Ralph Goodale

[Government Contracts, November 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I should remind the right hon. gentleman of the procedure.

Where a department wishes to have a certain service provided with a firm to be selected from a pre-qualified list, that department sends the requisition to the Department of Public Works and it is officials within the Department of Public Works that make the decisions.

The minister or the officials within the other department may have opinions or advice to offer, but the fact of the matter is the decision does not rest with them. The decision rests with the officials in the Department of Public Works.

[Canadian Wheat Board, November 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, there is a procedure in place to ensure just that. If there are violations of the rules, those violations can be investigated and the appropriate steps can be taken. If there are facts that are being alleged here that should be drawn to the attention of either me under the law or the election coordinator, I would welcome that information and the appropriate adjudication will take place.

[Government Contracts, November 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, again the issue is the question of who made the decision. The evidence that appears on the file in my department is that the decision was taken by the officials vested with that responsibility, and it was the officials within the Department of Public Works. The Department of Canadian Heritage could make a recommendation, as is its prerogative, but it does not make the decision.

[Government Contracts, November 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I obviously have no authority in relation to the matters that the hon. gentleman is suggesting, but I have looked at the records in my department to indicate what transpired at the time. What those records reveal is that an appropriate procedure was followed. A department needed certain services. It requisitioned those services from a pre-qualified list of suppliers. The selection of the firm from that pre-qualified list was made by the officials within the Department of Public Works.

[Government Contracts, November 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the issue here is who had the authority to take the decision. Under the processes existing at that time the decision was taken by the Department of Public Works, not by the Department of Canadian Heritage, not by the secretary of state, but by the Department of Public Works. The officials who had the responsibility at that time exercised their judgment and made a choice, but it was their decision, not one resting with some other minister.

[Government Contracts, November 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, again let me explain the process here. This occurred a number of years ago under the process in place at that time. The department wishing to have a certain advertising service set up a requisition. That requisition, as is the normal case, included a suggestion, but it was not the prerogative of the requisitioning department to make the decision. The prerogative rested with the Department of Public Works and the officials in that department at that time.

[Government Contracts, November 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it was not and is not the prerogative of the secretary of state to decide. The matter came under the contracting procedures of the Department of Public Works and the choice with respect to the firm to be selected off the pre-qualified list was made by officials within the Department of Public Works.

[Government Contracts, October 31st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I have made inquiries further to yesterday and my department is unaware of any ongoing investigation by either the RCMP or by the FBI with respect to the matter the hon. gentleman refers to.

He has requested that the Auditor General undertake an investigation. I understand the Auditor General is considering that request and will reply in due course, but with respect to any ongoing investigation by police authorities, my department is not aware of any.

[Prairie Farmers, October 31st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman's allegations are patently ridiculous. What is being suggested here by the opposition is that there should be some intervention in a court proceeding. That would obviously be an ethical violation and I will not do it, even when requested by the official opposition.

[Prairie Farmers, October 31st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the legislation that was enacted in 1998 provides very clearly for how the mandate of the Canadian Wheat Board can be changed. That mandate requires consultations with the board of directors and it requires a vote among prairie producers.

Interestingly, when we debated that legislation in 1998, this side of the House wanted to put in provisions that would allow farmers to trigger the whole change process and that was taken out at the request of the opposition.