we need a few more civilians in the process. Your role on the procurement is to make sure you're asking the right questions, but we've noticed since the beginning that at the end of the day you're just applying what they've asked for. So there's a line in the sand, that's it, that's all, and thank you, voilà, and I'll give you what you want.
For the sake of governance, that's an important question. Don't you believe that you should be in the process, not when the requirements are settled, but during the process so you can ask all the questions?
It seems, especially with the C-17, when you look at some of the requirements, and if you take the ones on tactical, they're talking about the delivery and the certification. They had to change their minds in only a few weeks on the capacity, on the payload, meaning that they learned their lesson well--talking about trucks--but they moved from 43,000 pounds to 86,000 pounds.
If you had been there in the beginning of the process, when they were asking questions, at least you could see what was going on, and that's why General Lucas agreed to provide us with the correspondence, because within two weeks everything seemed to have changed.
Don't you believe the best way to have a true--and you spoke about transparency--procurement process...that you as the Minister of Public Works should get involved also in the statement of requirement so you can challenge a bit more as a civilian? As a military you have your needs, and it's normal, but your role, also, is to make sure that they not only have their equipment but also that at the end of the day it's the taxpayers' money. So don't you believe you should be in the process before everything has been settled?
9:45 a.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Well, the SOR, as you know, is not a child of any particular government. It's been around for a while. It was around when you sole-sourced the Challengers, when you sole-sourced the subs from the Brits, when you sole-sourced several Hercules here and there. It's been around.
I know this committee's looking at this, and if this committee has suggestions about how to improve procurement within the military--and I say this very objectively--I'm open to them, and I'm sure Mr. O'Connor is as well.
I take exception to your suggestion that there are no civilians involved. I even understand why you're asking the question in English, given that we're two francophones speaking in English. I also understand why that's taking place in English.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
9:45 a.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
It's just for the audiences, for the CTV people, and CBC—
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
No, the sound bite has already been done. You're okay. Don't worry.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
February 20th, 2007 / 9:45 a.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Oh, that's already gone?
In any event, as I was saying, I take exception to the fact—
9:45 a.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
—that you're suggesting that civilians aren't involved. As a matter of fact, I think I've demonstrated repeatedly here this morning, and so have my officials, that civilians are involved. My officials are. Treasury Board officials are. So once the final specs are determined, they have been discussed—
9:50 a.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
They have been discussed—
9:50 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
When you mention
the statements of requirements
statement of requirements that means that when I provide you with all of the information and tell you that I will be going to see Mr. Williston, he then gives me the go-ahead. When the three department representatives sit down together, it means that the specifications have already been set. Your role is to ensure that the process is transparent, whether it is a sole source contract or, possibly, an expression of interest and qualification. When you have the specs in hand, it means that the criteria have already been established.
My question is clear. It is true that some things were done in the past. However, we are looking at the procurement policy. Do you not think that there should be some earlier involvement by Public Works and Government Services Canada? The navy has a public process. Do you not think that you are involved in that process?
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and if there's any time left over, I'd like to share it with Mr. Blaney.
The Auditor General appeared before the health committee a couple of weeks ago, and they were questioning her on her report that showed Public Works had not followed government contracting rules and regulations when it spent over $25 million on the Canadian Health Network. It was revealed during questioning that of 15 million cases, a spot check of 905 billings yielded a savings to the taxpayer of $4.5 million. So we had that much in the cases checked--$4.5 million worth of work that was paid for, with no services given in advance.
It would appear that this decade of darkness prevailed in other departments as well. During the same period of time, there was a similar incident involving the Department of National Defence. That involved the contract with Hewlett Packard, for which there was $160 million of billing, $100 million of which was for services that were not rendered.
So my first question is what measures have been taken to ensure that sort of thing doesn't happen again?
9:50 a.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Well, let me just answer, and I'll ask the deputy to answer specifically on Hewlett Packard if he wishes to.
I think the FAA is going to go a long way to ensuring these things don't take place again. I think we need to have a system in which people feel comfortable in raising their hands and identifying practices around them that are reprehensible, which, I believe, wasn't the case prior.
As I've stated in the past, and as others have stated in government, we have tremendous confidence in the public service. However, we need to have better checks and balances, and I think the FAA is going a long way to ensuring these checks and balances will be there and available to ensure that these situations don't occur.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Some concerns have been expressed to me: firstly that while Hewlett Packard is reimbursing some of the defrauded taxpayers' millions, some may have been laundered. Canadians still want to know whether there's been a cover-up in the actual $100 million that went missing.
In addition to the safeguards that you mentioned, we'd like to know--we want to confirm--that there's no way future contracts with Hewlett Packard, who have paid the $100 million in return, will be padded to make up for what they have had to pay out in the millions that are still missing.
9:50 a.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Do you mean with that company specifically?
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
