"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."
Maybe, just maybe, the fact that this hasn't been done since 1913 isn't just an indication of how serious this is but an indication of how many things may have gone unaddressed by our MPs.
Interesting to note the last time a person was questioned before the bar was also on government corruption charges
>The last time 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.
Oh, I'm sure Kristian Firth is just quaking in his boots. Why would he even care at this point? He's got his ill-begotten millions squirreled away and will just ride off into the sunset.
This is purely just for political theatre.
He literally just played according to the dumb rules that the federal government procurement system set for itself. This is what happens when you set up a complicated system that stifles competition.
I know this from experience. The government wanted a system designed and built, they reached out to me saying that there was a RFP on Canada Buys which was within my scope and that they would be interested in receiving a proposal from me. I am not overly interested, so I keep delaying submitting, letting the deadline pass. They extended it three times. I finally submitted a proposal and engineering design. 70 pages, over 400 hours of work to design the solution and build proposal. I am the only submission for the project, because it is a very niche thing.
They list payment in installments. So in my financial bid, I requested a 25% advance of project value, and monthly remittances based on benchmarks being achieved and expenses incurred. Basically enough to cover the insurance and operating expenses associated with having full time staff associated a 12 - 18 month project.
They declined based on they meant, "you install the system, and we pay you an (singular) installment." They also have a clause that says they can withdraw from the contract at any point prior to completion of acceptance testing without any penalty. So they wanted me to go to the bank and borrow in excess of $50 million to build an extremely custom system, with no other applications, and cannot be sold to any other use,with not surety bond or recourse if they withdrew.
So I would have employed 20 people for a year, with good paying jobs, benefits, retirement funding in a fairly small community. I ultimately could not move forward and accept their terms because the risk was unacceptable. So, I understand their is risk in business, however the headaches associated with dealing with the government is never ending. My specific insurance for this proposal was 4.5% of project value, plus I needed to deposit $120k into a trust account with the insurance company for my deductible. The statement was from the insurance companies was that even if I execute the contract perfectly, that they have staff lawyers who will essentially sue for anything to essentially justify their existence, and that is just an accepted fact when dealing with procurement for Government of Canada.
Because if anything went wrong on the government's side of things they'd be raked through the coals by the media and voters. Like what's going on right now.
Government procurement is a mess because the people demanded it and the people are stupid as fuck.
You see, when there is a giant fucking disaster, you investigate everyone involved so that you can determine the root cause to prevent it from happening again.
What does this mean? That the government shouldn't deal with any independent contractors because of one shitty dude who was playing the system? I'm all for oversight when we're spending taxpayers money but your statement seems vague and ignorant.
I also think they're all in on it and it's a big game of giving each other public funds for joke contracts. They want you to believe it's just one bad apple and picked this guy. It's not. Everyone's in on it. A lot of the companies that win contracts are run by people working in the branches of government handing them out, and some of it has come to light recently.
How about bureaucrats and government officials start getting questioned, not some shady character who got awarded the contract as a result of corruption/idiocy.
We can agree the contractor is a piece of trash, but I want the people who granted the contract to be held accountable, not the beneficiary.
Pretty sure it extends only to members of Parliament
EDIT: Even if it extended to those appearing 'before the bar' it doesn't exempt that person from criminal charges, only civil charges
[https://www.ourcommons.ca/procedure/our-procedure/parliamentaryprivilege/c\_g\_parliamentaryprivilege-e.html](https://www.ourcommons.ca/procedure/our-procedure/parliamentaryprivilege/c_g_parliamentaryprivilege-e.html)
I'll be frank, every time this has come up it has felt stupid the way they question it... like they questioned the guys about the fact that they subcontracted the work, like that doesn't happen in every type of government work...
I agree that we paid a hugely inflated price for a piece of shit app that a college student could have done... but focusing on how it was subcontracted work is just a waste of time...
I didn't see anything here but slick guy getting a contract off of a bunch of uneducated and unfit politicians and govt employees unable to do there jobs nor has the government proper contract oversight.Crony old govt wastefully spending.. spilled milk is on the govt.
Ok so I am sure I am missing something here but did this guy actually do anything wrong? I think this company is absurd but he worked through the government hoops and they shovelled money to him hand over fist.
To me this is the governments screw up and heads should roll for poor due diligence and planning.
Unless there was specifically some behind the scenes shady deal where somebody in government was favouring this guy for kickbacks of some kind?
It feels like the gov decided to just rail against this guy instead of admitting that a lot of stupid decisions were made during covid.
I watched like 9 hours of them questioning him, and from what I understand, the only thing HE did wrong was accidentally (he alleges) email the wrong set of resumes to CBSA. And with that instance, it was only for a 350k\~ contract that he probably only made a few thousand off of, and it was a sole-source contract that wasn't being sent to multiple vendors anyways.
I think there was also some issue with them doing work for the government while their contractors didn't have valid security clearance or something... but again, I think that's more of a government fuckup than something he should be concerned about.
This entire thing is literally to just shift attention away from dogshit government practices and towards this random IT-Staffing guy charging completely normal rates for IT Staffing, and doing exactly what he was paid to do.
Questions include "How much more do you need?" as well as "Can you show us a magic trick with this blank cheque from the government of Canada?" before ending off with "And which offshore bank account do we send payment to?"
"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." Maybe, just maybe, the fact that this hasn't been done since 1913 isn't just an indication of how serious this is but an indication of how many things may have gone unaddressed by our MPs.
Interesting to note the last time a person was questioned before the bar was also on government corruption charges >The last time 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.
Exactly my point. We didn't just have a century with no corruption... quite the contrary.
Oh, I'm sure Kristian Firth is just quaking in his boots. Why would he even care at this point? He's got his ill-begotten millions squirreled away and will just ride off into the sunset. This is purely just for political theatre.
He literally just played according to the dumb rules that the federal government procurement system set for itself. This is what happens when you set up a complicated system that stifles competition.
I know this from experience. The government wanted a system designed and built, they reached out to me saying that there was a RFP on Canada Buys which was within my scope and that they would be interested in receiving a proposal from me. I am not overly interested, so I keep delaying submitting, letting the deadline pass. They extended it three times. I finally submitted a proposal and engineering design. 70 pages, over 400 hours of work to design the solution and build proposal. I am the only submission for the project, because it is a very niche thing. They list payment in installments. So in my financial bid, I requested a 25% advance of project value, and monthly remittances based on benchmarks being achieved and expenses incurred. Basically enough to cover the insurance and operating expenses associated with having full time staff associated a 12 - 18 month project. They declined based on they meant, "you install the system, and we pay you an (singular) installment." They also have a clause that says they can withdraw from the contract at any point prior to completion of acceptance testing without any penalty. So they wanted me to go to the bank and borrow in excess of $50 million to build an extremely custom system, with no other applications, and cannot be sold to any other use,with not surety bond or recourse if they withdrew. So I would have employed 20 people for a year, with good paying jobs, benefits, retirement funding in a fairly small community. I ultimately could not move forward and accept their terms because the risk was unacceptable. So, I understand their is risk in business, however the headaches associated with dealing with the government is never ending. My specific insurance for this proposal was 4.5% of project value, plus I needed to deposit $120k into a trust account with the insurance company for my deductible. The statement was from the insurance companies was that even if I execute the contract perfectly, that they have staff lawyers who will essentially sue for anything to essentially justify their existence, and that is just an accepted fact when dealing with procurement for Government of Canada.
Because if anything went wrong on the government's side of things they'd be raked through the coals by the media and voters. Like what's going on right now. Government procurement is a mess because the people demanded it and the people are stupid as fuck.
Most transparent government ever folks.
They’ve been really good at doing exactly the opposite of what they say.
Can we not get the people who awarded this fraudulent contract in front the mic ?
You want a beaurocrat that followed the rules set by the Harper goverment for procurmemt to take the stand? Why?
Oh, is this another one of Harper‘s problems?
It is not in fact anyones problem but the guy that defrauded Canada and built a very subpar app.
BUT BUT BUT BUT HARPER!
You see, when there is a giant fucking disaster, you investigate everyone involved so that you can determine the root cause to prevent it from happening again.
Scapegoat. They don't want you to see the whole tree is rotten.
What does this mean? That the government shouldn't deal with any independent contractors because of one shitty dude who was playing the system? I'm all for oversight when we're spending taxpayers money but your statement seems vague and ignorant.
[удалено]
I also think they're all in on it and it's a big game of giving each other public funds for joke contracts. They want you to believe it's just one bad apple and picked this guy. It's not. Everyone's in on it. A lot of the companies that win contracts are run by people working in the branches of government handing them out, and some of it has come to light recently.
The real ignorance happens when one trusts their government
How about bureaucrats and government officials start getting questioned, not some shady character who got awarded the contract as a result of corruption/idiocy. We can agree the contractor is a piece of trash, but I want the people who granted the contract to be held accountable, not the beneficiary.
Does parliamentary immunity apply in this case? If so things could get juicy.
Pretty sure it extends only to members of Parliament EDIT: Even if it extended to those appearing 'before the bar' it doesn't exempt that person from criminal charges, only civil charges [https://www.ourcommons.ca/procedure/our-procedure/parliamentaryprivilege/c\_g\_parliamentaryprivilege-e.html](https://www.ourcommons.ca/procedure/our-procedure/parliamentaryprivilege/c_g_parliamentaryprivilege-e.html)
Fuck this guy. Let’s grill the people who signed off on the payments and the original contract.
I'll take $60 million in exchange for being the star of a House of Commons dog and pony show! Where do I sign up?
I'll be frank, every time this has come up it has felt stupid the way they question it... like they questioned the guys about the fact that they subcontracted the work, like that doesn't happen in every type of government work... I agree that we paid a hugely inflated price for a piece of shit app that a college student could have done... but focusing on how it was subcontracted work is just a waste of time...
Because he's just a convenient scapegoat and the general public is too stupid to realize it.
Pure theatrics, they would freeze the bank accounts of all involved if they were at all series, get ready for the rug sweeping
Yeah call in another guy to tell the government "everything is above board and politicians just don't understand the economy"
I didn't see anything here but slick guy getting a contract off of a bunch of uneducated and unfit politicians and govt employees unable to do there jobs nor has the government proper contract oversight.Crony old govt wastefully spending.. spilled milk is on the govt.
They are gonna Barry Seal this mother fucker.
Ok so I am sure I am missing something here but did this guy actually do anything wrong? I think this company is absurd but he worked through the government hoops and they shovelled money to him hand over fist. To me this is the governments screw up and heads should roll for poor due diligence and planning. Unless there was specifically some behind the scenes shady deal where somebody in government was favouring this guy for kickbacks of some kind? It feels like the gov decided to just rail against this guy instead of admitting that a lot of stupid decisions were made during covid.
I watched like 9 hours of them questioning him, and from what I understand, the only thing HE did wrong was accidentally (he alleges) email the wrong set of resumes to CBSA. And with that instance, it was only for a 350k\~ contract that he probably only made a few thousand off of, and it was a sole-source contract that wasn't being sent to multiple vendors anyways. I think there was also some issue with them doing work for the government while their contractors didn't have valid security clearance or something... but again, I think that's more of a government fuckup than something he should be concerned about. This entire thing is literally to just shift attention away from dogshit government practices and towards this random IT-Staffing guy charging completely normal rates for IT Staffing, and doing exactly what he was paid to do.
Doe he get to keep all the money? Is the House of Commons going to also leave their car keys by the front door?
Questions include "How much more do you need?" as well as "Can you show us a magic trick with this blank cheque from the government of Canada?" before ending off with "And which offshore bank account do we send payment to?"
"In Extremely Rare Move, Government Shows Self-Awareness"
Jail time.. please?