Just how does public money end up in the pockets of Cummings' friends?

by Good Law Project Limited

Just how does public money end up in the pockets of Cummings' friends?

by Good Law Project Limited
Good Law Project Limited
Case Owner
Good Law Project brings litigation to protect the public interest.
25
days to go
£138,575
pledged of £150,000 stretch target from 6,291 pledges
Pledge now
Good Law Project Limited
Case Owner
Good Law Project brings litigation to protect the public interest.
Pledge now

This case is raising funds for its stretch target. Your pledge will be collected within the next 24-48 hours (and it only takes two minutes to pledge!)

Latest: Oct. 5, 2020

Another contract handed to Dominic Cummings' mates

A lobbying firm run by allies of Dominic Cummings was handed a contract worth £900,000 to conduct public opinion polling on the coronavirus pandemic. The contract was awarded to Hanbury Strateg…

Read more

Like us, you might have wondered why it is that the biggest contracts to purchase PPE have gone not to manufacturers or professional suppliers but instead to pest controllers, confectioners, and opaque family offices.

You'll also have seen the stories about the placing of contracts with colleagues of Mr Cummings. But, although reporters pick them up, nothing ever happens. There's no mechanism to discover what really happened.

Well, this time it's different.

On 3 March 2020, the Cabinet Office shook hands with Public First, a small privately held polling company. There was no formal contract or prior advertisement or competitive tender process. It just made what procurement lawyers call a 'direct award'. And it formalised it retrospectively on 5 June 2020 and publicised it a week later on 12 June 2020. Having shaken hands the Cabinet Office paid Public First approximately £253,000 for services between March and May 2020 but the total contract value is £840,000. 

The directors and owners of Public First are Ms Rachel Wolf and Mr James Frayne. Ms Wolf and Mr Frayne have close connections with both the Minister for the Cabinet Office (the Rt Hon Michael Gove MP) and his long time colleague and Chief Adviser to the Prime Minister who works in the Cabinet Office (Mr Dominic Cummings). 

Mr Frayne and Mr Cummings were co-founders of the New Frontiers Foundation think-tank. According to Mr Cummings’ blog, he and Mr Frayne, in 2004, “set up the campaign to fight the referendum on the North East Regional Assembly as a training exercise for an EU referendum."  In 2011, Mr Gove (then Secretary of State for Education) appointed Mr Frayne as Director of Communications for the Department for Education. In that position he worked alongside Mr Cummings, who was then Special Adviser to Mr Gove at the Department for Education.

Ms Wolf formerly worked as an advisor to Mr Gove and has also worked for Mr Cummings. She founded the “New Schools Network”, a charity which supported the ‘academisation’ of public schools, under a programme of reform designed by the Mr Gove and Mr Cummings. The New Schools Network drew public criticism for receiving £500,000 of public money without being required to undergo a competitive bidding process. She has been a vocal public supporter of Mr Cummings’ plans for reform of the civil service. And she co-wrote the Conservative Party’s manifesto for the 2019 general election.

According to ‘transparency data’ published on the Government website, the Cabinet Office paid Public First:

  • on 18 March 2020, £58,000 in respect of “GOV COMMS EU EXIT PROG”;
  • on 20 March 2020, £75,000 in respect of “INSIGHT AND EVALUATION”;
  • on 2 April 2020, £42,000 in respect of “EU EXIT COMMS”; and 
  • on 27 May 2020, £78,187.07 in respect of “COVID-19”. 

But it was not until 5 June 2020 that the Cabinet Office told Public First that it “proposes to make an award of a contract to you to provide extremely urgent deliverables as part of the response to unforeseeable consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the terms set out in this letter”. This award was made retrospectively and in the absence of any advertisement or competition. It is not clear why it took three months to put in place any written contract. Or on what basis Public First worked in the meantime. Or why a contract for “Research in to Government Communications” (one relating in part to “EU Exit” communications), was so “extremely urgent” that normal procurement processes should be dispensed with. 

Money for your mates - on a handshake, formalised later, public money, and we believe unlawful.



Good Law Project has instructed Rook Irwin Sweeney and leading procurement lawyers Jason Coppel QC and Patrick Halliday. You can read our formal pre action protocol letter to Mr Gove and Mr Cummings below [1]. Protective proceedings will be issued later today and we will post them in an update.

The basis of the claim is that to ensure value for money, to protect public funds, to guard against cronyism and bungs, one must put public contracts out to tender. And there was no exception here to that rule.


10% of the sums raised will go to the Good Law Project to help it develop and support further litigation in the public interest. It is our policy only to raise sums that we reasonably anticipate could be spent on this litigation. However, if there is a surplus it will go to support and enable other litigation we bring. Our founder, Jo Maugham QC, continues to work unpaid.


[1] https://www.dropbox.com/s/2xbiux64pcddo36/CummingsPAPLetter.docx?dl=0 


Recent contributions

Be a promoter

Your share on Facebook could raise £26 for the case

I'll share on Facebook
Update 6

Good Law Project Limited

Oct. 5, 2020

Another contract handed to Dominic Cummings' mates

A lobbying firm run by allies of Dominic Cummings was handed a contract worth £900,000 to conduct public opinion polling on the coronavirus pandemic. The contract was awarded to Hanbury Strategy without any advertisement or competitive tender process. And it was awarded to Hanbury despite the fact that - as our sworn evidence discloses - Hanbury was ill-suited to do the bulk of the work and would have had to subcontract it to others. That sworn evidence also suggests that the price paid by Government was “absolutely off the chart”.

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. The Government has ignored the law which requires them to publish details of the contract. However, media reports state that the contract came to an end after four months, with Hanbury Strategy having run up a bill of more than half a million pounds. Without details of the contract, we have no way of knowing how they arrived at this huge sum of money.

Ignoring proper procurement practices to hand lucrative contracts to your mates is unlawful. We have issued judicial review proceedings to challenge this award. More details of the claim can be found here.

We cannot, and will not, stop in our efforts to hold this Government to account. Thank you for your support.

Update 5

Good Law Project Limited

Aug. 23, 2020

And now we're suing Ofqual, too, over Public First

You’ll remember the action we launched against Michael Gove’s Cabinet Office for passing a hugely lucrative contract to Public First - owned by long time political allies of his and Dominic Cummings - with no tender process at all.

You may have missed that it wasn’t the only one. 

Earlier this week news broke about two further contracts gifted  by the Government to Public First. The Mirror identified that Public First was given £116,000 to identify ways to "lock in the lessons learned" during the Covid-19 crisis. And the Guardian was tipped off that Ofqual had also hired Public First - for an unspecified sum of money - to handle the comms fall-out from cancelling A levels and GCSEs.

The money is flooding in.

Well, it’s not in our nature to just stand by and watch so on Sunday 23 August we sent a further Pre-Action Protocol letter to Ofqual challenging its decision to sidestep procurement law - and alleging apparent bias in the grant of that third contract to Public First.

We don’t know what Government will say. We can’t see any defence at all - and it may well be that Government can’t either. Earlier in the week Government filed its Summary Defence in the Cabinet Office challenge and it said substantially nothing.

If you are in a position to add a little more to the crowdfunder to help with this further challenge we would appreciate it. 

Update 4

Good Law Project Limited

Aug. 2, 2020

Someone must stand up to them

Several weeks back we issued judicial review proceedings against Michael Gove for his decision to award an £840,000 contract to associates of his and Dominic Cummings, without any advertisement or competitive tender process. 


Last week we got back a letter from Gove’s lawyers, refusing to provide any information about the contract how it was awarded (despite being bound by a duty of candour). Instead they refuse to engage at all with the proceedings - and challenge our right to bring them. 


We already knew from his trips to and around Durham that Cummings didn’t think the rules applied to him; does Gove now feel the same?Well, they may consider themselves above the law, but we do not. 


And on Friday 31 July, we filed the fully particularised claim form, with detailed analysis and evidence that firmly underscore the unlawfulness of this award. You can read the documents here.


We believe that the judicial review should succeed for several reasons. First, the Government can’t rely on emergency procurement procedures for services such as focus groups and communications services. Second, it can’t breach procurement safeguards to let a six month contract on the grounds of urgency. And third, there is apparent bias in the grant of this large contract to long-time associates of Gove and Cummings. Importantly, we reserve our position in relation to whether there might be actual bias.


The evidence we have provided show how lucrative the contract was. In the witness statements, we reference conversations with industry specialists, who tell us £840,000 is an “extraordinary”, “crazy” or “insane” price.


Worryingly, these industry experts have also told us that they dare not raise their heads above the parapet to complain publicly, because they fear they will be “punished” by the Government for doing so. 


And therein lies the rub. The Government says that we cannot challenge the contract because we don’t have ‘standing’ - the only people who can challenge, it says, are those they have frightened into silence.


But we must and will stand up to them. Procurement rules exist to ensure value for public money; they aim to mitigate bias and prevent croney-ism. Government must not, under cloak of public emergency, hand out large sums of cash to long-time associates. 


If you'd like to support cases like this dealing with mismanagement of public funds, please become a member of the Good Law Project or join our mailing list here: https://goodlawproject.org/membership/

Update 3

Good Law Project Limited

July 15, 2020

If you'd like to support...

... cases like this dealing with mismanagement of public funds, please become a member of the Good Law Project or join our mailing list here: https://goodlawproject.org/membership/ 

We have closed the crowdfunding because we believe we have sufficient funds to fund this particular case.

We are very grateful for your support.

Jolyon Maugham QC 

Update 2

Good Law Project Limited

July 15, 2020

Why we have lifted the stretch target to £120,000

We believe our expenditure on the Public First judicial review is unlikely to exceed £100,000. However, we have significant unprotected liabilities in respect of our judicial reviews in relation to three other emergency procurement contracts- those entered into with Pestfix, Clandeboye Agencies and Ayanda Capital Limited https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/108million/. Any sums raised above £100,000 will be allocated to those cases which raise very similar questions about whether public monies have been misused.

Jo Maugham QC

 

Update 1

Good Law Project Limited

July 11, 2020

We have issued proceedings

Yesterday, shortly after launching the crowdfunder, we issued proceedings in the High Court. You can read those proceedings, which allege both breaches of procurement law and apparent bias in the grant of the contract to longtime colleagues of Mr Cummings, here.

Jo Maugham 

    There are no public comments on this case page.