The city's auditor general has tabled his annual report for last year, in which he finds there is the possibility of bid rigging in snow removal, and household garbage and recycling collection.
Jacques Bergeron audited the years from 2005 to 2013.
Among his findings in the 680-page report, the auditor general said often the same companies were awarded snow removal contracts in those years, and that there was very little competition in calls for tender.
Some of his findings:
The report states that within the 19 boroughs, 54 companies were awarded snow removal contracts totalling $315.8 million, or 64 per cent of the overall contracts.
Among these companies, 25 were awarded contracts on a regular basis during the nine years in the audited period, winning 83.6 per cent, or $264 million, of the total snow removal contracts awarded by boroughs. Nine of these 25 companies won contracts of more than $11 million for a total of $169.4 million or 53.6 per cent of the contracts in the snow removal.
Three companies operating in the snow removal sector won 100 per cent of the contracts from one borough: Entreprises Michaudville Inc. in Plateau-Mont-Royal, Environnement Routier NRJ Inc. in Outremont and Pavages D’Amour Inc. Pierrefonds-Roxboro.
Déneigement Moderne also obtained between 80 and 99 per cent of contracts for Hochelaga-Maisonneuve from 2006 to 2013, the report shows.
In terms of snow removal equipment, contracts totalled $64.1 million, or 13 per cent of the total amount of contracts in place. In this sector, 12 companies obtained contracts during the audit period totalling $43.1 million, or 67 per cent of the total amount of contracts awarded.
He also noted that among garbage collection companies, only seven companies did almost 60 per cent of the work.
When it comes to garbage removal and recycling, the report found areas in need of improvements for the city and boroughs.
Of some 40 companies that operate in this sector, only 29 were awarded contracts by the boroughs from 2005 to 2013.
Seven companies received contracts for both the collection and removal of household waste and of recyclable materials, totalling $294.6 million or 58.4 per cent of the $503.9 million total in contracts.
Of these seven companies, four won 92.2 per cent, or $271.5 million of the total amount of the contracts.
These four companies were found in 17 of the 19 boroughs. The report concluded there was little competition between three of them when submitting a bid in response to a call for tenders.
Fourteen companies received contracts for the collection and removal of household waste, totalling $98.2 million or 19.5 per cent of the total amount of the contracts in place in all boroughs.
Several companies involved in waste management and recycling concentrated their activities in one or two boroughs.
Eight companies received contracts for recycling collection, totalling $111.1 million or 22.1 per cent of the total.
Of the eight companies that shared the profits, two won 83.6 per cent, or $92.9 million of all the boroughs.
One of those two companies dominated the sector, with $60.8 million in contract in 13 boroughs, while the other company had $32.1 million in contracts in four boroughs.
Ten of the 29 companies received contracts on a regular basis over the nine-year period from 2005 to 2013.
As far as recycling is concerned, three companies received 100 per cent of the contracts in six boroughs.
In two boroughs, two companies won between 80 and 99 per cent of the contracts.
In 10 boroughs, six companies won between 50 and 79 per cent of the contracts.
When it came to garbage collection, the same four companies received 100 per cent of the contracts in nine boroughs.
In four boroughs, four companies won between 80 and 99 per cent of the contracts.
In three boroughs, two companies won between 50 and 79 per cent of the contracts.
The report also found that decision-making summaries were sometimes absent about price differences as large as more than 15 per cent between the lowest and second lowest compliant bidder. Boroughs did not always provide an explanation for why a successful bidder was chosen.
Mayor reacts
Mayor Denis Coderre could not give a concrete figure of how much money the bid rigging may have cost taxpayers, but did say he will follow up with the auditor general.
“The auditor general raised the flag, we addressed it, and he has all the powers, so we’ll let him do his job,” said Coderre.
Opposition leader Richard Bergeron said the evidence of collusion is mounting.
"We suspected that. With the information that we see in the report of the auditor general, it begins to be almost proof," he said.
Bergeron is expected to speak on the matter at a press conference Tuesday afternoon.
