Mr. Bard, it seems a little bit peculiar that in one sense you actually use Mr. Arès' words to justify some of your position, and then in another sentence you totally dismiss what he says.
Let me give you another e-mail that Mr. Arès sent. It says:
It seems clear enough that the insistence on staying at Place Victoria in this case serves interests other than the sound management of public funds. I cannot agree to cover, in an administrative manner, a decision that is difficult to justify financially, because it is costly (the client, CED, had agreed to move to Place Bonaventure, or as a last resort, we could have signed a lease with the second-lowest bidder [CED agreed], which would have been more beneficial to the Crown).