Mr. Chairman, this motion was tabled at the Standing Committee on Finance, on which I also sit. One of the reasons why we did not agree that it be studied at the Standing Committee on Finance was that we were convinced that it should come under the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.
I therefore agree on the substance of the question. However, some components of the motion are very different from the motion that was tabled at the other committee. That was much less accusatory, in part. I would like to propose a friendly amendment to Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, if he agrees. In the second paragraph, I would delete the part that talks about contracts “valued at $24,900 to Conservative Party supporters in order to bypass Treasury Board guidelines”. If we want to find out if that is what was done, we must hear from the witnesses in order to ask them, before stating it in the motion. I will read the motion as it was tabled at the Standing Committee on Finance. It said:
Furthermore, Access to Information requests have shown that the Minister of Finance awarded a disproportionate share of untendered contracts valued at between $24,000 and $24,900 and therefore falling just below the level at which contracts must be subject to competitive tendering.
Everyone knows that. I would delete the entire third paragraph. At the end of the fourth paragraph, where it says: “to appear as witnesses in order to further study these violations of Treasury Board guidelines”, I would delete the words “these violations of Treasury Board guidelines”, and say: “on these situations that appear to be contrary to Treasury Board guidelines”.
I do not know if Mr. Wrzesnewskyj will agree, but I propose this friendly amendment.