Amidst the backdrop of the Canadian federal government’s expenditure of 496 billion Canadian dollars last year, recent revelations have shed light on significant challenges surrounding software development endeavors. This includes potential instances of fraudulent billing by subcontractors and ongoing controversies such as the ArriveCAN app debacle, underscoring the complexities inherent in government software projects.

Despite exhaustive investigations, Auditor General Karen Hogan expressed difficulty in pinpointing the exact costs associated with the creation of ArriveCAN. Initially rolled out in 2020 amidst the Covid-19 pandemic to gather traveler information and coordinate quarantine measures, the app garnered widespread criticism for its usability issues. Estimates suggest the project may have ballooned to approximately 60 million dollars, significantly exceeding its initial budget of 2.3 million dollars.

In response to these concerns, federal officials have announced measures to enhance oversight of government procurement, particularly in the realm of software services. Notably, the government has initiated an investigation into 5 million dollars’ worth of invoices from three software contractors, suspected of fraudulent billing practices. Although the specific companies involved were not disclosed, officials highlighted instances where contractors exploited the paper-based nature of government contracts to bill multiple departments for the same work.

Minister of Public Services and Procurement, Jean-Yves Duclos, emphasized the transition to electronic contracts, enabling more efficient detection of fraudulent activities. While the ArriveCAN controversy has spotlighted the issue of exorbitant costs attributed to intermediary companies, it underscores broader concerns within the government procurement system.

In the case of ArriveCAN, a small two-person company named GC Strategies acted as the intermediary, reportedly pocketing millions in project funds. Despite claims from one of the company’s owners, Darren Anthony, disputing the figures, the government suspended all dealings with GC Strategies following the auditor general’s report.

According to Professor Daniel Henstra of the University of Waterloo, the rise of such intermediary companies reflects a broader trend of governments outsourcing software development projects. This shift, he argues, is driven by the need for expedited project completion, as traditional procurement methods are deemed impractical for time-sensitive initiatives like ArriveCAN.

However, while outsourcing offers expediency, it also raises questions about transparency and accountability. Professor Henstra suggests that governments should reevaluate the extent of outsourcing, advocating for stronger in-house capabilities to mitigate risks associated with third-party involvement.

Ultimately, while instances of fraud and ballooning project costs may garner attention, they are exceptions rather than the norm. Government-contractor relationships generally function well, serving the public interest. However, heightened scrutiny and accountability mechanisms are necessary to address systemic challenges and ensure effective utilization of taxpayer funds in future software development endeavours.