House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 36% of the vote.
Human Rights April 26th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the answer to this question is quite straightforward. There is an agreement already between the general contractor and the subcontractor.
When issues of this kind come to our attention of course we are concerned. At this time there are discussions between our department and Labour Canada to work toward strengthening anti-discrimination clauses in contracts. An agreement has already been reached between the general contractor and the subcontractor.
Budget Implementation Act, 1996 April 25th, 1996
Sounds like Winnipeg to me.
The Budget April 16th, 1996
Find something original.
Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act March 26th, 1996
We are on Bill C-7, are we not, Mr. Speaker?
Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act March 26th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. We had a long debate on Bill C-7 yesterday. The government spoke and members of the opposition parties spoke. As far as I am concerned-
Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act March 25th, 1996
Madam Speaker, I really cannot believe my ears. I am absolutely amazed that members of the Bloc would propose the politicization of the letting of contracts. It is really hard to believe in this day and age that any member of Parliament would suggest that they should directly intervene in the letting of contracts.
What is the point in having a professional civil service? What is the point of setting down an objective set of criteria if members of Parliament, even with the best of intentions, were allowed to interfere in the letting of contracts or in the invitation of bids. It simply would not work.
If we hear today outcries about patronage, which we do from time to time, can you imagine, Madam Speaker, the kind of outcries you would hear if we were to pursue the course suggested by the Bloc? I suppose if the government were to let a contract to someone who had ties to the Bloc, then of course everything would seem open, fair, transparent and above board. It would be seen as okay.
What would happen if the government ever let a contract to someone who may have some kind of remote ties to the government? Right away the accusation of patronage would be heard.
We went through this in the 19th century. Surely the Bloc would not want to have that kind of political patronage come back on to the political scene.
The Bloc members have been more or less implying or suggesting that we do not listen and if only we would listen we would do a far better job. Let us talk about Bill C-7 or in its former incarnation Bill C-52. Members voiced concerns about clause 16. They were concerned about the discretion that the original version of clause 16 gave to the minister. They were concerned that the minister would have too much power.
What was done? The clause was amended. Under clause 16 the minister no longer has that discretion. Now the discretion must be exercised by order in council, in other words by full cabinet. Not only that, but it was amended so that when it came to entering into contracts with other governments, whether they were inside the country or outside the country, it cannot be done by the federal government on its own, in other words, it cannot be done proactively. It has to be done as a result of an amendment only on request.
Even if the government thought it would like to enter into some kind of contractual liaison with another province, it cannot do it unless that province approaches us and asks us specifically to enter into a contractual liaison. That is an example of listening.
When the members of the Bloc talk about us not listening, I would submit very sincerely that they are being disingenuous. To put it in clearer language, they are not being sincere.
With that kind of talk, I do not think the members of the Bloc do service to themselves, their constituents, the people of Quebec, and certainly not to Canadians in general. We have what is called an open bidding system, which is open, fair, above board and transparent. If members of the Bloc want to acquaint themselves with the system they will find that it is a good system and it is working.
Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act March 25th, 1996
Madam Speaker, I will finish my last point in a moment. I thought I was doing a service to the members of the Bloc by providing this information. I believe I am providing a service to all Canadians watching this debate.
The hon. member for Mégantic-Compton-Stanstead seems to be suggesting we politicize the public service. I think we have one of the greatest public services in the world. It is professional and public servants do their jobs in a professional manner. The last thing I want is to politicize that service. I believe we have a system in place.
If the members of the Bloc do their homework, if they need information, if they want information, it is there. They may have to do some work but after all that is what they are paid for. We have a system that works and we should be very proud of it.
Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act March 25th, 1996
Madam Speaker, let me continue with respect to what the hon. member for Témiscamingue was saying. In effect he was saying he did not know what was going on in his own riding and that members of the Bloc Quebecois should know more about what is going on with respect to the letting of government contracts, that it should know more about what is going on in its ridings.
If the members do their homework they can find out. We talked about the open bidding service before and I will talk about it again. For example, I cite what is available on OBS: all contract opportunities; notices of plans, sole sourced contracts as well as notices of contract awards; the open bidding system also offers contract histories, that is information on contracts that have been awarded in the past to whom and for what amount.
He is also somehow suggesting we should make all this information available on a riding to riding basis, which would invite all kinds of red tape. We already have red tape in the government. We already have too much paper and we are providing this information through the electronic system, OBS.
If the hon. member really wants to know what is going on he can do it. It may take a little work but if he ties into the open bidding system he can get the information he needs.
I go back to what the member for Mégantic-Compton-Stanstead said. I am not exactly sure what he was talking about. I know the hon. member. He is a personable, engaging fellow, but I think he has had a bad day. Somehow he was talking about promoting a contracting out code.
We have the system in place that is open, that is fair, that is transparent. It is above board. What the members from the Bloc are suggesting is that we draw members of Parliament into the system-
Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act March 25th, 1996
Madam Speaker, it behoves me to respond to some of the statements made by members of the Bloc. I do not think they can be allowed to go unchallenged.
A few minutes ago the member for Berthier-Montcalm raised the issue of the dredging contract at Sorel, Quebec. He more or less implied that the public has been ignored, that certain concerns have been overlooked and that people who have legitimate concerns have been shut out of the process. I say unequivocally and categorically that is not true.
Yes, there are environmental concerns surrounding that project. Those environmental concerns are being met. Already there have been public meetings on this issue. There were two meetings that I know of, one on January 5, 1996 and another on March 14, 1996. Those meetings involved public consultations.
For the hon. member to somehow suggest that the public is being ignored in this process, he is just not being factual and is not rendering a service to the House. I can state that if further public meetings are required that will happen. As I said, there are environmental concerns. The Department of Public Works and Government Services has a responsibility to address those concerns.
I want to put those statements on the record. I do not think that the hon. member from Berthier-Montcalm had all the information at his fingertips. I would hope he would take what I have said into account.
I also want to address one of the issues raised by the hon. member for Témiscamingue. If I can put it in my own words, the hon. member for Témiscamingue was asking out loud what is going on in his riding or in other ridings in Quebec. He was saying that the government issues contracts and he, the hon. member for Témiscamingue, does not know what is going on.
I would suggest that he should do his homework better. There are means available to the hon. member for Témiscamingue and for other members from the Bloc, other members from the province of Quebec, other members from all provinces in this country. There is ample opportunity for-
Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act March 25th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the observations made by my hon. colleague from Quebec. He has a concern about waste, as he should as a member of Parliament. All members on both sides of the House are concerned about waste.
Over the decades all governments have had reputations of waste. I can say with enthusiasm that this government and especially the minister, since I am talking about the new Department of Public Works and Government Services, want to hear about waste.
I will not stand in my place and pretend everything works absolutely perfectly. When there is waste, when there is inefficiency, when there is a better way of doing things we want to hear about it.
I would always invite the hon. member whenever he comes across examples of inefficiencies to bring them to our attention. It is a big department and things will not always work well. I would be more than happy to entertain concerns, whether relatively small or relatively large.
The hon. member asked about an open process. I believe we do have an open process. If there is a better way to make it more open, transparent and fair, let us do that.
I appreciate the comments of the hon. member. We are working on it as best we can.