Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 16-30 of 65
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Public Accounts committee  Strictly untendered?

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  I'm sorry; I think he's talking about the e-training.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  The e-training being developed by Public Works and Government Services Canada is on track to be put in place at the Canada public service school by the end of this month.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  I can report, if I may, Deputy, that we have developed a process, and we've in fact given it a test drive. In early February we were successful in removing an R designation on a parcel of INAC land. So we have used the process, and it worked: we have actually removed an R.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  It is one out of 21. The important thing to understand about the R designation is that these are parcels of land that federal departments are using—their Inuit-owned lands. There's a reserved designation because a federal department was using it at the time the land claim agreement was signed.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  There are a couple of steps to it. There is a second parcel, I'm told, that is close to having the R designation removed—within weeks. The process is that if there have been actual undertakings on the site, for instance buildings or storage of contaminated materials, we have to do a joint inspection with the Inuvialuit Land Corporation of the site, develop a jointly agreed remediation plan, then carry out the remediation plan, and then jointly inspect the property at the end of that.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  I don't know the answer.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  I don't know the answer to that.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  I have not personally, sir, but it's an excellent suggestion and I'll have staff look into that.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  At this stage, we've had many discussions with Public Works and Treasury Board around what kinds of information systems we have to track our contracting, for instance, and then our non-competitive tendered expenditures. As you can imagine, the Government of Canada has fairly significant-sized contracting, and we are challenged by needing to break down our contracting activities to settlement land areas, which are different boundaries from normal provincial-territorial boundaries that our big systems may understand.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  Like the deputy, I don't have the actual records. But it would be most unusual for us to put forward a cabinet submission that implicated other departments and did not have their full endorsement. I can't imagine that occurring 23 years ago, and I can't imagine it occurring today.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  We can look into that, but I'm not sure....

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  We have the federal government's view of “reasonable share”,and now we have a responsibility under the land claim agreement to consult with our other partners to come to a mutual conclusion as to the interpretation of“reasonable share”.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  I can't give an example.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell

Public Accounts committee  Yes, I do, sir.

March 11th, 2008Committee meeting

Terry Sewell