Source: http://bpp.worldbank.org/en/data/exploreeconomies/canada/2017
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 06:47:16+00:00

Document:
There are no regulatory barriers to doing PPPs in Canada at the federal, provincial, or municipal level. The Canadian PPP regulatory framework on the federal level would include: -Government Contracts Regulations SOR/87-402 (1987) (last amended September 22, 2011) -Department of Public Works and Government Services Act S.C. 1996, c. 16 (last amended on June 26, 2013) -Financial Administration Act R.S.C., 1985, c. F-11 (1985) (last amended on October 1, 2014) -Procurement Services Act [SBC 2003] Chapter 22 (Assented to April 10, 2003) -Guideline to Implementing Budget 2011 Direction on Public-Private Partnerships, issued by the Treasury Board in 2012 [hereinafter "Federal Implementing Guidelines"]. According to Section 6.1 of these Guidelines, "In the Government of Canada, P3s are governed by various Treasury Board policies and their associated standards and directives. Policies governing federal investments in assets and acquired services primarily reside under the Policy Framework for the Management of Assets and Acquired Services. Ensuring value for money in the management of assets and acquired services is a guiding principle of the framework and its associated policy instruments. Deputy heads are accountable for ensuring that proper due diligence is conducted and that investment decisions demonstrate value for money in line with the principles outlined in Treasury Board policies. The following is a summary of relevant Treasury Board policy considerations for P3s: Under the Policy Framework for the Management of Assets and Acquired Services, value for money and sound stewardship are achieved through a life-cycle approach to the management of assets and acquired services. For decisions involving federal real property, departments and agencies may consult the Policy on Management of Real Property. The Guide to the Management of Real Property provides guidance to departments and agencies on real property decisions throughout the property's life cycle. Federal investments should be considered in the context of the department's investment planning process. The objective of the Policy on Investment Planning is to contribute to the achievement of value for money and sound stewardship in government program delivery through effective investment planning. Federal real property projects are subject to the requirements of the Policy on the Management of Projects. The objective of the policy is to ensure that the appropriate systems, processes, and controls for managing projects are in place at a departmental, horizontal, or government-wide level and that they support the achievement of project and program outcomes, while limiting the risk to stakeholders and taxpayers. Departments and agencies may consult the Contracting Policy and associated policy instruments for contracting and procurement considerations." -The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Business Case Guide (2008). -Additional components of a PPP screening process are guides particularly for federal departments and agencies developed by the relevant Governmental entity, PPP Canada, in accordance with the aforementioned Federal Implementing Guidelines and with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s Policy on Investment Planning. These Guides are comprised of: a) Federal P3 Screen b) Procurement Options Analysis Development Guide; c) Procurement Options Analysis Methodology Guide; d) P3 Business Case Development Guide. -Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Contracting Policy (1989) [hereinafter "Federal Contracting Policy"]. This includes the Policies' Appendix C - Treasury Board Contracts Directive; Section 3 of the Federal Contracting Policy addresses its scope of application and provides, "This policy applies to all departments and agencies, including departmental corporations and branches designated as departments for purposes of the Financial Administration Act, except those included within the meaning of paragraph (c) of the definition of "department" found in section 2 of that Act." -Competition Act, RSC 1985, c C-34 (1985) Additionally, contributors highlighted the nature of the country's legal system, which embodies case law and inter-provincial trade agreements that the regulatory framework would be comprised of in addition to provincial laws. This shall form the regulatory framework on PPPs in Canada's federal level system for purposes of this analysis.
"In the Government of Canada, P3s are governed by various Treasury Board policies and their associated standards and directives. Policies governing federal investments in assets and acquired services primarily reside under the Policy Framework for the Management of Assets and Acquired Services. Ensuring value for money in the management of assets and acquired services is a guiding principle of the framework and its associated policy instruments.
Deputy heads are accountable for ensuring that proper due diligence is conducted and that investment decisions demonstrate value for money in line with the principles outlined in Treasury Board policies.
Under the Policy Framework for the Management of Assets and Acquired Services, value for money and sound stewardship are achieved through a life-cycle approach to the management of assets and acquired services.
For decisions involving federal real property, departments and agencies may consult the Policy on Management of Real Property. The Guide to the Management of Real Property provides guidance to departments and agencies on real property decisions throughout the property's life cycle.
Federal investments should be considered in the context of the department's investment planning process. The objective of the Policy on Investment Planning is to contribute to the achievement of value for money and sound stewardship in government program delivery through effective investment planning.
Federal real property projects are subject to the requirements of the Policy on the Management of Projects. The objective of the policy is to ensure that the appropriate systems, processes, and controls for managing projects are in place at a departmental, horizontal, or government-wide level and that they support the achievement of project and program outcomes, while limiting the risk to stakeholders and taxpayers.
Departments and agencies may consult the Contracting Policy and associated policy instruments for contracting and procurement considerations."
-The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Business Case Guide (2008).
-Additional components of a PPP screening process are guides particularly for federal departments and agencies developed by the relevant Governmental entity, PPP Canada, in accordance with the aforementioned Federal Implementing Guidelines and with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s Policy on Investment Planning. These Guides are comprised of: a) Federal P3 Screen b) Procurement Options Analysis Development Guide; c) Procurement Options Analysis Methodology Guide; d) P3 Business Case Development Guide.
-Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Contracting Policy (1989) [hereinafter "Federal Contracting Policy"]. This includes the Policies' Appendix C - Treasury Board Contracts Directive; Section 3 of the Federal Contracting Policy addresses its scope of application and provides, "This policy applies to all departments and agencies, including departmental corporations and branches designated as departments for purposes of the Financial Administration Act, except those included within the meaning of paragraph (c) of the definition of "department" found in section 2 of that Act."
Additionally, contributors highlighted the nature of the country's legal system, which embodies case law and inter-provincial trade agreements that the regulatory framework would be comprised of in addition to provincial laws.
This shall form the regulatory framework on PPPs in Canada's federal level system for purposes of this analysis.
The Federal Implementing Guidelines in Section 4 provide that PPP Canada has been established "to advance federal efforts to increase the effective use of P3s in Canada. PPP Canada advises departments and agencies in support of P3s and assesses federal P3 opportunities. It also provides information and support services to departments and agencies considering a P3 option."
Additionally, the Federal P3 Screen, Procurement Options Analysis Development, Procurement Options Analysis Methodology, and P3 Business Case Development Guides clarify that government agencies and departments should engage PPP Canada in the analysis process.
If the project is receiving federal funds, then it is subject to the approval of the appropriate government ministry (e.g., Transport Canada). Article 4.1.6 of the Treasury Board Federal Contracting Policy provide, "Treasury Board approval must be obtained prior to entering into contracts or contractual arrangements where the values or the contract costs (which include all applicable taxes including GST and HST) exceed the limits prescribed by the Treasury Board in the Treasury Board Contracts Directive (Appendix C)."
The Federal Treasury Board approval is required before contract execution. This approval requirement is not exclusive for PPPs but also required for similar scope procurement under any model. Previously mentioned Article 4.1.6 of the Treasury Board Federal Contracting Policy thus applies.
Contributors identified that the (Conseil des ministres), or the Cabinet, would approve certain PPP projects that are large scope projects, which are considered new policy initiatives within the Federal Government.
Section 127(2) of the Financial Administration Act addresses public borrowing and stipulates, "Where a parent Crown corporation indicates in a corporate plan or an amendment to a corporate plan an intention to borrow money, the Minister of Finance may require that his recommendation, in addition to that of the appropriate Minister, be obtained before the plan or amendment is submitted to the Governor in Council for approval."
Facilities Management / Output Specification Advisors: These technical advisors assist in the development of the output requirements and the standards for the asset.
Cost Consultants or Design Consultants: These consultants provide assistance in assessing the costs of designing and building the asset. They can also provide cost data for the risk workshops.
Transaction Advisors: These advisors provide support for the competitive process, contributing to the development of documentation such as the request for qualifications, the request for proposals and the project agreement. A fairness monitor may also be used as part of the competitive process.
On the federal level, Section (2) of the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund Act (S.C. 2002, c. 9, s. 47) provides, "The Fund shall, where appropriate, promote the use of partnerships between public and private sector bodies." And according to Section 5 of the Federal Implementing Guidelines, "[B]budget 2011 encourages federal organizations to explore potential P3 opportunities through a P3 screen for infrastructure projects that have capital costs of less than $100 million and a lifespan of less than 20 years. Budget 2011 also encourages federal organizations to explore P3 opportunities for investments other than federal infrastructure projects."
If yes, please specify: This is in application of the previously mentioned framework.
The Business Case Guide issued by the Board of Treasury on the Federal level provides the methodology for socio-economic analysis of PPP projects. Section 3.4.3 of this Guide discusses "impact assessments".
The Business Case Guide issued by the Board of Treasury on the Federal level provides the methodology for socio-economic analysis of PPP projects. Section 3.4.3 discusses "impact assessments" and lists a number of factors that should be provided and assessed in order to proceed with investments. These include: Economic: - Fluctuating interest and exchange rates - Current economic situation and trends - Current and projected economic growth - Unemployment and labour supply - Labour costs - Levels of disposable income and income distribution Social: Resources, training, change management, and cultural impact - Population growth rate and age profile - Population health, education, social mobility, and attitudes toward these - Population employment patterns, job market freedom, and attitudes toward work - Employee engagement In addition, according to New Building Canada Fund: Procurement Options Analysis Guide [hereinafter "Procurement Analysis Guide"] http://www.p3canada.ca/~/media/english/resources-library/files/nbcf%20poa%20guide_20140328_final_eng_clean.pdf, issued by PPP Canada, identified in Section 2 under "Qualitative Analysis" the need to include economic and social factors in the assessment of PPP projects.
Details: This is in application of the previous guidelines to ensure PPP projects are well screened.
The Procurement Analysis Guide in Section 4 on "Quantitative Analysis" discusses "P3 Model Cost Estimates." The factors that would be highlighted in this analysis would ensure the operation, maintenance and lifecycle services are paid for by the Procuring Authority and the payments are referred to as the Non-Capital Annual Service Payment (Non-Capital ASP). Similar to the Capital ASP, the NonCapital ASPs are made regularly on a monthly or quarterly basis. There is no financing element associated with the Non-Capital ASP. The total of the Capital ASP and Non-Capital ASP is simply referred to as the Annual Service Payment (ASP). The calculation of the Capital ASP and Non-Capital ASP are the main components of this analysis. Moreover, Section 6.2 discusses investment costs where the purpose of this section is to present two separate base cost estimates, on a whole-of-life basis, of the PSC and the preferred P3 model.
The Federal Procurement Analysis Guide in Section 4 on "Quantitative Analysis" discusses "P3 Model Cost Estimates." The factors that would be highlighted in this analysis would ensure the operation, maintenance and lifecycle services are paid for by the Procuring Authority and the payments are referred to as the Non-Capital Annual Service Payment (Non-Capital ASP). Similar to the Capital ASP, the NonCapital ASPs are made regularly on a monthly or quarterly basis. There is no financing element associated with the Non-Capital ASP. The total of the Capital ASP and Non-Capital ASP is simply referred to as the Annual Service Payment (ASP). The calculation of the Capital ASP and Non-Capital ASP are the main components of this analysis. The Canadian Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals also provides a cost benefit analysis guide in Step 4. And the Federal Identifying PPPs Guide identifies affordability criteria in Criterion 13 under "Life-Cycle Costs."
According to the PPP Screening criteria in Section 5 of the Federal Implementing Guidelines, the "The potential value of a P3 delivery model is heavily dependent on the ability to identify and allocate risks. While a full risk assessment will be undertaken as part of the value for money analysis, departments and agencies are encouraged to conduct a preliminary review of potential risks as part of the P3 screen. It will be helpful to assess whether there may be opportunities to transfer these risks to the private sector and to determine the extent to which the investment will benefit from the transfer of risks. Risks that the private sector may be in a better position to manage include, for example, those related to design, construction, recapitalization, and timeline. The public sector is often in the best position to manage demand-related risks."
Section 3.5 of the Business Case Guide outlines risk assessment factors. Step 5 of the Federal Procurement Analysis Guide details this assessment under "Risk Analysis and Quantification."
Section 6 of the Federal Implementing Guidelines provides in 6.2, "Value for money analysis essentially represents a risk-adjusted comparison of the costs and benefits of different investment options. While the distinction between value for money analysis and the development of the business case varies, for the purpose of this guide, value for money analysis is seen as an input into the development of the business case. The business case combines the analysis of requirements and screening with a preliminary value for money analysis that includes qualitative, quantitative, and risk factors."
If yes, please elaborate Sections 6.3 and 6.4 of the Federal Implementing Guidelines detail comparative assessment analysis standards.
Section 5 of the Federal Implementing Guidelines highlights the importance of assessing the "Financial or Funding Considerations" as part of the PPP screening process. Section 6.4 of the Federal Procurement Analysis Guide also articulates financing assumptions corresponding to the different potential procurement models, which include: The assumed financing plan under the P3 model, including the types, amounts and timing of different senior-debt, equity or mezzanine instruments, along with associated fees and pricing.
Section 4 of the Federal Procurement Options Analysis Methodology provides outlines components of financial viability and bankability assessments.
The Federal Implementing Guidelines provide under Section 5 entitled "Budget 2011 and P3 Screening," the "Private Sector Interest and Capacity: It is important to determine as early as possible whether there will be private sector interest in the potential investment because the value proposition of a P3 is enhanced by competition. Requests for expressions of interest and other forms of market sounding are often used as tools to assess market interest. Private sector interest is a primary driver in the ability of the model to deliver value; the level of interest depends on a variety of factors including the considerations outlined in this section."
Details of market assessment of what is referred to as "market sounding" is outlined in Section 3.0 Step 4 of the Business Case Development Model. Additionally, Section 3 of the Procurement Analysis Guide also addresses market sounding, and sets the objective of this assessment to: - Outline the Procuring Authority's overall strategy for engaging with market sounding participants; - Describe the process used to identify market sounding participants to ensure that selected participants are appropriate. A list of market sounding participants should be included; - Describe the process used to conduct market soundings, including details about the project related information provided to participants in advance of the meeting, the role of the Procuring Authority during meetings; questions asked; and - Provide information on the Procuring Authority's plan for follow-up consultations and refreshes.
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012 (http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-15.21/) provides in Section 13, "A designated project for which the responsible authority is referred to in any of paragraphs 15(a) to (c) is subject to an environmental assessment." Section 15 includes, "(c) the federal authority that performs regulatory functions, that may hold public hearings and that is prescribed by regulations made under paragraph 83(b), in the case of a designated project that includes activities that are linked to that federal authority as specified in the regulations made under paragraph 84(a) or the order made under subsection 14(2)."
Section 2.3 of the Procurement Analysis Guide on "Investment Description and Rationale" provides, "Feasibility studies should assess the degree to which various features of the investment are either sustainable or achieve the objectives desired by the department or agency. A common approach used in feasibility studies is the use of the triple bottom line (TBL) analysis. The TBL assesses different options on the basis of social, economic and environmental factors." The Section stresses that departments should obtain relevant screening information from sources such as environmental assessment reports to ensure the project's feasibility.
Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012 provides that factors that must be considered when conducting environmental impact assessments in Section 19 of this Act.
(j) any other matter relevant to the environmental assessment that the responsible authority, or — if the environmental assessment is referred to a review panel — the Minister, requires to be taken into account."
Details: This is in application of the previous guidelines and Act and to ensure PPP projects are well screened.
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012 also provides within the environmental impact assessment scheme, the environmental assessment of a designated project may take into account community knowledge and Aboriginal traditional knowledge (Section 19(2)(3)).
Details: This is in application of the previous Act and to ensure PPP projects are well screened.
According to the Federal Procurement Services Act, "(3) The minister may recommend to government, government organizations and local public bodies (a) practices, (b) the form and content of agreements, and (c) arrangements that promote fair and open procurement, competition, demand aggregation, value for money, transparency and accountability." Additionally, Section 12.4.2 of the Contracting Policies provides, "12.4.2 As stated in article 4.2, the Standard Government Construction Contract has been prescribed for all construction contracts that exceed $100,000. The basic policy governing the principles and expression of the Standard Government Construction Contract is the prerogative of the Treasury Board. However, the style and content are the responsibility of the Public Works and Government Services Canada."
Section 10.7.38 of the Federal Contracting Policy provides, "For procurements subject to NAFTA and WTO-AGP, after the publication of an invitation to participate, but before the time set for the opening or receipt of tenders as specified in the notices or the tender documentation, a contracting authority finds that it has become necessary to amend or reissue the notice or tender documentation, the contracting authority shall ensure that the amended or reissued notice or tender documentation is given the same circulation as the original. Any significant information given by a contracting authority to a supplier with respect to particular procurement shall be given simultaneously to all other interested suppliers and sufficiently in advance so as to provide all suppliers concerned adequate time to consider the information and to respond."
Contributors have identified that the minimum periods are provided in the request for qualifications or proposals. Nonetheless, the Canadian Internal Trade Agreement Section 506 provides, "5. Each Party shall provide suppliers with a reasonable period of time to submit a bid, taking into account the time needed to disseminate the information and the complexity of the procurement."
(b) inviting bids on a proposed contract from suppliers on the suppliers’ list."
Federal Contracting Policy 10.1.1 also provides, "As required by Section 5 of the Government Contracts Regulations, the contracting authority is to solicit bids before any contract is entered into. The competitive approach in determining a contractor should therefore be the norm." Contributors confirm that open tendering remains one of the options available within the competitive bidding scheme for PPP projects.
Federal Contracting Policy 10.7.20 provides, "Pre-qualification of bidders. When the size or complexity of a project necessitates further special assurance of the contractor's ability, all necessary tests of the competence of prospective contractors may be made in advance. Bids are then invited only from the firms that have qualified. The possibility of disqualifying a firm after it has incurred a considerable expense in bidding on a large special project is thereby reduced or eliminated." Section 1.7 of the Federal P3 Screen also provides, "P3s, by virtue of their long-term nature, require a signify cant investment in upfront planning and analysis and the engagement of advisors with P3 expertise. This upfront planning serves as an assurance that needs are well understood and articulated; that cost estimates are robust; that risks are understood and optimally allocated; and that competitive bids will be received through the Request for Qualify cation (RFQ) and Request for Proposals (RFP) process. The benefit ts of the due diligence implied by the P3 planning process can improve the performance of public sector investments that often involve the expenditure of hundreds of millions in public funds."
Decision Point—P3 identified as preferred option through updated value for money analysis.
Federal Contracting Policy 10.7.22 provides, "Two-step proposal (including price competition). This method is used when, owing to the special nature of the requirement and the lack of a detailed definition of the specifications, the selection is to be based largely on the technical and managerial proposals submitted. Final selection among the firms that have submitted acceptable technical and managerial proposals is then made on the basis of price. One of the methods above may be used to choose firms to be invited. Pre-qualification is frequently the most appropriate in these circumstances."
According to Section 10.7.41 of the Federal Contracting Policy, "Call for tenders under the Agreement on Internal Trade. A notice of a call for tenders shall contain at least the following information: a brief description of the procurement contemplated; the place where a person may obtain information and tender documents; the conditions for obtaining the tender documents; the place where the tenders are to be sent; the date and time limit for submitting tenders; the time and place of the opening of the tenders in the event of a public opening, and a statement that the procurement is subject to the AIT." Section 10.5.1 of this Policy furthermore provides, "Requirements should be defined and specifications and estimates established before bids are solicited and contracts let, so that all prospective contractors are treated equally. In acquiring complex capital equipment, construction or services, other procedures may help control time, cost and performance. Some of these are described below. The procurement method chosen should be indicated, with supporting justification, when contract approval is sought, whether within a department or agency or from the Treasury Board. Adequate specification details should be available to all interested or qualified firms."
According to Section 10.7.1 of the Federal Contracting Policy, "Equal opportunity for all contractors. In accordance with the policy statement to reflect fairness in spending public funds and the requirements under the trade agreements, the method of procurement used for a particular acquisition must, within the limits of practicality, give all qualified firms an equal opportunity for access to government business." Section 10.5.1 of this Policy furthermore provides, "Requirements should be defined and specifications and estimates established before bids are solicited and contracts let, so that all prospective contractors are treated equally. In acquiring complex capital equipment, construction or services, other procedures may help control time, cost and performance. Some of these are described below. The procurement method chosen should be indicated, with supporting justification, when contract approval is sought, whether within a department or agency or from the Treasury Board. Adequate specification details should be available to all interested or qualified firms."
The Federal Contracting Policies in Section 10.8.22 provide, "Forwarding of Tender Documentation by the Entities under the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization - Agreement on Government Procurement. The respective agreements require that in open and selective procedures, contracting authorities shall forward the tender documentation at the request of any supplier participating in the procedure, and shall reply promptly to any reasonable request for explanations relating hereto."
General rules on transparency and fairness of the bidding process would apply according to Section 10.7.27 of the Federal Contracting Policies, which stipulate, "The principle of applying bid criteria or requirements equally to all bidders is part of Canadian contract law and is applicable to both the public as well as the private sectors. Fairness to all prospective contractors and transparency in the award process are imperative." Section 10.7.2 of these Policies also provides, "Contracting authorities should note that when a combination of solicitation processes is used together, it is essential that they commence and close on the same dates; provide potential suppliers with the same information; and impose identical obligations on these suppliers." As for the proprietary information that may harm certain bidders, contributors have explained that for RFQs the answer is generally they are shared with all bidders." In RFPs there are two types of questions, (a) those that are not confidential and the responses go to all bidders. The second type of question are commercial in confidence questions. The responses to those questions only go to the proponent who submitted the question. Proponents indicate which category they think their question falls into. It is the public sector which must decide if they agree with the classification of the question or not.
If yes, please specify: Disclosure is part of upholding a transparent and fair procurement process.
If no, please elaborate: Contributors provided that in actual impementation, disclosure varies by project and authority.
Section 10.7.27 of the Federal Contracting Policies, which stipulate, "The principle of applying bid criteria or requirements equally to all bidders is part of Canadian contract law and is applicable to both the public as well as the private sectors. Fairness to all prospective contractors and transparency in the award process are imperative." Reference could also be made to the Supreme Court of Canada's judgment on the law of tender in Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia (Transportation and Highways), 2010 SCC 4 (CanLII),  1 S.C.R. 69. (Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia (Transportation and Highways),  1 SCR 69, 2010 SCC 4 (CanLII), , retrieved on 2016-03-30) provides a helpful overview of the law of tender, at para. 87: For almost three decades, the law governing a structured bidding process has been dominated by the concept of Contract A/Contract B initially formulated in The Queen in right of Ontario v. Ron Engineering & Construction (Eastern) Ltd., 1981 CanLII 17 (SCC),  1 S.C.R. 111. The analysis advanced by Estey J. in that case was that the bidding process, as defined by the terms of the tender call, may create contractual relations ("Contract A") prior in time and quite independently of the contract that is the actual subject matter of the bid ("Contract B"). Breach of Contract A may, depending on its terms, give rise to contractual remedies for non-performance even if Contract B is never entered into or, as in the present case, it is awarded to a competitor. The result of this legal construct is to provide unsuccessful bidders with a contractual remedy against an owner who departs from its own bidding rules. Contract A, however, arises (if at all) as a matter of interpretation. It is not imposed as a rule of law. [Emphasis in original.]"
According to Section 10.8.10 of the Federal Contracting Policies, "When only one valid bid has been received, that bidder may also be asked to provide price substantiation. If the information provided is not acceptable to the contracting authority, then price negotiation should take place. If the single bidder does not appear to have the requisite financial stability, it may be in the public interest to require the bidder to submit an appropriate form of security before the bid is considered. Another alternative would be to invite new bids."
Contributors have provided that the awards are published electronically on the federal level on http://www.p3canada.ca/en/about-us/media-room/. Section 10.7.31 of the Federal Contracting Policy provides, "10.7.31 In order to demonstrate the requirement for access and openness in government contracting, contracting authorities are encouraged to publish an Advance Contract Award Notice (ACAN) for contracts with pre-identified contractors using electronic bidding methodology. If no statements of capabilities meeting the requirements set out in the ACAN are received within fifteen calendar days, the contract is deemed to be competitive and the higher electronic bidding dollar levels apply."
According to Section 10.8.21 of the Federal Contracting Polices, "Debriefings should be provided to unsuccessful bidders on request and should normally include an outline of the factors and criteria used in the evaluation, while respecting each bidder's right to the confidentiality of specific information. "Additionally, judicial decisions provide a basis for this. In Canadian Federal Courts, the Khoury Real Estate Services Ltd. v. Canada (Public Works and Government Services), 1996 CanLII 11863 (FC) (Federal Court of Canada Trial Division) http://canlii.ca/t/g07wb discusses this aspect in its application of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (R.S.O. 1990, c. F.31, as amended) and the Court explains, "Protection of proprietary information and ensuring an appropriate measure of confidentiality concerning details of different proposals are accepted aspects of the process of tendering in response to invitations to contract. At the same time, courts have traditionally intervened at least in the award of public contracts where there is unfairness in the process (Assaly (Thomas C.) Corp. v. Canada,  34 F.T.R. 156 (F.C.T.D.)), or possibly for other reasons necessary to ensure the integrity of the process. Clearly, judicial review of decisions made in the contracting of work by federal public authorities is within this Court's jurisdiction (Gestion Complexe Cousineau (1989) v. Canada, 1995 CanLII 3600 (FCA),  2 F.C. 694 at 702-703, per Décary J.A.). It is due to the necessity of ensuring fairness in the process that tenders submitted on projects that are defined in detail ordinarily lead, on opening of the bids, to publication of the tender prices submitted. That ensures for all who have submitted a tender, that their tender has been received and evaluated in relation to cost at the prices they have set, and it also indicates where their tender ranks, in terms of price, in relation to others. In that process, the cost or price is that determined by the party submitting the tender." The Court further applies these standards to the facts of the case, which concerned a residential development project conducted under a PPP project and clarifies, " That is not the process followed in this case. Here, the Request for Proposals invited bidders to submit their detailed proposals to meet objectives established for the project. No overall standard method for achieving these objectives was set, and thus, the various proposals were evaluated, in accord with criteria and a marking system described adequately in the Request for Proposals. The outcome of that assessment by PWGSC was not made public, except that each tenderer was offered a debriefing concerning the assessment of its own project only, and a listing, in order, of how the department ranked the several submissions made. That process is not comparable, in my view, to that followed with respect to tenders on defined projects. The comparison with other bids in the latter case is relatively easy, made on the basis of comparative prices established by each one. In this case, the marks assigned in the evaluation process by PWGSC staff were not revealed except, for each project, in the debriefing session with the respective proposer." Ultimately, the Court decides, " However, in the interest of fairness to the applicants, who have spent a substantial sum in preparation of a tender and who held property for development of the project, an order will go directing PWGSC to provide information permitting general comparison of marks assigned to the applicants' project proposal with a general measure, such as the range, or the average, or the median of marks assigned to all proposals. The most appropriate comparative information in regards to its assessments of the various proposals to be released to the applicants, and any other tenderer that is interested, I leave to be determined by the respondents."
According to Section 10.8.21 of the Federal Contracting Polices, "Debriefings should be provided to unsuccessful bidders on request and should normally include an outline of the factors and criteria used in the evaluation, while respecting each bidder's right to the confidentiality of specific information."
According to Section 10.8.14 of the Federal Contracting Policy, "As stated in article 4.2, modifications are not acceptable under any circumstances after bid closing."
If yes, please specify: This is to uphold a fair and transparent bidding process.
• A succession or transition strategy to demonstrate: 1) an understanding of the importance of life-cycle management and oversight to secure value from a P3 model and 2) a commitment to integrate contract management and operations representative in the project team to ensure a proper transitioning of the investment from the design and construction phase to the operation phase."
According to Section 3 of the Federal Management Policy, "3.4 This policy is issued pursuant to section 7 of the Financial Administration Act. 3.5 Ministers have responsibility for the administration of projects in support of the mandated programs of their departments. Deputy heads are responsible for the effective management of projects according to legislation, regulations and Treasury Board policy instruments that promote due diligence, ethical behaviour and sound management practices, thereby ensuring long-term sustainability and value for Canadian taxpayers. They are also responsible for ensuring projects are managed in a manner that fulfills any legal obligations with respect to Aboriginal groups and that the honour of the Crown is upheld." Section 6.1.6 of the Federal Management Policy also provides, "Project-based procurements and real property transactions, including those in public-private partnership agreements, are fully integrated into the governance, management and oversight of projects. In addition, controls must be implemented to ensure that procurement contracts and real property transactions support key project objectives and program outcomes."
Step 5 of the Federal PPP Canada Business Case Guide addresses "Managing the Investment" and provides, "The objective of Step 5, the important final step in the business case development process, is to describe-at a strategic level-how the investment, project, initiative, or event will be managed, while also demonstrating an acceptable level of due diligence. A secondary goal of Step 5 is to further reinforce the key messages of the business case, ensuring its soundness and conformity to commonly acknowledged best practices for business. Once approved, the business case will be supported by a Project Charter and a Project Management Plan that will address the organizational, tactical, and operational elements related to the management of the project, including project governance.
Section 12.6 of the Federal Contracting Policy provides, "12.6.1 The management and administration of contracts involves many activities to ensure the fulfillment of a contract. This also covers those activities or events that can alter or disrupt the performance of a contract e.g., default of a contractor, disputes and contract amendments. This policy applies equally well to those other activities associated with the management and administration of contracts.
12.6.2 Whenever the satisfactory fulfillment of a contract is jeopardized, contracting authorities should take the necessary steps to serve and protect the interests of the Crown in meeting the terms of the contract, and then to protect (where appropriate) the interests of other parties involved in the contract. Contract disputes should be dealt with fairly and as promptly as possible. Contract amendments should be made with the same care that went into the original contract."
According to Section 5.1 of the Federal Contracting Policy, "5.1.1 It is the responsibility of departments and agencies to ensure that adequate control frameworks for due diligence and effective stewardship of public funds are in place and working. Treasury Board Secretariat works with departments and agencies to address management issues and compliance with Contracting Policies identified through its ongoing relationships with departments, management reviews, evaluations, internal audits and transactions." Additionally, Step 5 of the Federal PPP Canada Business Case Guide addresses "Managing the Investment" and provides, "The objective of Step 5, the important final step in the business case development process, is to describe-at a strategic level-how the investment, project, initiative, or event will be managed, while also demonstrating an acceptable level of due diligence. A secondary goal of Step 5 is to further reinforce the key messages of the business case, ensuring its soundness and conformity to commonly acknowledged best practices for business. Once approved, the business case will be supported by a Project Charter and a Project Management Plan that will address the organizational, tactical, and operational elements related to the management of the project, including project governance. The following subsections provide guidance on how investment management should be described in terms of strategies and how to illustrate that critical project management fundamentals and methodologies have been well thought out and are in place before the launch of the project:  Governance and Oversight  Project Management Strategy  Outcome Management Strategy  Risk Management Strategy  Change Management Strategy  Performance Measurement Strategy ." And according to Section 3 of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat's Policy on the Management of Projects (2007, and amended in 2009) http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=18229 provides [hereinafter "Federal Management Policy"], "3.4 This policy is issued pursuant to section 7 of the Financial Administration Act. 3.5 Ministers have responsibility for the administration of projects in support of the mandated programs of their departments. Deputy heads are responsible for the effective management of projects according to legislation, regulations and Treasury Board policy instruments that promote due diligence, ethical behaviour and sound management practices, thereby ensuring long-term sustainability and value for Canadian taxpayers. They are also responsible for ensuring projects are managed in a manner that fulfills any legal obligations with respect to Aboriginal groups and that the honour of the Crown is upheld." Section 6.1.6 of the Federal Management Policy also provides, "Project-based procurements and real property transactions, including those in public-private partnership agreements, are fully integrated into the governance, management and oversight of projects. In addition, controls must be implemented to ensure that procurement contracts and real property transactions support key project objectives and program outcomes." Section 6.1.1 of the Federal Management Policy provides that Deputy heads in the Government of Canada are responsible for ensuring that: "A department-wide governance and oversight mechanism is in place, documented and maintained. The mechanism is used to manage the initiation, planning, execution, control and closing of projects. In addition, the mechanism ensures that opportunities are considered for integrating projects across the department and the Government of Canada." 6.1.6 of the Federal Management Policy also provides, "Project-based procurements and real property transactions, including those in public-private partnership agreements, are fully integrated into the governance, management and oversight of projects. In addition, controls must be implemented to ensure that procurement contracts and real property transactions support key project objectives and program outcomes."
Section 12.7.11 of the Federal Contracting policy provides, "Contracting authorities should obtain a fair reduction in the contract price for less-than-specified performance."
The subsections of the business case study as in Step 5 of the Federal PPP Canada Business Case Guide provide guidance on how investment management should be described in terms of strategies and how to illustrate that critical project management fundamentals and methodologies have been well thought out and are in place before the launch of the project: " Performance Measurement Strategy ."
On the Federal level, Section 12.9.1 of the Contracting Policies provide, "Even though the Contracts Directive allows for amendments, contracts should not be amended unless such amendments are in the best interest of the government, because they save dollars or time, or because they facilitate the attainment of the primary objective of the contract. Work definitions should be carefully developed. Contracts should then be properly administered to avoid unanticipated amendments except to change the scope of the work. Amendments to existing contracts often call for more administrative work and little can be done through competition to encourage the contractor to do additional work or respond to changes at the lowest possible cost." According to the Contracting Directives in Part 1, "When a contracting authority has entered into a contract, it may amend the contract without the approval of the Treasury Board, if the cumulative value of the amendments, which includes all applicable taxes (including GST or HST), does not exceed the limit set out in Columns III, V, VII of Schedules 1, 2, or 3. When the Treasury Board has approved an amendment, the contracting authority may further amend the contract without the approval of the Treasury Board, if the cumulative value of such amendments, which includes all applicable taxes (including GST or HST), does not exceed the limit set out in Column VII of Schedules 1, 2, or 3."
According to Section 10.8.19 of the Federal Contracting Policy, "Change in scope of work. When there are changes in the job requirements or in the funds available that reduce the scope of the work, an attempt should be made to negotiate a new price with the successful bidder. If the change in the scope of the work is significant or negotiations cannot be concluded to the satisfaction of the contracting authority, new bids should be invited. For construction contracts, new bids are normally invited from the two lowest bidders on the original bid solicitation. When more than two bidders have bid in the same approximate amounts, consideration should be given to including these firms on the new bid solicitation. For goods and services, it is often the practice to solicit new bids without limiting the field of competition."
On the Federal level, Section 12.9.1 of the Contracting Policies provide, "Even though the Contracts Directive allows for amendments, contracts should not be amended unless such amendments are in the best interest of the government, because they save dollars or time, or because they facilitate the attainment of the primary objective of the contract. Work definitions should be carefully developed. Contracts should then be properly administered to avoid unanticipated amendments except to change the scope of the work. Amendments to existing contracts often call for more administrative work and little can be done through competition to encourage the contractor to do additional work or respond to changes at the lowest possible cost." According to the Contracting Directives in Part 1, "When a contracting authority has entered into a contract, it may amend the contract without the approval of the Treasury Board, if the cumulative value of the amendments, which includes all applicable taxes (including GST or HST), does not exceed the limit set out in Columns III, V, VII of Schedules 1, 2, or 3.
When the Treasury Board has approved an amendment, the contracting authority may further amend the contract without the approval of the Treasury Board, if the cumulative value of such amendments, which includes all applicable taxes (including GST or HST), does not exceed the limit set out in Column VII of Schedules 1, 2, or 3."
According to Section of the Federal Contracting Policy, "12.8.1 The key factor when disputes arise is the expeditious handling of the disagreement. This is particularly important because prolonged disputes can delay performance as defined in the contract and payment to the contractor. As such, the Minister of Justice has committed to working with client departments to introduce Dispute Resolution (DR) clauses into the various contracts to which the Government is a party. To this end, the Directive Concerning the Use of Dispute Resolution Clauses in Contracts (the Directive) has been issued by the Department of Justice. The Directive states that, in advising client departments and in preparing contracts for client departments, Justice legal practitioners must make every effort to insert dispute resolution clauses into contracts, where appropriate. Dispute resolution clauses may range from provisions for resolution of disputes as they arise, by way of structured negotiations, to other alternatives such as mediation and arbitration. Any inquiries regarding the Directive Concerning Dispute Resolution policy or the appropriate clauses should be made to your departmental legal services unit of the Department of Justice.
12.8.2 In a contract dispute, the decisions of the contracting authority made after the contract has been awarded, are challengeable in court. Under North American Free Trade Agreement, the World Trade Organization - Agreement on Government Procurement, the Agreement on Internal Trade, the bidding process can be challenged at the Canadian International Trade Tribunal. It is important, therefore, that legal advisers be consulted and that the actions of a contracting authority and its decisions on a contractor's claim be defensible in court.
the decision is quickly communicated to the contractor so that the contractor may take further action if so desired.
the costs of mediation should be shared equally by both parties.
12.8.5 Arbitration. Arbitration that is binding on both parties is an alternative to litigation, provided that both the contractor and the contracting authority agree to it. The agreement to allow for its use may be inserted in a contract at the outset, or it may be negotiated between the parties at the time a dispute arises. If allowance is to be made for, or there is the prospect of arbitration, the contracting authorities should first discuss the details of it with their legal advisor. This advisor has guidelines from the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Legal Services, Commercial and Property Law, Department of Justice, covering the format (including procedures) and contents of an arbitration agreement and of any arbitration clause to be included in a contract.
the interpretation and application of statutes that relate primarily or solely to commercial transactions including, for example, the Commercial Arbitration Act and the International Sale of Goods Contracts Convention Act.
"(1) An arbitral award, irrespective of the country in which it was made, shall be recognized as binding and, upon application in writing to the competent court, shall be enforced subject to the provisions of this article and of article 36."
Canada is also signatory to both NAFTA and the New York Convention, which provide that foreign arbitral awards are enforceable amongst its signatory states.
Canada is also signatory to NAFTA, the New York Convention, and the ICSID Convention, which provide that foreign arbitral awards are enforceable amongst its signatory states.
According to Section 12.7 of the Federal Contracting Policy, "12.7.1 In every case of the impending or actual bankruptcy of a contractor, the contracting authority should contact the departmental legal adviser and ensure that any proposed action will not prejudice the Crown's legal position. When the bankrupt contractor is a company resident outside Canada, action should be taken in accordance with the bankruptcy law of the country concerned. Legal advice should be obtained locally, if necessary."
The PPP contracts regulates this circumstance in accordance with Section 12.4 of the Federal Contracting Policy, which provides, "12.4.1 All contract documents should contain conditions and clauses that reflect the requirements of the work to be produced or supplied under the contract. In addition, certain clauses are applicable for all contracts. As stated in article 4.2, Related requirements, other necessary clauses will include: a provision for paying interest when the Crown causes a delay in paying the contractor; a clause to permit the Crown to pay the Goods and Services Tax or the Harmonized Sales Tax; a clause covering possible conflict of interest situations; and, if relevant, a clause addressing intellectual property issues, including the ownership of intellectual property. An appropriate termination clause is especially important so that the contracting authority may end the contract if, for example, there is a change in the government's priorities or a cutback in funding. The Department of Justice representative in each department or agency should be consulted about contract terms."

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.