Gerry Ritz

[Government Contracts, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, this is a brand new company with absolutely no track record in advertising and it gets a five year monopoly. It must have been some process.

Mr. Boulay through his shadow companies now controls three-quarters of all government advertising, $60 million last year alone.

We have had a string of public works ministers over there and every one of them have hid behind the line that Treasury Board guidelines were followed. Some guidelines.

A public works audit in 2000, again the one they hide behind, however, said “The process did not fully comply with the spirit or the letter of Treasury Board rules and directives”. This kind of goes against what they have been saying.

Why do the Liberals consistently break the rules for their political contributors?

[Government Contracts, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, Claude Boulay said “You don't have to be a good little Liberal to receive government contracts but it helps”, and helps and helps.

Media IDA Vision is another company owned by Mr. Boulay of Groupe Everest fame and condo rentals. No sooner did IDA come into being than it became the agency of record for all government advertising. That is a five year monopoly.

Was this just a coincidence or does this have everything to do with Mr. Boulay's generous contributions to the Liberal Party?

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Madam Chair, it is the kind of thing that jumps out at us. It is listed under public works. The subheading is professional and special services. I can give the minister the names and amounts again if he would like.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Madam Chairman, two companies have been noted as having received good sized donations from the federal government. First, Quantum Management Services in Ottawa received $10 million. Second, Powell Group in Ottawa received $22,600,000. What do these companies do for the taxpayers of the country?

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Madam Chairman, the minister has promised quite a bit of information tonight. It will all be on the record and we will be able to follow up on it. Would he would also care to table the briefing notes used by his panel this evening?

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Madam Chairman, Communication Coffin is another name, one of the advertising subcontractors that has popped into disrepute in the last little while. It is also known as 2794101 Canada Inc. Communication Coffin has been awarded some contracts. Has business also been done or subcontracted from Coffin to the numbered company?

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Madam Chairman, it may be a couple of weeks when all of this gets tabled.

The minister said earlier tonight that he has not signed any cheques or contracts in his nine days on the job. He has not done that. I have a flow chart here of public works and I have another one of Communications Canada. Business goes on. I am wondering who on those flow charts that came out of the main estimates is authorized to sign cheques and okay contracts and for what amount?

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Madam Chairman, I am wondering how the minister can explain that Lafleur Communications, which did not make that short list of 10, received a contract to take some money in a briefcase down the street to VIA Rail and got $120,000 for doing it. I am wondering how it got into that competitive bidding process when it was not one of the 10.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Madam Chairman, the minister could table it to save time.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Going back to the auditor general's report, on page 5, point 22, she said that the government ran a competitive process in March 1997 to identify 10 firms that were pre-qualified as suppliers and selected Groupaction from that list for the second and third contracts. I am wondering who was the first choice. Who was number one?