Public Accounts committee  It's half a billion dollars.

Public Accounts committee  Well, I have a letter from Mr. Goodfellow telling me the value of the contract that was awarded, and it's a little over $500 million.

Public Accounts committee  It has an impact on the outcome of the evaluation. We're being evaluated on $500 million.

Public Accounts committee  No. It was, as I explained earlier, that we were asked to provide a ceiling price that would be the maximum a transferred employee would have to pay for property management services.

Public Accounts committee  We had to assemble property management firms across the country, in many locations where there aren't a lot of property management firms, that would manage these vacant houses for perhaps a year or two years. And yes, we were being conservative, because that's a tall order. Royal

Public Accounts committee  The only reason the RFP required bidders to include a ceiling price was to protect transferred employees from being gouged on property management services, which they had to pay themselves out of money the government had given them. We were all told we should assume we would be m

Public Accounts committee  --of $1,000.

Public Accounts committee  All the third-party services were to have a cap, which is commonly known as the ceiling price. That is what the government would pay for those services they had to pay for through the contractor. If the third-party supplier charged more than that, then either the relocation manag

Public Accounts committee  Yes, between the $48.7 million identified by the Auditor General and the technical points that were not awarded by the evaluation committee that should have been, the calculation shows that Envoy won the CF contract.

Public Accounts committee  We would have won the tender for the military contract.

Public Accounts committee  Yes. That is the big contract. There are two contracts, one for the military and one for everything else. The military is the larger by far.

Public Accounts committee  Actually, Mr. Badun and I don't interpret the RFP and the ensuing contract in the same way. This is a very simple situation that has a big red herring flopped all over it. The fact of the matter is that the government said that if you don't sell your house, we save $6,000 worth

Public Accounts committee  Our proposals were evaluated incorrectly, as confirmed by the CITT decision, and we were penalized on the technical points at least with respect to 24 points and arguably with respect to 48 points. The CITT looked into it and agreed with us on that. When you add the technical poi

Public Accounts committee  It's--

Public Accounts committee  No. Are we entitled to receive it?