OV9

Nice to see the start of Tory thieves having their feet held to the fire over all the multi-million pound contracts they dished out to their mates under cover of the pandemic.
https://goodlawproject.org/update/the-judgment-is-in/

Some months ago I posted my irritation at the way the government was using emergency measures to bypass the proper tendering and procurement process, but as the details of the contracts were being deliberately obfuscated, it was difficult to join up to dots of specific deals, even though the wider pattern was obvious. So, to answer those that demanded a specific list at the time, here are a few of the dodgy deals with their specific links:

- Public First, a small privately held polling company, was awarded a contract valued at £840,000, with no prior advertisement or competitive tender process. The directors and owners of Public First are Ms Rachel Wolf and Mr James Frayne. They have close connections with both Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings.

- Hanbury Strategy won a contract worth £900,000 to conduct public opinion polling on the coronavirus pandemic. Two of three active directors of Hanbury Strategy are Mr Paul Stephenson, a former Conservative advisor and Vote Leave alumni, and Mr Ameetpal Singh Gill, a former advisor to David Cameron.

- Ayanda Capital, a politically connected firm was given a £252 million contract to supply facemasks, the majority of which could not be used by the NHS. The deal was brokered by Andrew Mills who is one of twelve advisers to the Board of Trade, chaired by International Trade Secretary Liz Truss. He has been also been a ‘Senior Board Adviser’ to Ayanda Capital since March 2020.

- PPE Medpro, a company with assets of £100 set up by a former business associate of Conservative peer Baroness Mone, was awarded contracts worth £200 million, just seven weeks after it was set up.

- Hinpack, owned by Alex Bourne, who used to run a pub in Matt Hancock’s village, was awarded about £30m-worth of work making test tubes. The contract was allegedly agreed via WhatsApp messages with Hancock, despite the fact that Hinpack was at the time manufacturing disposable catering items, had no experience in the medical products sector, and had not been certified by the Department of Health and Social Care.

- CH&L Limited was awarded a £14.4 million contract in April 2020 for the supply of isolation gowns. CH&L Limited was incorporated in January 2020 with one director – Mr Chun Lei Li a practitioner of Traditional Chinese Medicine and a member of the Newmarket Chinese Medicine Centre. In June 2020, Frances Stanley was appointed as the second director of the firm, and later in the year became the sole person with significant control of the company. Stanley is a director of Newmarket Racecourse, based in Matt Hancock’s West Suffolk constituency and has worked with Hancock on various projects related to Newmarket (e.g. sitting on a delegation with the MP about investment in local rail services). Her husband Peter Stanley – also in the horse racing business – donated £5,000 to Hancock’s office in June 2019.

- SG Recruitment UK Limited, a staffing agency, won two PPE contracts worth over £50m, despite auditors raising concerns about its solvency. Tory Peer Lord Chadlington sits on the Board of its parent company, Sumner Group Holdings Limited.

- P14 Medical Limited, controlled by former Conservative Councillor Steve Dechan, who stood down in August 2020, was awarded three contracts worth over £276m despite having negative £485,000 in net assets.

- Health Services Laboratories (HSL) Pathology won a £38 million contract for the provision of PCR testing equipment in September 2020. The chairman of HSL is Lord Patrick Carter of Coles, a former investment banker and health entrepreneur, who also happens to chair of the DHSC’s Health Procurement and Efficiency Board. One of the firm’s other directors, Dr Vanya Gant, advises the Government’s innovation agency – Innovate UK.

- Abingdon Health won a government contract worth up to £87.5million. Approved by Sir John Bell, former Roche and AstraZeneca employee, who is now head of National Covid Testing Scientific Advisory Panel, and Lord Bethell, former Ministry of Sound owner and now junior health minister.

- Computacenter was awarded contracts worth at least £198 million. Its founder, Sir Philip Hulme, has donated hundreds of thousands of pounds to the Conservative Party in recent years and Mr Hulme’s wife has also donated £100,000 as recently as the 2019 Election. The DfE has redacted key pricing documentation from the published contracts, so the definitive cost per laptop or tablet is unknown. However we do know that in September and October last year, the DfE placed three contracts valued at £39.7m with Computacenter. The deal required Computacenter to supply 192,400 devices. This equates to an average cost of £206 per device. Independent experts have valued the basic laptops in the region of £100 per device.

- Specialist Computer Centres (SCC) won a contract for the provision of 10,000 school laptop devices from October 2020 to October 2021, worth £2.1 million. SCC is owned by Rigby Group Plc, which donated £50,000 to the Conservative Party in 2019, following a donation of £55,000 in 2017.

- Efficio, won COVID-19 contracts worth at least £5.9 million. Efficio is controlled by Livingbridge, a global investment company. Oluwole ‘Wol’ Kolade is the managing partner of Livingbridge, and has made more than 20 personal donations to the Conservative Party, amounting to £678,000, since 2002. This has included a £10,000 donation in 2019 to Health and Social Care Secretary Matt Hancock, and donations amounting to £39,854 in 2020.

- ANS Group was awarded four contracts for the supply of IT “cloud” services to the DHSC and NHS England since April 2020. ANS is owned by firm called Lowry Trading Limited, which has donated £240,500 to the Conservative Party since 2014.

- Meller Designs was awarded a series of DHSC contracts worth at least £163.5 million for the supply of PPE in May 2020. Meller typically specialises in supplying home and beauty products to high street retailers, including Marks & Spencer. Meller Designs is owned by David Meller, who was the finance chair of Michael Gove’s 2016 Conservative Party leadership campaign and has donated nearly £60,000 to Conservative politicians and the central party since 2009.

- Medacs Healthcare, a global healthcare recruiting agency, was awarded a £350 million contract to provide laboratory staff to the UK’s testing operation. Medacsis owned by Impellam Group, in turn owned by former Conservative Party deputy chairman Michael Ashcroft. Ashcroft sat as a Conservative peer in the House of Lords from 2000 to 2015, when he was forced to resign over his non-domiciled tax status.

- Clipper Logistics won a £1.3 million contract from the Government to distribute PPE. Its founder and executive chairman is Steve Parkin, recently donated £725,000 to the Conservative Party

- Consultancy firm McKinsey & Company has picked up 23 contract awards valued at £18.6 million including a recent £4 million deal to provide ‘testing support’ to the government’s test and trace programme headed by Dido Harding, who is a former consultant of McKinsey.

- Lerwick-based Globus (Shetland) Ltd was given a £93.7m contract for PPE, and has donated more than £375,000 to the Tories since 2016. Owner Haraldur Agustsson, is a member of the Conservative Leader’s Group dining society.

No specific links, but another three that absolutely stink:

- Crisp Websites Limited, trading as PestFix, company with last reported net assets of £18,047, was awarded a five PPE contracts for £313.7m for facemasks, gloves, and gowns.

- A further £108 million in contracts was handed out to a company called Clandeboye Agencies Limited – a sweet wholesaler with no proven expertise or experience in supplying PPE.

- Aventis Solutions was awarded an £18.5m contract to supply face masks. Aventis is an employment agency.

The judgment yesterday is only the first step - but it’s important. The cases on whether the contracts were improperly awarded are yet to be heard, though Good Law Project’s standing to bring them should no longer be in doubt.

Absolutely - this is the ruling that both stops them hiding the evidence, and defeats the ridiculous primary defence that GLP doesn't have the standing to bring the case.

How long does awarding contracts normally take ?

Are they going to argue that speed was more important in this instance ?

Also what’s the punishment like if they decide there was shenanigans afoot ?

Dave!

V8Granite wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 4:24 pm How long does awarding contracts normally take ?

Are they going to argue that speed was more important in this instance ?

Also what’s the punishment like if they decide there was shenanigans afoot ?

Dave!

It varies, but the very short answer for contracts of this size is 35 days, but this can be shortened to 15 days under an accelerated procedure. Lots of government procurement happens under framework agreements, where a panel of companies are pre-approved, then procurement can happen virtually instantly.

And yes, they are very likely to try and argue that the speed and simplicity of awarding contracts to people who are already in the building or in your private phonebook trumps all other considerations. In the case of things like the Deloitte/McKinsey contracts that's possibly an acceptable argument - massive multinational companies with broad and far reaching capabilities (even if not specific to the contracts awarded) and a longstanding track record of government work. They really are going to struggle to make that excuse wash in the cases like Hancock agreeing a £30m test tube deal via WhatsApp with his ex-neighbour, or signing off hundreds of millions to companies with no track record, some of which were only set up weeks before by tory peers or donors with no purpose other than to win these contracts without any competition.

The speed argument also looks a lot weaker when several were warned against at the time and have subsequently failed to deliver the goods (or suitable goods).

Ultimately, though, what's coming out of all this is that it wasn't accidental or forced by the Covid-induced panic - the National Audit Office report identified a policy of "VIP lane" procurement where tory donors and other "connected parties" were put to the top of lists (frequently lists of one!) and guided through the process, with no scrutiny whatsoever into their suitability.

Here's a quote from Meg Hillier, Chairwoman of the Public Accounts Committee:
"[The government’s procurement efforts have] ridden roughshod over the taxpayer and ripped up too many of the rules that guard against cronyism. It’s bad enough that it set up a ‘high-priority lane’ to fast-track companies with the right connections. But the failure to track how half the companies had ended up on it made it impossible to ensure proper safeguards were in place.”

Pretty damning stuff.

As for ultimate penalties, it really depends how far it all goes. Personally, I'd be happy to see it go all the way to criminal prosecutions of individual ministers and their accomplices for Misconduct in Public Office, Fraud, and whatever else the CPS can throw at them.

NJAC. Hopefully this'll be a start on accountability and responsibility.

It'll be nice to hear them try and justify their actions in an actual court of law, where they actually have to answer the question asked rather than parliament, where they now seem to think it's ok to ignore the question, trot out a rehearsed half-joke, quote falsified statistics, and distract with non-sequitur jibes at someone on the opposition benches.

There’s obviously a good chance that the judicial review of the award of contracts will be successful. But the remedy awarded by the court is by no means certain.

What happens in those instances where there is a deal for £millions for PPE but what is delivered can't be used because it's unsuitable or whatever? Do we get our money back or what?

The litigation is a review of award of contracts, not against the third party contractors. So that’s some way down the line.

I loved the one where Matty H gave his landlord mate a contract and claimed he'd never had a pint with the guy yet there's a picture of them both behind the bar with a pint.

It's just bent and theft of public money putting it bluntly. Will they be held accountable, probably not.

Having just filled out the form for the electric car charger grant, the irony of the form guidance warning me about it being taxpayer funded and not to try to abuse it, warranted a raised eyebrow. Perhaps we should issue that cover to all ministers.

Having jumped through any hoops to get an sort of Government jobs it is infuriating. I have no confidence anyone will be held accountable in a meaningful way.

DeskJockey wrote: Sun Feb 21, 2021 7:45 am Having just filled out the form for the electric car charger grant, the irony of the form guidance warning me about it being taxpayer funded and not to try to abuse it, warranted a raised eyebrow. Perhaps we should issue that cover to all ministers.

I'd say that every time a minister is caught taking the piss with public money, they should have a joint of a finger lopped off with blunt sidecutters and no anaesthetic, but let's face it - all that would do is leave us with a parliament who are incapable of typing.

Exceptional circumstances, force majeur blah blah blah

In how many of these cases did the group awarded the contact fail to deliver on the contract to a significant degree??

There’s a spectrum of dodgyness here from:

- a mate of government getting a contract, who charges fair market rate and then delivers to contract = “probably more common than we like to admit, Government” Iffy but under the circumstances, I dunno...

- mate mate of government getting a contract, overcharging but still delivering on the contract = “significant dereliction of Government responsibility” quite a lot dodgy, no real excuse, even under the circumstances

- mate mate of government getting a contract and failing to deliver on the contract with no excuse = Theft / Robbery (whichever is the correct phrase)

I remember reading about corruption as a whole increasing quite greatly after the brexit vote. Then Boris came in and took it to a whole other level. We went from MPs claiming duck houses to political allies claiming actual fortunes. The main stream media have kept surprisingly quiet about it all too this time round, only publishing short snippets.

dinny_g wrote: Sun Feb 21, 2021 3:00 pm In how many of these cases did the group awarded the contact fail to deliver on the contract to a significant degree??

There’s a spectrum of dodgyness here from:

- a mate of government getting a contract, who charges fair market rate and then delivers to contract = “probably more common than we like to admit, Government” Iffy but under the circumstances, I dunno...

- mate mate of government getting a contract, overcharging but still delivering on the contract = “significant dereliction of Government responsibility” quite a lot dodgy, no real excuse, even under the circumstances

- mate mate of government getting a contract and failing to deliver on the contract with no excuse = Theft / Robbery (whichever is the correct phrase)

The Cabinet Office documents published as part of the NAO report explicitly state that for contracts awarded to "VIP" channel firms, no questions would be asked unless pricing was 25% above average unit prices - i.e. carte blanche to whack an extra 25% on the open market price if you're a tory mate.

By the admission of their own documents, we're definitely in categories 2 and 3 for many of the awarded contracts.

There's probably also an extra category just shy of category 3 - contract issued to government mate with no mechanism to ensure effective delivery or even evaluate whether effective delivery has been achieved.