Mr. Chairman, I'll try to stick to the five minutes.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is Bruce Atyeo, president of Envoy Relocation Services.
As you can imagine, I have followed these proceedings with great interest. Last Tuesday, I listened via the webcast, and on Thursday I was here in person. I can't tell you how grateful I am to finally have an opportunity to discuss this matter with a group of government officials who obviously get it, and who at the same time have an interest in getting to the bottom of this scandal—and it is a scandal.
Based on your discussion last Thursday, I'm even more grateful today, knowing that it is unusual for a member of the private sector to be given this privilege. I assure you that I will restrict my remarks to your business.
This process started on April 11, 2005, when I first wrote to the chairman of the public accounts committee, who at the time was Mr. Williams, requesting that this issue be sent to the Auditor General for review.
Here we are today with the results of that review, confirming what Envoy has always contended: that these contracts were not awarded fairly.
At the risk of minimizing the excellent efforts of the Auditor General and her team, I think they—and now this committee—would agree that just about anyone looking at these events objectively would very quickly come to the same conclusion.
Unfortunately, it falls to me to tell you that what you have seen and heard so far is just the tip of the iceberg. The Auditor General and her team have done an excellent job of exposing serious flaws in the 2004 bidding process, as well as many of the contract management practices. You've been wrestling with these findings over the course of two meetings already. There is much more you should know.
On Thursday, you witnessed the same kinds of blank stares and non-answers that we, Envoy, have experienced from just about everyone, both bureaucrat and politician, over the past four years. However, today I will provide you with further insight into some of the mismanagement and the stonewalling that we experienced in both the bidding processes and contract management issues over the past four-plus years. This includes real answers to your questions, backed up with real data, information, and guidance.
If we were to level the playing field between Royal LePage and Envoy to the tune of $48.7 million, as suggested by the Auditor General, and take into consideration the 24 points awarded to Envoy by the CITT decision, Envoy won the CF contract, in spite of the biased method of the selection formula. In fact, it was so biased that in spite of being 94% compliant and almost $60 million lower in price, we're just barely able to squeak out a win because of that biased formula. However, we won the competition, and we expect to be awarded the contract.
As a bidder who has incurred considerable cost and wasted much time, during both the bidding process and subsequently in fighting for justice for our company, I look forward to providing you with real answers. There are individuals within the client departments, as well as within Public Works, who need to be sanctioned for serious mismanagement practices.
The contracts with Royal LePage need to be cancelled because there is evidence that those contracts have been breached in more ways than one. The contract should be awarded to the rightful winner.
You have my undivided attention for as long as you need it.
Thank you very much.