Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 106-120 of 211
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Public Accounts committee  I'll make note of that and table it with the chair.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  Yes, it is. That is the practice. The Treasury Board ministers look at the cash needed, look at other priorities of the government, and come down with a decision. We give them information that would help them make their decision, and they make--

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  Clearly it would be better if full life-cycle costing and accrual accounting were used, and that's the whole issue being discussed right now. Mind you, I think...yes, we need to look at the full life cycle, there's no doubt about it, and I think perhaps members of the Treasury Board are looking at it as well.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  I think this is the issue we talked about earlier. We have now a good understanding of what we need and we're going out to acquire these systems. This will help us to upgrade over the next couple of years. I should also say that since the 2002 report, we have developed regional investment plans based on each major real estate region of the country and the needs of different government departments.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  Yes, Mr. Chair. We have been very conscious of the need to upgrade our systems in this kind of program going forward, and the actual savings we've achieved so far and are working on amount to $1.25 billion. We have earmarked $100 million for changes over five years—new systems, new capabilities, and so forth—which then would yield a net of $925 million.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  We are certainly examining very carefully the economics of owning, because as you look at a business case on paper, when you want a long-term occupancy, it would often point to the advisability of owning. On the other hand, as you get into the 25-year journey and you don't make the investments to upgrade your building, you end up at the end of 25 years with a building you really have to tear down.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  I believe the reasoning was that the minister and the department had decided.... If I go back a bit, they had wanted to expand their occupancy or the space they needed. They ended up concluding that they didn't need to expand—so right there is a savings in the space utilization, but in other costs as well—and that they would stay where they were.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  Yes, you're right. That's what I meant. We tried to reduce the impact of that.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  Yes, we would be very pleased to do that.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  I very much regret that I cannot.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  There has been a letter of intent signed with the vendor, Minto, on January 10. The option we have with the vendor expires on June 15.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  Yes, so a decision must be made--

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  You mean the decision--

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall

Public Accounts committee  Yes, the letter of intent clearly states that we must receive approval from ministers of the Treasury Board, and other conditions of that kind.

June 8th, 2006Committee meeting

David Marshall