What Public Services and Procurement said in their response is that perhaps they should look at evaluating other criteria. Instead of evaluating the resource that ultimately isn't performing the service, there are other criteria that should be looked at to determine who the preferred proponent should be. That's one issue.
The second issue is that if we know this is a practice, then perhaps de-emphasizing the price is not the right approach, because if in the end you get a resource that's closer to the mandatory or the minimum rating, I think price should matter much more.