Mr. Speaker, I was appalled by the Liberal government's answer to the question I raised in the House of Commons on December 3, 1999. The answer, or rather lack thereof, provided by the Liberal government makes me wonder if it really has control of government or not.
My question was a simple one: Given that the auditor general commended in-house bids for military contracts for meeting all the criteria of being good business cases, would the Liberal government ensure that an in-house bid would be welcomed and considered?
Incredibly, the Liberal government refused to answer this question, spouting generalities instead.
I then became more specific, indicating savings projected in supply chain business cases. My figures showed that the Liberal government's projected savings from contracting out through alternative service delivery may have been overstated. When I asked the government to clarify the matter, the response I received again did not answer the question at hand.
This leaves me very concerned indeed about who is in control of contracts and expenditures in our military. I received a letter from a constituent dated March 16 of this year which stated:
We have had to fight tooth and nail to keep our jobs from going out to contractors who charge the government ridiculous amounts for the tasks we used to do and these contractors pay employees just above the minimum wage. They (meaning the contractors) are paid huge amounts for nothing and some of them have been fired before completely their contract. We have a large battle ahead of us just to keep our jobs from going to the private sector even though we are the most cost effective organization.
I am concerned that this whole contracting out process is a waste of taxpayers' hard earned money. It makes me wonder if the Minister of National Defence was out of town during the human resources department scandal.
Another constituent wrote to me on February 17 stating:
The only people who are walking to the bank are the consulting firms and military brass who are walking out one door in military dress and walking back in with suit and tie working for these big conglomerates. We were the guinea pigs for their first trial run with Alternative Service Delivery, we cut our workforce by more than half. We told these consultants we are the best bang for the taxpayers dollars, but off they went to the bank.
I would like to direct the Liberals' attention to a report produced by their own defence department and the comments made therein concerning ASD:
Had the management of this Montreal-based CF supply and maintenance infrastructure been turned over to the private sector under the ASD program, it is doubtful whether the military could have transformed it so quickly into such an effective third line support organization.
When civilian military workers successfully beat the ASD contract bids of private companies, the government abruptly changed the rules of engagement to favour large corporations. The bundling of bids provides for the awarding of contracts on a national basis, not only a cheap shot at our military, but a slap in the face to small business throughout the country.
What is the Liberal government's real agenda? An efficient military or a privatized and gutted military with enough funds for huge capital purchases but not enough to sustain the dedicated men and women serving Canada in both civilian and military roles?
Before rushing blindly into a minefield, will the government not take time and fully explore what continued contracting out will mean to the people of Halifax and elsewhere?
On behalf of the many Canadians who work hard and efficiently for our Canadian forces and on behalf of all taxpayers eager not to see their hard earned money wasted, will the Liberal government review its contracting out policy within our military? Will the government involve all of those affected in this review and will it make the findings public?
Once and for all I ask for a direct answer instead of a sales pitch from the Liberals about how wonderful and rosy things are in the military.