Ralph Goodale

[National Defence, May 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence and I have answered questions about the MHP on several occasions in the House. We have indicated that the project is now on a rebundled basis. We have indicated that we are now into the second or third step of the outlined procedure for this particular calendar year.

We are determined to follow those steps meticulously to determine that the process is absolutely appropriate in the circumstances and, at the end of the day, that the military gets the equipment it requires, and at the very best possible price.

[Agriculture, May 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the government has consistently stood by farmers in arguments of these kinds.

It is significant that the government defends the rights of farmers to make their own marketing decisions in Canada by Canadians.

The opposition by contrast sent a delegation some years ago to Washington, stood on the steps of the U.S. Capitol, joined arms with Newt Gingrich and sided with the United States.

[Agriculture, May 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the allegations involved in the pending American action are not new allegations. They have been in the public arena for 10 to 15 years.

The Americans have pursued these actions on at least 10 previous occasions. Every time they have been pursued, those same kinds of fruitless statements have been made by the opposition. At the end of the day Canadian farmers have won 10 out of 10. The Government of Canada has stood with them every inch of the way. We will continue to do so.

[Public Works and Government Services, April 29th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the specific circumstance to which the hon. gentleman refers, I am advised that matter is in fact under investigation by the Ontario Provincial Police. They will of course do their job.

In terms of the broader issue, public works does report on seized property activities annually. That is done in the normal course to the public accounts.

I hear the hon. gentleman express a serious concern about transparency in terms of the administration of justice and in the administration of assets that come within public ownership. I take his point seriously. I think it needs--

[Public Works and Government Services, April 29th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Public Works has a role to play in terms of the disposition of assets of this kind. I would point out that the act itself is up for review to determine its adequacy in the circumstances of our modern society.

My department takes the step of reporting annually on how these matters are handled. We are certainly aware of the concerns that have been raised and are anxious to make sure that our law and our procedures are adequate to cope with modern circumstances.

[Government Contracts, April 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the process here is designed to make the requirements of the military very clear, so that all the bidders know exactly what they are bidding on and at the end of the day we get the aircraft that does the job to the military's satisfaction and we do so at the best possible price for the Canadian taxpayer.

[Government Contracts, April 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, there was a statement of requirements published with respect to military aircraft in the late 1990s.

The procedure being followed by the Government of Canada is designed to ensure that statement of requirement is in fact fulfilled by the equipment that is ultimately purchased.

[Government Contracts, March 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I think the Minister of National Defence took a very positive step in December when he addressed the bundling issue.

The purpose of the pre-qualification process, which has begun today, is to reduce the risk that equipment proposed by any of the bidders would be disqualified for technical non-compliance. The whole purpose is to make sure that the bidders know on what they are bidding.

[Government Contracts, March 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the procurement strategy for the maritime helicopter project is consistent with the Treasury Board best value contract policy. It ensures that all potential suppliers will be bidding on exactly what the military needs, allowing Canada to seek the best price among all the compliant bidders. It is based on clear, rigorous, mandatory requirements. It includes a requirement for long term, in-service support thereby acknowledging the importance of life cycle costs. It matches the needs of the Canadian forces, as identified in the statement of operational requirements, with the needs of Canadians for the responsible stewardship of public funds.

[G-8 Summit, March 21st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, if any such individual has a problem with the process, if they think they are being dealt with unfairly, then they need merely to write to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, House of Commons, Ottawa, K1A 0A6, and I will reply.