MPs Considering Rare Parliamentary Rebuke of ArriveCan Contractor

Conservative MP Michael Barrett awaits the start of a meeting of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on Jan. 17, 2024. Justin Tang/The Canadian Press

A key ArriveCan contractor accused by MPs of refusing to answer questions and of being evasive during a committee testimony now faces being called to the Bar of the House of Commons to be admonished.

“This is borne out of the $60 million of corruption, fraud and forgery,” Tory MP Michael Barrett said March 22 in describing the ArriveCan scandal before presenting his motion.

Mr. Barrett’s motion calls Kristian Firth, co-owner of GC Strategies, to be sanctioned by Parliament. The House of Commons was adjourned for two weeks before a vote could take place, but all parties appeared to be in general agreement.

GC Strategies is the firm that scored the biggest value contracts for the development of the ArriveCan application. Federal watchdogs found the development process was riddled with irregularities and other investigations are ongoing.

Mr. Firth faced arrest by the House sergeant-at-arms if he didn’t appear before the government operations committee (OGGO) on March 13. While he did ultimately testify, MPs were unsatisfied with the answers provided.

The committee voted unanimously after Mr. Firth’s testimony to consider studying a potential breach of privilege, otherwise known as contempt of Parliament. A committee report on the matter was presented to the House of Commons March 20.

Mr. Barrett spoke on the matter in the House on the same day, arguing in favour of sanctioning Mr. Firth for breach of privilege.

Mr. Barrett said he’s most concerned about Mr. Firth refusing to disclose to committee which public servants he collaborated with to establish the criteria for a competitive contract GC Strategies eventually won as the sole bidder.

GC Strategies had initially won several sole-sourced pandemic contracts from the Canada Border Services Agency to develop ArriveCan, and then won a $25 million competitive process.

The Office of the Procurement Ombud and the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) noted in their reviews of ArriveCan that the eligibility criteria for that contract was very narrow. The ArriveCan application, used at one point to check the vaccination status of travellers, cost $59.5 million according to the OAG’s estimate based on incomplete records.

Mr. Firth refused multiple times to answer questions from MPs, citing an active RCMP investigation. The federal police force began looking into GC Strategies last fall over misconduct allegations unrelated to ArriveCan, but it recently expanded its probe into that file.

Mr. Firth told the committee he would respond in writing to some unanswered questions the following day.

Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader, said the information was given to the committee when responding to Mr. Barrett’s March 20 plea to sanction Mr. Firth.

Mr. Lamoureux’s assertion was disputed by Tory MP and chair of OGGO Kelly McCauley the following day, who said that Mr. Firth had provided only part of the answers requested. The clerk of the committee said during a March 20 meeting that Mr. Firth had submitted the information he had agreed to provide in writing, but that other questions posed by MPs were left unanswered.

The Epoch Times contacted GC Strategies for comment but didn’t hear back by publication time.

Speaker’s Ruling

House Speaker Greg Fergus ruled March 22 that Mr. Firth’s lack of transparency in committee earlier this month had breached the privilege of MPs.

Mr. Fergus remarked that even though the proposed remedy—to have a contractor be admonished by the Speaker—hasn’t been pursued for over 100 years, he said it remains “procedurally in order.”

Mr. Barrett’s motion seeks to find Mr. Firth in contempt of Parliament for his “refusal to answer certain questions and for prevaricating in his answers to other questions” and orders him to the Bar of the House within a short timeframe.

The purpose of his appearance would be to receive an admonishment from the Speaker, and to answer questions that were asked during committee as well as other questions.

It is very rare for a government contractor to be summoned to the Bar of the House. The last occurrence was in 1913, when R.C. Miller, the former president of a utilities company, was summoned to answer about bribes in government contracts.

Mr. Miller appeared with counsel, was sworn-in, but refused to answer questions citing ongoing litigation, reports the Canadian Parliamentary Review. The House found him in contempt and sent him to jail, where he stayed for more than three months until the House was prorogued.

“Let us be clear. I am not proposing that Mr. Firth be imprisoned for this particular offence,” Mr. Barrett said March 20. “However, we must all recall that the House possesses awesome power and authority to vindicate its role as the grand inquest of the nation.”

The Bloc Québécois is supporting Mr. Barrett’s motion. “We agree that there is something downright scandalous about this whole thing,” said Bloc MP Martin Champoux.

Liberal MPs have also called for accountability on the matter and support the motion’s general objective. “We cannot allow those who disregard, disobey, disrespect, mislead or lie to Parliament or its parliamentary bodies to go scot-free,” said MP Chandra Arya.

NDP House Leader Peter Julian has signalled support for a Liberal amendment which would send back the question to the procedure and House affairs committee (PROC) for further study.

Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen presented the amendment.

“I am just talking about letting PROC establish how that individual is treated when they come here. I am by no means suggesting the individual does not come here,” Mr. Gerretsen said when being accused of trying to buy time by Bloc MP Marie-Hélène Gaudreau.

“A further committee study, further delay, is not what we need,” said Mr. Barrett.

Speaker Fergus said debate on the motion will commence April 8 when House proceedings resume.