Evidence of meeting #32 for Public Accounts in the 39th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was contract.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Brian Fitzpatrick
Okay. I'll keep that in mind, Mr. Laforest.
Let us get a reaction to Borys' question.
Is this a point of order?
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Brian Fitzpatrick
You're out of order. I've always wanted to say that, too, Mr. Williams: you're out of order.
Let's get back to the agenda.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Yes. Were any of your team contacted by Royal LePage? Were any of those people involved in the process, and what kind of relationships are you aware of that existed with Royal LePage?
Manager, Project Delivery Services Division, Public Works and Government Services Canada
The departmental authorities and the project authority were involved in the program operations during the previous contract. But I'd like to point out that those individuals were not involved in the technical evaluation process.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
So people who had existing relationships were in on the process.
Manager, Project Delivery Services Division, Public Works and Government Services Canada
That's correct.
Manager, Project Delivery Services Division, Public Works and Government Services Canada
No, “were not”; they were not.
Manager, Project Delivery Services Division, Public Works and Government Services Canada
In the development of the RFP, yes.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Brian Fitzpatrick
We have a couple of points of order. We're finished questioning. Maybe we will give the witnesses the honour of being able to leave while we're raising our points of order, unless they want to stay to listen to them.
Mr. Christopherson.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I just want to request, and I can do it by way of motion, if you require it....
One would be that there has been reference a few times to these 280 questions, and in the key area we keep asking about just one and two. Could we get, for one thing, a copy of all the questions that were asked and the answers that were provided? That's one thing, and two is a copy of the internal departmental complaint process in detail: generically, if I'm a bidder and there's a process and I have a concern, what is my process; what am I informed of?
Please provide that in writing, and whether or not there was any—and I'm emphasizing “any”—variation from that process with regard to these contracts.
Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Acquisitions, Public Works and Government Services Canada
As a point of clarification, Mr. Chair, I just want to make sure that.... I am not aware that were complaints during the 2004 RFP process. There were certainly questions, but I take it that the question—
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Let me be clear, then, Chair. I want to make sure I'm right.
My understanding was that there were complaints from bidders, and it may have been in the 2002 process, but some of the things they were concerned about still remained in the 2004 contract, so it's legitimate to see whether or not you responded in a way we feel was adequate.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Brian Fitzpatrick
Another document we should have for the next meeting as well, Mr. Bennett, is the scorecard on the evaluation. There were points assigned and they were graded or scored. It would be relevant to this committee that we would have that scorecard with the point total.
Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Acquisitions, Public Works and Government Services Canada
Mr. Chair, with respect, I would need to defer to legal advice on that, and I will take counsel on that.
Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Acquisitions, Public Works and Government Services Canada
Yes. I'm not sure that we would normally disclose that type of information.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
You can either provide the document or a legal position as to why you're not—
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Brian Fitzpatrick
It would have to be a pretty good legal reason not to provide that document.
We'll be meeting again, for some of you, on Tuesday.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Can I ask one other question about the process? I don't know if you can answer or not. If there were confidential information--say, you couldn't use a descriptor of a position even though you weren't naming someone because it might lead to that person's name if you were in the department--do we have the ability to go in camera and receive that kind of information? Or are we only entitled to what we can receive in a public session and we don't have the ability to do confidential briefings on matters?
Conservative
