Debates of Oct. 17th, 1994

Department Of Natural Resources Act

[Julian Reed, Liberal, Halton—Peel, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from the hon. member. I should point out to him that in any function of government when questions are being asked as to how we tackle a situation and what areas we consider in a situation, all sorts of proposals are made. Whether they are adopted or rejected is yet another thing.

At this stage I certainly do not know that any consideration would be given to such a tax. However I think it is valid to debate the subject and to look at it as being on the table and worthy of debate, not in a dissimilar way to what the minister of finance tried to initiate before the budget last February. Remember, we all participated in a prebudget debate. There was consultation, albeit too brief at that time, to try and bring in the business and corporate sector.

Public consultation is something that has not been generally practised in this country in the past. More is the pity because now when we enter into public consultation and try to glean from it ideas and concepts that will guide us, cynics say that it is a bit of window dressing and the government will go on and do whatever it wants anyway.

As the member knows, the gun control issue was another one where public consultation was undertaken by the ministry. People travelled across Canada all summer long and talked to Canadians. I point out that in the previous firearms acquisition bill the former minister would not even entertain a written brief, not one written brief.

This is a new exercise for Canadians. If the government treats this process with respect, then we all gain.

The member talks about a two cents a litre tax. I also read the newspaper article and I have no knowledge that any such thing is contemplated, but I certainly would welcome a debate on it.

[Bernard Deshaies, Bloc, Abitibi, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the hon. member, who is also a member of the Natural Resources Committee, a question further to his speech on ecology. My question is quite specific. Do you not think that we could have put all the billions of dollars that are going to be invested in the Hibernia project into projects other than petroleum projects, into renewable energy projects such as hydrogen, for example? What the Bloc quebecois is saying is that the federal government's interference in areas of provincial jurisdiction is not merely constitutional in nature, but involves amounts of money that Canadians, and therefore Quebecers, are paying for projects that are not viable financially or ecologically. Do you not think that better choices could have been made?

[Julian Reed, Liberal, Halton—Peel, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. friend for that question.

I can remember sitting on the Ontario Hydro select committee during 1976 to 1980 when the debate raged over the construction of the Darlington nuclear plant. I remember that from our perspective Darlington was too expensive to contemplate. After the debate we realized that the utility had gone ahead and committed something like $500 million toward Darlington, a facility that has now cost about $15 billion, which is absolutely ludicrous.

I remember being quoted in the paper as saying that sometimes when we get so far into something it is very hard to get out. I expect that one could say something similar. We inherited the Hibernia project. We did get out of the Lloydminster heavy oil issue. We were able to extract ourselves from it. We are living with what is reality at the present time.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Madam Speaker, I used to sound like the hon. member through the seventies and early eighties when I believed the lies we had at that time about consumption and about available resources.

I come from a place where we have world scale petrochemical programs that we were told would only last another five years. We have now extended them for twenty years and there is no foreseeable end to our ability to produce.

The member referred to China. What about the alternate energy that will in fact come about such as coal gasification? China has huge resources of coal. What about some of the alternate energy forms that are there just waiting to be taken over? What about all those?

[Julian Reed, Liberal, Halton—Peel, ON]

Madam Speaker, China is a very interesting country. The last time I checked it was installing hydro units at the rate of 15,000 a year. China is the world's largest producer of hydraulic turbines. It builds good stuff, incidentally.

There is a pent up demand for energy in countries like China that far exceeds our ability to comprehend. We should be able to turn it to our advantage. Whether it is petroleum export or whatever, I do not see forms of energy competing against one another per se. As a matter of fact I see them complementing one another.

In terms of petroleum I would suggest that Sheikh Yamani was right. The commodity itself is probably too precious to combust. We can look at the clean air targets. The business of

coal combustion, for instance, is something we are probably shying away from because it is a direct contributor to greenhouse gas.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Order. I am sorry but the hon. member's time has expired.

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

The question is on the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

All those in favour will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And more than five members having risen:

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Call in the members.

And the division bells having rung:

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Pursuant to Standing Order 45(5)( a ) I have been requested by the chief government whip to defer the division until a later time.

Accordingly, pursuant to Standing Order 45(5)( a ), the division on the motion now before the House stands deferred until 5.30 p.m. tomorrow, at which time the bells to call in the members will be sounded for not more than 15 minutes.

[Marlene Catterall, Liberal, Ottawa West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The deferral motion you just read stated 5.30 p.m. tomorrow. It should be after the conclusion of government business which may or may not be as early as 5.30.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Does the House agree?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed from October 5 consideration of the motion that Bill C-52, an act to establish the Department of Public Works and Government Services and to amend and repeal certain acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee; and of the amendment.

Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act

[Ovid Jackson, Liberal, Bruce—Grey, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is certainly my pleasure to rise in the House to speak on Bill C-52, a bill to consolidate the government services department.

Over the last number of years we note there have been paradigm shifts in terms of how business is done. When we on this side of the House were elected the Prime Minister decided that we were to operate with fewer cabinet ministers. We were to work in every department to make sure, if there were any savings to be made, savings would be made for the Canadian people. We were to deploy our manpower to make sure it worked in the most efficient manner possible to get the best bang for the dollar.

Recently scientists watched a set of Canada geese flying and they found out that they flew in a particular v formation. When they studied it they found that one wing was slightly longer than the other. They also found out that if the one bird in front led for quite a while it created a vacuum which made it easier for the following birds to fly. As that bird got tired it would pull back and another bird would take its place. As a result the birds could travel 70 per cent farther than they otherwise could.

I hope all members of the House try to stretch the dollar that much further so that Canadians could get the best possible dollar value from us. It is up to all members to look for ways to save. I do not think it is incumbent on us always to be critical. We need to make sure that people working for governments know they are working for people who work very hard and honestly to get their salaries. They in turn expect a fair return on their dollar.

I am really pleased today to speak on behalf of the consolidation of the department. Since we started debating Bill C-52 my Bloc colleagues have repeatedly asked that the government produce regular statements, monthly reports, and open up the federal government contracting process. According to them the purpose of the monthly reports would be threefold: to keep taxpayers informed, to stimulate competitiveness, and to ensure that government decisions are open and transparent. There is no doubt that these are worthy goals.

However I assure the Bloc members and the House that the government has already taken many steps to do just that. From

the very onset of its mandate the government has been committed to fairness and openness in government contracting.

Public Works and Government Services is Canada's largest purchasing organization. As the principal purchasing agency for the federal government it has responsibility for approximately 65 per cent of total government purchasing. The rest is spread over about 100 other federal organizations. The department buys some $10 billion worth of products and services each year.

Taking into account the procurement activities of the agencies under its purview, Public Works and Government Services issues approximately 1,000 contract transactions each day. It goes without saying that administering such a large volume of transactions is a huge undertaking. However there are cost effective systems in place at Public Works and Government Services Canada which allow the Canadian public to be effectively and fairly served while having unfettered access to information about government contracting.

There is no need to waste time, energy and taxpayers' money tabling reports on contracting activity, given the fact that the information is readily available and accessible to the Canadian public.

The issues raised by the Bloc members, namely access to contracting information, competitiveness and the integrity of the procurement process, have been and continue to be priorities of the government.

We did as promised in the red book and have taken a series of initiatives to restore confidence in the institutions of government. As one of Canada's largest buyers of goods and services and a major real property manager, the Department of Public Works and Government Services is committed to providing the nuts and bolts information which helps all companies across Canada to do business with the federal government.

One tool is the open bidding service. It is also known as OBS. It is an electronic bulletin board that gives fast and equal access to opportunities to bid for government contracts. It provides information about upcoming requirements and the documents companies need to bid on them. It provides equal access to public works and government services, opportunities valued at $60,000 or more for construction and maintenance services and $25,000 or more for other types of government procurement. With OBS anyone anywhere in Canada has access to the same information at the same time.

The Department of Public Works and Government Services also produces the government business opportunities or GBO publication. It lists the same opportunities as OBS. It is printed three times a week and provides very timely information. In addition to advertising contract opportunities with the federal government, the OBS gives notices of contracts the government intends to award on a sole source basis. In this way companies have the opportunity to challenge the government's rationale for single tendering.

If in response to a sole source notice another supplier can demonstrate that it can meet the government's requirements for a particular contract, a competition will be held. It is another way by which the government stimulates competitiveness.

Not only does the government already make information available on proposed business opportunities to all Canadians, but it also provides information on contracts that have been awarded. The information is posted regularly on the OBS as well as published in the GBO. A contract history data base is available on OBS which provides information on any contract awarded on open bidding service since 1989. It allows anyone anywhere in Canada to see which companies have been awarded open bidding contracts, for what goods or services and for what value.

The open bidding system is designed to allow easy and equitable access to information on government procurement opportunities both in process and historical. The system effectively addresses access, competition and accountability.

All MPs have been invited to subscribe to the OBS. By getting onboard they would certainly have access to all the information they need on contracts being awarded in their ridings. Easy access to information on contract opportunities is the key to ensuring fairness and openness to suppliers.

However, this government also believes in independent redress for suppliers who may believe that the government's actions have not met their commitment to openness and fairness, and suppliers who believe that they have not been treated equitably are able to appeal to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal. It is an independent board to which suppliers can seek quick and inexpensive redress for procurement subject to the NAFTA.

If successful, the supplier may be awarded payment of compensation or recompetition of the procurement. This is yet another mechanism through which the integrity of the procurement process is maintained.

More generally, each department is accountable to Parliament, suppliers, and therefore every Canadian for its activities including procurement through the annual tabling of the Main Estimates and the report of the Auditor General.

The public sector is under intense scrutiny today. Canadians are demanding that the government not only control the costs of services and administration but also that it acts in a fair and open fashion. Clearly, with all these mechanisms currently in place, the Department of Public Works and Government Services is providing equal access to the federal market, fairness in awarding contracts and ensuring that the information on contracts to

be awarded or that have been awarded is available and accessible to all Canadians.

There are policies and systems in place to ensure that the government procurement is open, fair and transparent, and that means no political influence. All contracts are subject to the requirements of the Treasury Board contracting policy whose principles and procedures I again emphasize ensure an open, transparent and competitive contracting process.

Up to date information on contracts awarded is currently available every day to any Canadian anywhere across Canada on the OBS. This information is very time sensitive to suppliers. With the information currently available and accessible suppliers know right away about the approach, for example, for subcontracting activity. A monthly report is not only a duplication of the information already available, but of very limited benefit to suppliers as it is only an historic record.

The OBS makes the system better and fairer for the government, for Canadian business and, most important, for the taxpayer.

Several other federal departments and crown corporations as well as the provincial governments of Alberta and Ontario have chosen to use the OBS to advertise their procurement needs, giving potential suppliers a window on a multi-billion dollar market. It also saves the government money, some $3.5 million annually, in document printing and advertising costs.

The tabling of monthly reports of contracts awarded is a duplication of effort. The Bloc members have condemned that kind of attitude in this House: "Nobody in this House can support ridiculous or useless spending". That was the member for Laurentides, February 10, 1994.

With their demands Bloc members are asking this government to do just that, more ridiculous and useless spending.

As the member for Laurentides has said in this House, we must try to eliminate duplication in order to reduce costs, to save money, to become more efficient.

This government is streamlining and eliminating waste. It is not the intention of this government to spend taxpayers' dollars producing reports that no one will read when there are effective and proven means of accessing the same information.

As a member of this government, I strongly believe that there is a compelling need, especially in these days of strict fiscal restraint, to ensure that each dollar spent by this government is a necessary expense and that it represents the best value that can be achieved in the use of that scarce resource; every dollar counts.

This government's commitment to the integrity if the procurement process has been made very clear with the increased use of OBS and the recent release of the new guidelines for public opinion research and advertising contracts.

The Minister of Public Works and Government Services has also introduced a new clause aimed at eliminating contingency fees. Bidders are now required to certify that they have not hired a lobbyist to solicit award of a contract where any part of the payment to the lobbyist depends on the client obtaining that contract.

In conclusion, I will once again state that Canadians already have access to up to date information anywhere in Canada on the government's procurement activities. That is the key to a truly competitive process.

This government believes strongly in the importance and the integrity of the procurement process. Canadians have a right to know that their government does business in an honest and open way and who it does business with. They also require that their government not waste money by duplicating its efforts.

This government will continue to serve the Canadian public by ensuring that an open and fair procurement process is maintained in the most cost effective way possible.

[Marlene Catterall, Liberal, Ottawa West, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is appropriate following my colleague's speech on the importance of our fiscal resources and using them well that I speak about those other resources which are perhaps even more important in delivering services to Canadians and ensuring good government for Canada and those are the people who are also a valuable resource.

Bill C-52 will give legislative force to the amalgamation of the former departments of public works and supply and services as well as the translation bureau and the government telecommunications agency. This is clearly in line with our government's commitment to make federal government operations more efficient and less costly to the Canadian taxpayer.

Madam Speaker, I will inform you and the House that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell, in this debate.

This merger will significantly reduce the administrative and other costs involved in providing most of the central services required by federal agencies and departments.

The overall staff requirement will be reduced by more than 20 per cent from 18,000 at the time of amalgamation to about

14,000 by 1998. Clearly such a reduction will substantially reduce the salary budget of the department-by more than $1 billion over the next decade.

Our government also recognizes that there is a very important human dimension to this downsizing, necessary though it may be.

We realize that the savings which we intend to achieve will inevitably affect the lives and careers of many public servants. That is why we are now taking all necessary measures to make this transition the least disruptive possible for those directly concerned.

The need to streamline operations and reduce the cost of government is by no means unique to Canada. It is a problem being faced by the provinces, by our municipalities, in the United States, in Europe and throughout the industrialized world.

I believe that the program of support and assistance being introduced by our government is one of the most enlightened of its kind and is recognized as a leader in the field. Unlike the previous government which regrettably was inclined to downgrade the public service and treat it as a scapegoat for its own failures, our government recognizes that the quality of our people is our most important strength.

We will work closely with our public servants and the unions that represent them to minimize the impact of these difficult but necessary staff reductions. The broad strategy will be to retain to the greatest degree possible the skills, the experience and the loyalties of the affected employees within the public service and to give the greatest possible assistance to those who cannot be retained in finding suitable employment elsewhere.

Specifically, each affected employee will be assigned a workforce adjustment adviser to provide job search, marketing assistance and other services on a regular basis.

All surplus employees will be offered a one-week course developed with union participation dealing with such issues as stress management, financial counselling and job search techniques. Surplus employees will be provided with links to specialized services as required, such as the employee assistance program, because we recognize that not only are people going through a career change but they are going through a significant life change.

Extensive training, advice and support will be provided to managers in planning and implementing reductions with special emphasis on communication with all employees. We recognize that the manager has a key role to play in ensuring that downsizing is implemented fairly and with maximum consideration for our employees.

We will fully apply the directive on reassignment for employees declared surplus.

Among other things, this means a guaranteed position in the federal Public Service to the extent that the employee can be retrained or is ready to consider relocation. It also means that employees will receive six months' notice if they are declared surplus and will be entitled to retraining courses for up to two years.

Under the work force adjustment directive, surplus employees will be entitled to salary protection if they are appointed to a lower position. If they wish to resign, they will be entitled to a lump-sum payment equal to six months of salary. Also, employees who are over 50 years old and have more than five years of service will receive up to 15 weeks of salary as severance pay as well.

Our government intends to work as closely as possible with the various public service unions in implementing these changes.

The unions and employees are understandably not entirely happy with the reductions in government staffing levels that are taking place throughout the country but they recognize the reality of the times and they know that we want to work with them to co-operate in ensuring that these lay-offs are conducted fairly and in accordance with government policy and directives.

In this regard, workforce adjustment committees are already in place at the national and regional levels of the former departments. The government is continuing to discuss and examine with the unions the most effective way to consult and co-operate on the reshaping of the new department.

In this exercise departmental managers are being encouraged to consider innovative strategies and the voluntary use of flexible work arrangements such as part time work and job sharing as a means of minimizing the impact of these changes.

The process of downsizing has already begun and there are currently some 250 surplus employees in the inventory of the department. It is encouraging to note that to date the majority of surplus employees have been dealt with through retraining and redeployment with very few involuntary lay-offs.

The components of this department in particular have an excellent record in treating their employees fairly.

I think hon. members will agree that our government has gone to extraordinary lengths to try to minimize the negative effects of departmental restructuring on the workforce. This is a clear demonstration of our commitment to build a new and stronger

relationship with the public service and to demonstrate that we both respect it and value its work.

The morale in the federal public service took a rather severe battering during the Tory years in power. We are determined to re-establish a new and better relationship based on mutual trust and mutual respect.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is with pleasure that I address the House this afternoon. As a matter of fact, this is the first time I get to participate in a debate since the Prime Minister appointed me Chief Government Whip.

I take this opportunity to thank the Prime Minister publicly, in front of my constituents, for appointing me and to tell all my hon. colleagues in this House that I will do my very best not to disappoint them. I will try to carry out my duties as whip in such a way as to keep the caucus united under the excellent direction of the Right Hon. Prime Minister.

Perhaps there is a symbolism in the fact that my first speech following my appointment is a speech on the contract award process. Why? Because this whole issue of contracting is one that I, as the member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell, consider very important.

We have before us today a bill introduced by the Hon. Minister of Public Works and Government Services, with an amendment moved by a Bloc Quebecois member, namely the hon. member for Québec-Est, seconded by the hon. member for Charlevoix.

Listen carefully to what the Bloc Quebecois member is proposing. His amendment reads as follows:

[That] this House declines to give second reading to Bill C-52-

Listen to this. He would have us decline to give second reading to a bill to amalgamate federal departments. What is the purpose of this bill? To prevent duplication. Where have we heard this before: to prevent duplication? Who has been advocating such action in this House? Madam Speaker, our colleagues opposite.

I can see the hon. member for Drummond smiling. She knows full well that her party claimed to be the champion of the use of government funds by stating that duplication must be prevented. With all due respect to their sovereignty, I must tell the hon. members opposite that today, a Bloc Quebecois member has actually asked this House to refuse to pass this bill to prevent duplication.

The reasons the Bloc Quebecois member does not want consent to be given are known. They are stated on page 6529 of Hansard for Tuesday, October 4, 1994. Let me read them to you, Madam Speaker. As a fair, non partisan member of this House, you can see clearly how the hon. member is mistaken. He says, and I quote the hon. member from the Bloc Quebecois:

Bill C-52 should have more teeth.

He is asking that consent be refused because he would want the bill to have more teeth. He may have some trouble with these subtleties but, not to worry, it will all become very clear, I think, when you hear what the member of the Bloc Quebecois said, and I quote:

This is the Bloc Quebecois's proposal: We ask that a public review board be created under the bill to scrutinize contracts awarded by the Department of Public Works and Government Services and to ensure openness.

There is the Comptroller General of Canada. Then, after public funds have been spent, there is also the Auditor General of Canada, at the risk of surprising the members opposite.

There are audit mechanisms in place before and after contracts are awarded. So the Bloc's first proposal does not hold up.

Second, said the member for Charlevoix, we ask that a contracting-out code be clearly defined in this bill. Again, at the risk of surprising the hon. member, there is a mechanism in place for all contracts awarded by the Department of Public Works and Government Services. I must say that I handled such matters in the past. Suppliers must fill out statutory declarations assuring the government that subcontractors have been paid before they can receive benefits from the government. This practice is now in effect. So the Bloc's second request does not hold up either.

Now listen closely, Madam Speaker, to the Bloc Quebecois member's third request: "Third, we demand that members of Parliament of all political stripes be consulted about and kept informed of the government contract awarding process involving the ridings they represent." Well, well, well! This sounds a lot like patronage. Is it because the leader of the Bloc Quebecois used to belong to a political party that was partial to patronage? Is that the reason? Is it a leftover from the Tory era? Probably not. It is probably just a coincidence.

Another funny coincidence, if I remember correctly, is that the former leader of the Conservative Party used to represent the riding of Charlevoix, did he not? The current member for Charlevoix was on the executive of his association, before he switched parties, of course. I am not referring to the days before the Bloc Quebecois leader switched parties: I am referring to the days before the member for Charlevoix switched parties. Indeed, as you know, these people have had a tendency to switch parties. During his career, the Bloc Quebecois leader switched parties five times; he will likely do it two or three more times again.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

It will not be long!