Mr. Speaker, going back to my Member’s statement, I mentioned I was told that the bids on the highway maintenance contract were reasonable based on the scope of work. I received a letter with some numbers on it, and this letter, actually, Mr. Speaker, is an insult to my intelligence. I’m no engineer, but I know these numbers are not reasonable. I don’t know how the numbers were reached. I don’t know if it was the summer or winter that they used these numbers on.
I would like to direct my questions today to the Minister of Transportation. I’d like to ask him: the decision to cancel the highway maintenance contract — was that made in the regional office?
Mr. Speaker, the Member’s correct that the decision to cancel the contract was done on the advice of, recommendations and discussions with the regional office.
I’d like to ask the Minister if the regional office has the authority to cancel tenders.
Mr. Speaker, the final decision to cancel the contract was made with the deputy minister.
Why, then, was the contract cancelled by the deputy minister? Does the region not have the authority to cancel the contract? Why did the deputy minister cancel the tender?
The prices were too high, and with the processing system inside the department, the contract was cancelled by the headquarters.
Final supplementary, Mr. McLeod.
I say again, the letter I received was an insult to my intelligence. I can add these numbers up just as well as anybody else.
I’d like to ask the Minister if the department felt they were obligated to cancel the tender because of public comments made by the Minister to give an additional 20 per cent guaranteed on top of the 50 per cent already guaranteed.
This, Mr. Speaker, doesn’t create a level playing field. I guarantee you any money that if these tenders were opened today, one company will be low-balled because there’s not a fair playing field.
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure Members of this House and members of the public that when this department decides to cancel any government tenders, it’s based on strong merits, it’s based on a financial decision, and this decision was based on a financial position that the tender came in way too high – 2 per cent way too high. This had nothing to do with any other issues. It’s just that the prices were way too high.
