In extremely rare move, House of Commons set to question ArriveCan contractor

The RCMP says it has searched the office of a contractor who worked on the ArriveCan app.

While the police force didn’t name the business, an RCMP spokesperson told CBC News that it had executed a search warrant on Tuesday at a location previously listed as GC Strategies’ mailing address in Woodlawn, Ont., just west of Ottawa.

The RCMP spokesperson said the search warrant was not related to an ongoing investigation into ArriveCan. 

The RCMP search comes as GC Strategies partner Kristian Firth faces questions from MPs in the House of Commons this afternoon — an extremely rare measure that hasn’t happened since 1913.

In response to a question from Conservative MP Michael Barrett, Firth confirmed that his office had been searched by the RCMP.

Firth said the search was related to allegations from Botler AI — an IT firm that didn’t work on ArriveCan but had been contracted for a separate project through GC Strategies and other firms.

Botler co-founder Amir Morv told the government operations committee last fall that he’s troubled by the fact that his resume and that of his partner were altered without their consent or knowledge for a government task authorization.

In previous testimony before the committee, Firth acknowledged that his company changes the resumes before submitting them to the government. He said it was a mistake.

Morv also suggested that GC Strategies may have been “ghost contracting,” which he described as a scheme which sees a company bill the government for work attributed to subcontractors that actually may not have done any work.

Firth and GC Strategies have denied these allegations. Firth said Wednesday that he is encouraging the RCMP investigation.

“We believe it’s going to exonerate us,” Firth told the House.

Speaker admonishes Firth

Last week, MPs unanimously approved a motion to find Firth in contempt of Parliament for refusing to answer questions before the House government operations committee last month.

Before being questioned by MPs on Wednesday, Firth received an admonishment from House Speaker Greg Fergus.

Fergus stressed the importance of the privileges MPs enjoy and their importance to the functioning of the House of Commons. He said the House has an “obligation” to reaffirm those privileges when they are violated.

“That is precisely what the House has ordered the Speaker, as the guardian of these rights and privileges, to do today — to reprimand your contempt for refusing to answer questions put to you by the committee and for prevaricating other questions,” Fergus said.

“For all these reasons, on behalf on the House of Commons, I admonish you.”

A public rebuke from the Speaker is itself a rare measure that has only been used a handful of times in the past century. But it is even more rare for an individual to face questions from the House.

No one has been questioned “before the bar” — a reference to a brass rail in the House that’s meant to keep strangers from entering the chamber — since 1913.

Government House Leader Steve MacKinnon kicked off questioning by asking about Firth’s mental health.

Firth told the House that his doctor diagnosed him with “acute mental health flare ups” and said he is not supposed to participate in any activity that would cause “undue stress.”

MacKinnon said the government wants answers from Firth but they shouldn’t come at the expense of his mental health.

WATCH | Answers shouldn’t come at expense of someone’s health, Liberal House leader says:

Kristian Firth, a partner with ArriveCan contractor GC Strategies, told the House of Commons he was ‘diagnosed with having acute mental health flare-ups’ and advised by a doctor not to participate in activities that would cause ‘undue stress.’ Government House Leader Steve MacKinnon, whose party did not participate in questioning Firth, said ‘forcing someone against medical advice to do something that a doctor believes could harm their treatment and recovery is indeed beneath the dignity of this place.’

“Forcing someone against medical advice to do something that a doctor believes could harm their treatment and recovery is indeed beneath the dignity of this place,” MacKinnon said, indicating that the Liberals would be open to having Firth return another time.

The Liberals didn’t participate in any further questioning.

The auditor general has reported that the soaring cost of the controversial ArriveCan project — estimated at roughly $60 million — was in part due to the government’s over-reliance on outside contractors like GC Strategies.

That same report found that GC Strategies was involved in developing requirements that were later used for an ArriveCan contract. That contract — valued at $25 million — was later awarded to GC Strategies, the report says.

WATCH | ArriveCan app was a hot mess: auditor general report: 

In a scathing new report, Canada’s auditor general says the final cost of the ArriveCan app is ‘impossible to determine’ due to poor record-keeping by the Canada Border Services Agency. Andrew Chang breaks down the report’s findings about this pandemic-era tool that is estimated to have cost Canadians nearly $60 million.

A separate report by Canada’s procurement ombudsman found that the criteria used in awarding the $25-million contract were “overly restrictive” and “heavily favoured” GC Strategies.

During his committee appearance, MPs repeatedly asked Firth which government officials he worked with to develop the criteria for that contract. Firth avoided those questions, citing an ongoing RCMP investigation into ArriveCan, even though he said he hadn’t been contacted by the police force at that time.

Firth did offer an answer to that question in the House on Wednesday, indicating that he had spoken with Diane Daly, a Canada Border Services Agency employee, about the contract requirements.

But Firth disagreed with the findings of the auditor general and procurement ombudsman. Firth told the House that the contract in question had over 200 requirements and that his firm only offered three suggestions. He also said that ten other firms bid on the contract.

“I don’t see that as overly restrictive,” Firth said.

Three reprimands since the 1990

Only three other people have faced a public admonishment before the House since 1990.

Former MPs Ian Waddell and Keith Martin were admonished by the Speaker in 1991 and 2002 respectively.

The most recent case was in 2021, when Iain Stewart, then the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada, appeared before the House after the agency failed to turn over documents to a parliamentary committee relating to the firing of two scientists from the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.

But in those cases, none of the individuals were forced to answer questions from MPs.

The last time that happened was in February 1913, when R.C. Miller was brought before the House to answer questions related to bribery allegations in relation to government contracts.

Miller previously refused to answer questions before the House public accounts committee and did so again when he appeared before the bar. In response, MPs ordered that Miller be imprisoned.

Last week’s motion suggests the government operations committee will “consider” Firth’s testimony and “if necessary, recommend further action.”