cybercoma Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/auditor-general-sounds-alarm-on-house-and-senate-contracts/article4257405/ Parliament has wrongfully awarded large contracts that went to unqualified bidders, were signed retroactively or did not include any justification for being untendered, the Auditor-General has found. The article goes on to say that the AG has found that 70% of contracts have been handed out in this manner. Are we still going to perpetuate the myth that the Conservatives are the best fiscal managers? Edited June 13, 2012 by cybercoma Quote
Fletch 27 Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 Or....... They knew where the good deals were! What's an "un qualified bidder"? Ohhh yea, someone in the INDUSTRY and not a lobbyist. NOWHERE in that article does it say money was lost???? Can you please point me to that? A "quilified bidder" is a company or person who spends days working on 300 page preoposals that draw millions of inclusions and exclusions into it. Seems like the Tories like the "here's your price and here's when it will be done" method. And good for them! When I was at the NRC we were FORCED to only work with qualified bidders, and the NRC lost and still is losing, its shirt... I could have paid 900,000 for a Steinbickler digitizing system or 240,000 through a distributor.. No, we had to pay for the bidded 900,000 dollar system.. Good for harper in saving us money. No wonder the rest of the G20 are trying to adopt our model http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/auditor-general-sounds-alarm-on-house-and-senate-contracts/article4257405/ The article goes on to say that the AG has found that 70% of contracts have been handed out in this manner. Are we still going to perpetuate the myth that the Conservatives are the best fiscal managers? Quote
Anti-Am Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 Good for harper in saving us money. No wonder the rest of the G20 are trying to adopt our model And what model is that? Is it awarding large contracts to unqualified bidders, signed retroactively without any justification? Quote
Fletch 27 Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 OH NO!!!!!! Un-qualified?!?! Oh DEAR!!!! Retroactively!?!? For shame!!!!! Now point me to where we LOST money. Stop being a baby.. We are saving money and cutting red tape.... I'm glad there is FINALLY transparency now in Parliamnet however... Remember those days with that "Sponsorship" thing? I'm glad we now have visibility into this process...... However streamlined it has become.... Did I say streamlined? Feel free to use "efficient"... And stop crying... And what model is that? Is it awarding large contracts to unqualified bidders, signed retroactively without any justification? Quote
punked Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 Or....... They knew where the good deals were! What's an "un qualified bidder"? Ohhh yea, someone in the INDUSTRY and not a lobbyist. NOWHERE in that article does it say money was lost???? Can you please point me to that? A "quilified bidder" is a company or person who spends days working on 300 page preoposals that draw millions of inclusions and exclusions into it. Seems like the Tories like the "here's your price and here's when it will be done" method. And good for them! If they want here is the price and here is when it will be done all they have to do is put that in the proposal. Which is what I am sure they did then when the bidder they wanted couldn't meet those requirements they gave them the bid anyway. If the bidders can't meet the MANDATORY requirements then draw up new requirements don't make a bid so difficult no one can meet it so you can give to your friends that is poor and non-transparent governance. I can't believe you would defend this practice. Quote
Anti-Am Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 I'm glad there is FINALLY transparency now in Parliamnet however... And stop crying... I hope that was a satirical response. Or sarcastic. Quote
nimiru Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 Or....... They knew where the good deals were! What's an "un qualified bidder"? Ohhh yea, someone in the INDUSTRY and not a lobbyist. NOWHERE in that article does it say money was lost???? Can you please point me to that? A "quilified bidder" is a company or person who spends days working on 300 page preoposals that draw millions of inclusions and exclusions into it. Seems like the Tories like the "here's your price and here's when it will be done" method. And good for them! When I was at the NRC we were FORCED to only work with qualified bidders, and the NRC lost and still is losing, its shirt... I could have paid 900,000 for a Steinbickler digitizing system or 240,000 through a distributor.. No, we had to pay for the bidded 900,000 dollar system.. Good for harper in saving us money. No wonder the rest of the G20 are trying to adopt our model Not following the guidelines set up for these sort of things. Makes me wonder just what you find acceptable in a government. If this sort of action is alright with you just about anything they think up should do. That's scary don't you think? Quote
Anti-Am Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) If the bidders can't meet the MANDATORY requirements then draw up new requirements don't make a bid so difficult no one can meet it so you can give to your friends that is poor and non-transparent governance. I can't believe you would defend this practice. Isn't that what they did with the fighter jets and they didn't even meet the requirements that they made up? It takes a special kind of stupid to eff that up Edited June 13, 2012 by Anti-Am Quote
punked Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 OH NO!!!!!! Un-qualified?!?! Oh DEAR!!!! Retroactively!?!? For shame!!!!! Now point me to where we LOST money. Stop being a baby.. We are saving money and cutting red tape.... I'm glad there is FINALLY transparency now in Parliamnet however... Remember those days with that "Sponsorship" thing? I'm glad we now have visibility into this process...... However streamlined it has become.... Did I say streamlined? Feel free to use "efficient"... And stop crying... You know what the AG said in his report? He said this is all he can say about the bids because the GOVERNMENT WONT OPEN THEIR BOOKS to show him what the spending was on. Yah great transparency. Go read the report. “It is difficult for the Administration [of the Senate] to clearly conclude that expenses are appropriate,” the report said. “Senators operate on the honour principle, with their signatures attesting that the expenditures have been incurred in carrying out the performance of parliamentary functions.” Quote
punked Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 Isn't that what they did with the fighter jets and they didn't even meet the requirements that they made up? It takes a special kind of stupid to eff that up Yep but they were the "closest" pretend jet to the bid so there you go. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/auditor-general-sounds-alarm-on-house-and-senate-contracts/article4257405/ The article goes on to say that the AG has found that 70% of contracts have been handed out in this manner. Are we still going to perpetuate the myth that the Conservatives are the best fiscal managers? Calm down. These are expenditures by the Senate and the House of Commons for the upkeep and administration of their facilities. It's a quaint little non-partison bureaucracy. Quote Back to Basics
punked Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) Calm down. These are expenditures by the Senate and the House of Commons for the upkeep and administration of their facilities. It's a quaint little non-partison bureaucracy. It is 500 million dollars is what it is. That is half a billion. Not small potatoes at all. It would be a whole lot less if we got rid of the Senate yes men that get paid to rubber stamp budgets. Edited June 13, 2012 by punked Quote
Guest Derek L Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 Where in the article does it mention Conservative MP’s or Senators specifically? Do not the other parties have expense accounts? Quote
Fletch 27 Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) You know what the AG said in his report? He said this is all he can say about the bids because the GOVERNMENT WONT OPEN THEIR BOOKS to show him what the spending was on. Yah great transparency. Go read the report. Really??? Won't open the books to the AG? But they can find a 14 dollar glass of OJ?? I read the report and the AG was just on "power and politics". NO where did he say there was a loss of money... And he ALSO commented on "streamlining"... Loss of money? Where the hell is it then? PROOF damn you! What happened to proof!?!? "Conservatives are just giving away money"??? What kind of defamation and lie is that!?!?!? The article doesn't even mention the Tories! Nor does the episode on P'N'P ! Skapegoating much? Edited June 13, 2012 by Fletch 27 Quote
Guest Derek L Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 Really??? Won't open the books to the AG? But they can find a 14 dollar glass of OJ?? I read the report and the AG was just on "power and politics". NO where did he say there was a loss of money... And he ALSO commented on "streamlining"... Loss of money? Where the hell is it then? PROOF damn you! What happened to proof!?!? "Conservatives are just giving away money"??? What kind of defamation and lie is that!?!?!? It's Libel... Quote
Fletch 27 Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 I second that! A Libelous post.. The left is only showing that lies and un-truths are fair game when in the desire for power. Shame. I suggest the guy that started the thread change the topic title or forever and ever, be labeled a Libel-or! The NDP super-hero "the Libel-or"! Comes up with bold faced lies in the face of confrontation.. He can also jump over picket-lines in a single-bound... Or jump to other parties... It's Libel... Quote
MiddleClassCentrist Posted June 13, 2012 Report Posted June 13, 2012 Really??? Won't open the books to the AG? But they can find a 14 dollar glass of OJ?? I read the report and the AG was just on "power and politics". NO where did he say there was a loss of money... And he ALSO commented on "streamlining"... Loss of money? Where the hell is it then? PROOF damn you! What happened to proof!?!? "Conservatives are just giving away money"??? What kind of defamation and lie is that!?!?!? The article doesn't even mention the Tories! Nor does the episode on P'N'P ! Skapegoating much? Pure comedy. You meant that as hypocritical satire I hope. Or else that's just sad. Thanks for the entertainment. Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
Fletch 27 Posted June 14, 2012 Report Posted June 14, 2012 No proof huh,,,,, that's 2 times today.. Stick around cutie-pie, I'm here all week Pure comedy. You meant that as hypocritical satire I hope. Or else that's just sad. Thanks for the entertainment. Quote
BubberMiley Posted June 14, 2012 Report Posted June 14, 2012 No proof huh,,,,, that's 2 times today.. Where's your proof that Bob Rae is running for the leadership of the Liberals. You did start an unsubstantiated thread about it after all. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
westguy Posted June 14, 2012 Report Posted June 14, 2012 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/auditor-general-sounds-alarm-on-house-and-senate-contracts/article4257405/ The article goes on to say that the AG has found that 70% of contracts have been handed out in this manner. Are we still going to perpetuate the myth that the Conservatives are the best fiscal managers? are you going to keep telling us how much you hats the Conservatives? Quote
cybercoma Posted June 14, 2012 Author Report Posted June 14, 2012 Maybe you don't care about the government giving out contracts without following the proper procedures, but other Canadians care a little bit more about how their money is spent. Quote
Topaz Posted June 14, 2012 Report Posted June 14, 2012 The problem with the AG, as it was pointed out on tv, was he only does this report once every five years and the AG should check on these guys every year but his department too, has funds being cut. It seems the A/T's are cutting everything but THEIR pensions and benefits. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/long-fought-audit-of-mp-and-senate-expenses-set-for-release-wont-name-names-158840935.html Quote
Smallc Posted June 14, 2012 Report Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) Maybe you don't care about the government giving out contracts without following the proper procedures, but other Canadians care a little bit more about how their money is spent. The Parliament of Canada is not the Government of Canada. All of the parties have direct input into what the Parliament does. Edited June 14, 2012 by Smallc Quote
capricorn Posted June 14, 2012 Report Posted June 14, 2012 From the OP's link. Still, Mr. Ferguson said nothing in the audit raised “cause for concern,” stating that the mistakes that were identified were largely administrative.“On the whole, we found no major weaknesses in the administrations of the Senate or the House of Commons,” Mr. Ferguson said. He added that both chambers agreed to implement his recommendations for improved administrative measures. No giving away money, no fraud, no theft and no link to robocalls. What me worry? Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
Fletch 27 Posted June 14, 2012 Report Posted June 14, 2012 QUICK! Skill testing question here as this is a political forum! What... Is the difference between the government of Canada and the parliament? Omg... Really dude? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/auditor-general-sounds-alarm-on-house-and-senate-contracts/article4257405/ The article goes on to say that the AG has found that 70% of contracts have been handed out in this manner. Are we still going to perpetuate the myth that the Conservatives are the best fiscal managers? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.