This is very close to the situation that's happening in the discussions for the TTC's subway cars. Contrary to the advice of staff, city policy, and without the consent of council, TTC commissioners decided not to follow city procedure and, instead, entered negotiations with just one company for about $700 million worth of subway cars.

Even at this early stage, the results of this decision are unfortunate. 

The top official of the TTC resigned, TTC commissioners have invested hours fending off allegations of impropriety, other levels of government are commenting on the city's decision-making, and there is concern over how the city contracts with business.

The costs of such a move can only be estimated by a biased and disappointed supplier left on the outside. It advises that the city's losses are well more than $100 million, or enough to fund major portions of the city's capital plan for a year. In terms of public transit, the losses are the equivalent of up to another 50 subway cars, about 230 buses or half of the TTC annual investment in infrastructure.

So, why would the TTC make this decision? Thus far, the only reason given was that jobs elsewhere in the province might be at risk, an issue for which the city has no responsibility, credibility or budget. 

It is fair comment that local manufacturing adds local value. But how much? Is it worth the cost? To establish the benefits and premium for local manufacturing, it only makes sense to have a competitive bidding process, and then decide whether the premium - if there is a premium - is worth paying.

This is clearly the position of both of the provincial and federal governments. If the province wished to express its preference for an Ontario-based vendor at this stage, it could have done so. Instead, the transportation minister wrote that there are "no impediments to a competitive procurement." 

If the federal government wanted the city to alter its procurement policies, it, too, is in a position to comment. Rather, it requested that the city undertake a transparent purchasing process.

The best step to take at this time is to suspend the sole sourcing discussions and allow the purchasing and management staff to issue a call for proposals. Prudence will not put any funding at risk. In recent weeks, city staff have received assurances from the provincial and federal negotiators that cost-shared programs would still be available if the city terminated its discussions for sole sourcing and held an open competition.

Once we get the facts from a fair and open process, council can decide how best to invest. Realistically, if fair and competitive proposals reveal that a premium is required to keep employment in Canada, then the provincial and federal governments will have ample opportunity to review their responsibilities.

While council must be a prudent steward of public funds, this issue is about more than money. The last words belong to Justice Denise Bellamy who made recommendations on Toronto's governance a short year ago:  "Councillors should separate themselves from the procurement process. They should have no involvement whatsoever in specific procurements. They have the strongest ethical obligation to refrain from seeking to be involved in any way."