Canada's Updated Professional Services Procurement Guidelines for 2025

According to Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC), these new measures are meant to be a stop-gap while they “develop a streamlined and simplified suite of mandatory methods of supply for the procurement of professional services,” which includes phasing out the Task-Based Informatics Professional Services (TBIPS) supply arrangement in an effort to improve outcomes related to contracting.

If you’re thinking we already have too many procurement rules, you’re right. 

The Auditor General of Canada agrees. In a report issued days before the new measures took effect, she expressed sentiments along these lines: the issue isn’t that existing procurement mechanisms and rules are insufficient, but rather that they aren’t being utilized properly (read: not being followed by those who set them). 

The Government of Canada’s response could be summed up as: Thank you. But we're going to introduce new rules anyway. 

What makes this response even more surprising is how quickly it came together. Unilateral procurement changes of this magnitude—especially those affecting every federal department and supplier—are highly uncommon without significant consultation. It’s not just the scope that caught many off guard, but the speed of rollout and limited notice.

So, here we are, faced with a new procurement reality. Again.

But before we dive into the specifics, let’s take a quick peek at what led to this (fast, rare, somewhat controversial) decision.

As we noted in earlier, unilateral changes that impact entire Canadian industries like this are highly uncommon. And the accelerated pace to implement these measures is unlike anything we've seen before.

From our perspective, there are a few contributors at play: 

1. A solution without a problem. The current news climate created a reactive political climate that could not be ignored. Within Ottawa especially, coverage proclaiming that something fundamental is wrong with procurement has dominated the headlines for years—as told by individuals who fundamentally do not understand how procurement operates. Regardless of merit, these stories contributed to a political environment where demand to solve a non-existent problem prevailed.  

2. New government, new style. Unlike past leaders, our new Prime Minister comes most recently from the private sector, where the approach to authority and problem-solving is markedly different. This, coupled with what we’re seeing as a general pattern of disinterest within the current government towards industry consultation, signals a desire to take ownership and control in an effort to put a decisive end to the high-profile procurement missteps that have drawn scrutiny from both sides of the aisle over the past decade.

According to Andy Burnham, Vice President of S.i. Systems’ Federal Government Practice, "This is government's effort to disaster-proof the process, and we're ready to take risks alongside our clients. But we think the unintended result of this pivot will be favouritism for a specific business model and an unlevel playing field, rather than better value for Canadians."

If you’re getting that hasn’t this been done before? feeling, there’s a reason. One word: Phoenix.

To this day, the Phoenix Pay System debacle stands as a billions-of-dollars example of why solutions-based procurement *is not foolproof*. The 2018 Auditor General Report found that:

“Phoenix executives prioritized certain aspects, such as schedule and budget, over other critical ones, such as functionality and security.” The result? User needs not met, huge cost to the federal government, and significant negative financial impact to thousands of employees.

This scandal became the impetus for change, which came in the form of unofficial procurement measures that prioritized agility via easy-to-scope and easy-to-change “task-based” work orders—priorities that were in place until July 1st of this year. That agility served Canada well, but value for the taxpayers was only a sure thing when the rules were followed.

That was the central issue of the ArriveCan app situation. In the same June 2025 report referenced earlier, the Auditor General of Canada concluded: “Federal organizations frequently disregarded government procurement rules that promote fairness, transparency, and value for Canadians when they awarded professional services contracts to Ottawa-based information technology staffing company GCStrategies Inc.” This was a case of this never should have happened, but it undoubtedly contributed to July’s procurement guidelines about-face.

Now, you find yourself scrambling to navigate this 180° turn. We’re here to help.

What This Change Means for You 

In a nutshell: your work just got more complicated. 

• You’re being told what to do, but not HOW to do it. There is no roadmap. Your only support is an overburdened Directorate that’s the sole contact for all questions from all procurement professionals in the country.

• You’re seemingly at an impasse. Naturally, you’re trying to push back because it seems impossible to get what your clients need and administer the resulting contracts the way the new system is designed. But top-down pressure (from as high as the Prime Minister) is keeping you at square one.

• You cannot pivot from TBIPS to SBIPS instantly. SBIPS is a less-familiar procurement mechanism (one where repeated change requests astronomically drive-up costs). If you and your clients aren’t technically proficient at defining future-proofed needs in a hybrid waterfall/agile environment, within two years you’ll end up with a solution that hasn’t kept up to a rapidly changing tech landscape.

Audra Tettenborn, Director of Business Development at S.i. Systems, sums it up, “We hear many in the executive group saying, ‘this is necessary and it will make things better.’ We say, it’s not as simple as you think, there will be unintended consequences, and we’re here to walk with you through it.”

Right now, things are moving fast. Adjusting will be hard, but not impossible.  

To help, Andy shares this final suggestion: “As you begin talking with your managers to create a workable execution plan, we encourage you to include the mechanisms already in place—requests for information, industry days, and validation interviews with bidders—that make the process more collaborative with suppliers while you’re defining the scope.” 

This will ensure you’re scoping the requirement in a way that someone can actually deliver on it. Because once a contract is in place, it’s significantly harder to change. 

These new measures pose a significant operational shift to navigate. It becomes easier if we do it together. We hope you’ve found this blog helpful. Stay tuned for additional blogs in this series, which will delve into other measures, specific impacts, and future considerations.

Reach out anytime to learn how S.i. Systems can help you maintain contractor supply for your most pressing needs while partnering with you as these new measures take root.