Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I wanted to talk about the Infrastructure Acquisition Plan and its format. We’re all familiar with the format of the Infrastructure Acquisition Plan, which lists each project individually along with the specific amount budgeted for each item. Projects range from $50,000 for a new patrol truck to millions of dollars for major infrastructure like schools. I’m concerned that this practice of publishing the budget for individual items may be preventing us from getting the best deal on our capital projects.
Suppliers, armed with the knowledge of the government’s maximum budget for an item, might easily bid higher than they would for other customers’ projects. Businesses certainly don’t publish their bottom lines in public documents, because to do so would obviously jeopardize their negotiating position. Is it any more reasonable that the government would do this? I’ve spoken to constituents who are in the business community, and they say that what this document, our Main Estimates, talks about helps them maximize their bidding opportunities, so they don’t leave money on the table.
I would like to suggest that our government consider reformatting the Infrastructure Acquisition Plan so that only the combined dollar total amounts are shown for small capital in this public document form. In this way we still leave the details in its project but not attached with a dollar amount. Regular Members, of course, would still want to see these details on individual items, but this information could be provided to us, like so many other items, in confidence. I’ve heard about this problem from a number of people. It only gets worse when it gets to large capital projects like schools or buildings. With a few hundred thousand dollars of opportunity here and there, this would add up to a large opportunity to save money.
This is being treated as a reference guide by many constituents. They say that when they want to go bid on a building envelope project, they go to our budget. If they want to go bid on a jet boat, they go to our Main Estimates. It goes on and on and on.
If the government wants to maximize its potential for saving money when we budget projects, we might want to keep that part of the project undisclosed when we go out. I’ve seen recent examples where by not publicizing our amount, we’ve been able to maximize construction of a school. We’ve been able to get good value for good dollars and good investment in quality projects. We need to go forward with a better plan.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Item 4, returns to oral questions. Item 5, recognition of visitors in the gallery. The honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, Mr. McLeod.
