Floyd Roland

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I guess just to set the record straight; from our discussions with the Department of Justice and the Legal Services Board, they are happy with the location that this new contract puts in place. It is a five-year lease, with options to renew. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we do have policies on whether we go RFP, sole source, negotiated contract or public tender, and I disagree with the Member that this was wrong. We went out for an RFP, a public process. We went out to the public and asked for input. We received some input. For one reason or another that didn’t fit the guidelines out there, but they were close enough. We sat down, used the same companies, had discussions about adequate space, and went forward with the one we felt was best at the time. I will provide a copy of the policies to the Member for the guidelines...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as I stated earlier, I believe we are in sync with what the Member is stating as we go forward. We are intending to change the policy to do just as the Member has stated in recognition that we have to be more accountable and those that receive money from us need to do the same, as well as the principle of being accountable to all citizens. We can no longer differentiate if it’s a private individual in income tax versus a business or a non-profit agency, and that’s what the majority of this here is around non-profit groups. They’re affected and as we go...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is something that we have stated in this government that we intend to be more vigilant and accountable for the dollars that are spent that are put out there. We can give a number of examples. As I stated earlier, I am bringing a paper to my FMB colleagues for accountability and a sense of directors that are on boards and requesting funds from the government.

Another big piece we have done here, since becoming elected, is put into practice the third-party accountability framework that is now being rolled out. That, as well, enhances how we see this flowing as a...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, with me this afternoon is Mr. Lew Voytilla, secretary to the FMBS.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I don’t have that detail with me with regard to the Department of Health and Social Services and the work they’ve undertaken in trying to get an accounting for that money. What I can say is, once the file was forwarded to us in FMBS, there were actions taken and initiated to try and collect on the funds, but our efforts came to no gain for us and that’s why we’re at this stage today. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The purpose of the Write-off of Assets and Debts Act, 2004-2005, is to authorize the write-off of debts listed in the schedule to the act. Pursuant to section 24 of the Financial Administration Act, the write-off of assets or debts exceeding $20,000 must receive Legislative Assembly approval.

Pursuant to section 82 of the Financial Administration Act, the write-off of debts owed to a public agency exceeding $20,000 must receive Legislative Assembly approval.

The write-off of debts owed to the Workers’ Compensation Board exceeding $50,000 must receive Legislative...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The member is right. As we go forward on the basis of some of the work that’s being done in RWED now, some of these deficiencies and concerns raised in the past and at this time, as well, are being considered as we go forward. Just to highlight the fact that in the next bill we are going to be dealing with accounts for the next $100,000 through the Development Corporation that we are forgiving in the next piece, and potentially there are other things to come. It is an area of concern, it has been for awhile, but there is a certain amount of risk that we do realize...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess I would have difficulty in recognizing how we are harming the operations of a company that did put in a response to an RFP. This company had put in their response. All three were actually deemed not to make the cut, but when we looked at what was on the table and the request for the space, and this was seen as adequate space in a downtown location where people can easily access the service that’s been asked for, it was felt that this was the avenue to go. Again with discussions with the Department of Justice, we felt that this was the avenue we go with. It...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No, there wasn’t a substantial amount repaid. Thank you.