National Post
Link to article
Subway car deal should be derailed
Stephen LeDrew
National Post
Friday, July 28, 2006
The debate that we are witnessing on the pages of the National Post and in coffee shops is not just about the cost of subway cars and Bombardier and the TTC and the Mayor of Toronto. We are witnessing more than just a political spat; this is a debate about the way that governments in Canada conduct themselves, about the way we do business in this country, and this sole-sourcing of subway cars for approximately three-quarters of a billion dollars is not the way we do business in Canada.
The deal, as it is structured now, is that the TTC made a decision to buy subway cars from Bombardier at a specified price (we don't know where this price came from, but presumably Bombardier set the price) and a bunch of accountants and bureaucrats are going to sit down to make sure that it is a good deal. Now, as to what constitutes "good" is unknown.
For example, how much profit should Bombardier make? Should it make a 5% profit or 50% profit, and who makes this decision?
Usually in this country when either government or business makes an acquisition, it calls for proposals or tenders, and then this process is scrutinized by firm and established rules, companies interested in doing the business make submissions, and the best and the cheapest product gets the nod. This is called competition.
Another benefit from open and above-board competition is that Canadian companies are generally allowed to bid on projects in other countries, which will probably not be the case if this deal is permitted to go through. Why would Germany or France allow a Canadian company to bid on any projects in their countries when Siemens and Alstom were precluded from even trying to get the business of the City of Toronto?
In addition, there is a very good case to be made that this whole deal is illegal. Section 106 of the Ontario Municipal Act states that "a municipality shall not assist directly or indirectly any manufacturing business or other industrial or commercial enterprise through the granting of bonuses for that purpose." Aside from the obvious interpretation, this has been recently construed in the Ontario courts to prohibit the conferring of "... an obvious advantage." There seems to be no argument but that Bombardier is receiving an obvious advantage from the City of Toronto because it is getting a huge amount of business plunked on its doorstep without competition. The Mayor of the City of Toronto has stated that the purchase of subway cars is being made from Bombardier because Bombardier needs the business -- no clearer case could be made but that this is a bonus.
The public has not been let in on the information that obviously the Mayor and the TTC have had -- that the jobs of the good people working for Bombardier in Thunder Bay would be lost if they didn't get this bid, although I guess we are to trust the Mayor when he says that the 300 people working for Bombardier in Thunder Bay need this contract to keep these jobs. But who told the Mayor that these jobs would disappear without this TTC contract? Bombardier? Is this a scare tactic to make a lot of profit on a non-tendered contract? Would these jobs disappear because no one else would buy Bombardier subway cars? Is Bombardier that lame?
We have established methods of doing business in this country because they work. It is the proper way to get value for your money and it is above-board. The Bombardier contract is socialism at its very worst because it presumes that government, and not the market, has the best knowledge and decision-making ability, and it presumes that without the government business no other business will be found. Presumably, Bombardier will be closing when this contract is filled? This sleight of hand slipped through by the Mayor and the chairman of the TTC should not be countenanced on any grounds.
- Stephen LeDrew is a Toronto lawyer and broadcaster.