Markus Andrews

The list of companies given “VIP” treatment for Covid contracts is even larger than Boris Johnson’s government has admitted, a legal campaign group has claimed.In November, the government shared a list of 50 companies fast-tracked for contracts to supply personal protective equipment (PPE) through a “High Priority Lane”.The so-called “VIP lane” was set up at the start of the pandemic and allowed MPs, ministers and senior government officials to pass on offers of help to a special email inbox.The Good Law Project has said it had been leaked internal documents showing that another 18 companies – awarded almost £1bn in PPE contracts between them – were also referred to as “VIPs”.A Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) spokesperson denied that these companies had been referred to government officials through the High Priority Lane route.But Jolyon Maugham, director of the Good Law Project, said it was “abundantly clear” from both a DHSC document and internal emails that these companies were treated as VIPs in the process of handing out contracts.“None of the contracts were subject to competition,” Mr Maugham said – arguing that the government “misled” the National Audit Office about the size of the “VIP lane”.The list of 18 companies complied by the Good Law Project was taken from a DHSC spreadsheet entitled ‘Product_VIP_Atamis’, the campaign group revealed on Tuesday.The Good Law Project said the companies may not have been aware they were referred to as “VIPs”. There is no suggestion the companies were involved in any wrongdoing.The health department said the “VIP” designation was used for labelling purposes, but does not mean these offers were prioritised via the high-priority route.A DHSC spokesperson said: “It is inaccurate to claim that all of these companies were referred by the High Priority Lane route.”“The purpose of the High Priority Lane was to efficiently prioritise credible offers of PPE, and our efforts have helped deliver over 17.5 billion items of PPE to the frontline to protect healthcare workers during the pandemic.”The Independent understands one of companies on the list of 18 referred to as a “VIP” should have been included in the High Priority Lane list, and the health department is updating its list.It follows accusations that the government “wasted” billions on unusable PPE and buying kit at inflated prices, after a report revealed the huge scale of losses.The department of health’s annual accounts report revealed that £8.7bn spent on PPE last year had been written off – admitting to a “significant loss of value to the taxpayer”.Around £2.6bn was spent on PPE “not suitable for use in the NHS”. But the DHSC attributed the biggest losses to the value of its remaining stock being slashed by £4.7bn as the price of PPE dropped. More

The Foreign Office has been a “target of a serious cyber security incident”, according to a public tender document.The document, which did not outline what happened or who was behind it, said urgent support is required to “support remediation and investigation”.It added that BAE Systems Applied Intelligence was called in to deal with the incident and received more than £467,000 for its work.The document said the work required involved “business analyst and technical architect support to analyse an authority cyber security incident”.The firm’s contract was concluded on 12 January this year, although it has not been confirmed when the incident took place or the extend of the damage. It is understood that all parts of the Government implement cyber security defences to identify and prevent potential attempts by cyber criminals to gain access to networks.The tender document, which was published on Friday, said: “The Authority was the target of a serious cyber security incident, details of which cannot be disclosed.“In response to this incident, urgent support was required to support remediation and investigation.”A Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office spokesperson said: “We do not comment on security but have systems in place to detect and defend against potential cyber incidents.”Additional reporting by Press Association. More

Martin Lewis has accused Kwasi Kwarteng of “denigrating the experience of fraud victims” with his “outrageous” defence of Boris Johnson’s false claim that crime had fallen under his leadership.Seeking to rescue his premiership amid the fallout from Sue Gray’s Partygate update, the prime minister told the House of Commons that crime had fallen by 14 per cent – a claim later denounced as “misleading” by the head of the UK Statistics Authority watchdog.Mr Johnson’s claim is only true when excluding fraud and computer misuse – with overall crime having actually risen by 14 per cent, according to the latest Office for National Statistics (ONS) data.But seeking to defend the prime minister, the business secretary suggested on Sunday that Mr Johnson had only been referring to crime which “people experience in their-day-to-day lives”.On Tuesday, the MoneySavingExpert website founder accused Mr Kwarteng of causing an “outrage” with the comments, and urged him to apologise.“To hear the business secretary say that fraud and online scams aren’t something people experience in their daily lives is outrageous,” Mr Lewis told BBC Radio 4.“Millions of people face it every day. I’ve had over 30 scam reports just about me today before I did this interview.“And to have the business secretary – and I don’t normally get political, or party political, at least – but to have the business secretary try and defend the fact they put out slightly questionable, iffy crime figures by denigrating the experience that people in this country have with scams, and the lives that have been lost or destroyed because of scams, is an outrage.“He must and needs to apologise if he has any shred of decency in him.”Mr Lewis was backed up by television presenter Kirstie Allsopp – who caused her own controversy this week when she suggested in a Sunday Times interview that young people could afford to get on the housing ladder if they made “sacrifices” – who tweeted that he was “spot on about fraud and its impact”.The government has been placed under investigation by the UK Statistics Authority after receiving complaints about claims that crime is falling, made by Mr Johnson in the Commons and by home secretary Priti Patel, in a quote published by the Home Office.Despite a fall in most crimes during coronavirus lockdowns, some are now reaching or exceeding pre-pandemic levels – with rises in some offences like fraud offsetting reductions seen elsewhere, the ONS said last week.Additional reporting by PA More

Jacob Rees-Mogg has been appointed minister for Brexit opportunities, in Boris Johnson’s latest reshuffle.The title of the post may seem odd, but the government already has a Brexit Opportunities Unit, which the new minister is likely to work closely with.The unit is based in the Cabinet Office department and it was announced in June last year.Ministers say it is involved in “setting the strategy for the Government’s ambitious approach to regulation, reviewing and reforming existing policy and regulation, and supporting the scrutiny and introduction of new regulation”.It was established by Lord Frost, who left government complaining of Boris Johnson’s political direction. One of his frustrations was that the government was no going far enough in doing things outside the EU it could not do inside: in particular strip out regulations.Appointed Mr Rees-Mogg as the minister for the area looks like an attempt to throw “red meat” to the Tory base. He is considered a dogmatic Thatcherite and Tories who want the government to be more radically right-wing on economic policy trust him.Mr Rees-Mogg has long said he wants to use Brexit to get rid of EU standards and regulations. In December 2016 he said the government could go “a very long way” to rolling back high EU standards on imported products and that regulations that were “good enough for India” could be good enough for the UK.“We could, if we wanted, accept emissions standards from India, America, and Europe. There’d be no contradiction with that,” Mr Rees-Mogg told a parliamentary committee.“We could say, if it’s good enough in India, it’s good enough for here. There’s nothing to stop that.“We could take it a very long way. American emission standards are fine – probably in some cases higher.“I accept that we’re not going to allow dangerous toys to come in from China, we don’t want to see those kind of risks. But there’s a very long way you can go.”The unit has produced little concrete work of note since it was announced last year. It is thought to be involved in decisions like whether to legalise pint bottles of Champagne, and whether to or not to implement new EU car safety rules.Previous reviews of red tape in government have generally failed to find anything they actually want to get rid of – in particular things that they want to get rid of that are politically popular. More

Boris Johnson was rebuked by the House of Commons speaker and warned that “words have consequences” after a mob surrounded Sir Keir Starmer and shouted abuse, repeating slurs about Jimmy Savile.Sir Lindsay Hoyle condemned the discredited claim made by the prime minister that the Labour leader “failed” to prosecute Savile, saying his remarks in Commons last week were “inappropriate” and “only inflame opinions”.As criticism mounted from Tory backbenchers over the smear, the Archbishop of Canterbury also offered a veiled reproach to the prime minister, issuing an appeal for those involved in political disputes to “learn to disagree well”.“When politicians are harassed and threatened it’s a threat not just to the MPs themselves, but to the health of our democracy,” said Justin Welby. “We must condemn it and stand united against it.Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon also criticised Mr Johnson for failing to say sorry. “If he has a single shred of decency, he will withdraw the comments that he made completely and he will fully, unreservedly, unequivocally apologise.”The interventions came after Monday’s incident reignited anger over Mr Johnson’s smear on 31 January, when he accused Sir Keir of “failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile” during a Commons debate.Updating MPs on Tuesday, Sir Lindsay also revealed he had requested a “situation report” from the Metropolitan Police over the incident which saw officers protect Sir Keir from protesters shouting “traitor” and “Jimmy Savile”, and accused him of “protecting paedophiles”.The Commons speaker said: “I know it has been reported that some abuse was directed at the leader of the opposition yesterday related to claims made by the prime minister in this chamber.“But regardless of yesterday’s incident, I made it clear last week that while the prime minister’s words were not disorderly they were inappropriate.”Sir Lindsay added: “As I said then, these sorts of comments only inflame opinions and generate disregard for the house and it is not acceptable. Our words have consequences and we should always be mindful of the fact.”Downing Street later insisted that Mr Johnson would not apologise for his Savile comments. His official spokesperson acknowledged his original words in the Commons were “capable of being misconstrued”, which was why he subsequently issued a “clarification”.Tory MP Caroline Nokes condemned Mr Johnson for failing to withdraw apologise for his “vile” Jimmy Savile slur against the Labour leader – linking it to the “completely acceptable” mob harassment suffered by Sir Keir.Asked on Tuesday if the PM was to blame, the backbencher told Sky News: “We have to play back the language used in the House last Monday … [he] actually used a vile smear against Sir Keir Starmer.”Ms Nokes added: “Do I want the prime minister to apologise? Of course I do … I want him to own the mistake.”At least 10 Tory MPs – including David Davis, Sir Roger Gale, Stephen Hammond, Tobias Ellwood and Julian Smith – have now tweeted criticism of the prime minister or spoken publicly condemning his remarks.Meanwhile, Jacob Rees-Mogg said he did not “recollect” feeding Mr Johnson the smear about Sir Keir “failing” to prosecute Jimmy Savile.Asked about a report in The Sunday Times that suggested he gave the PM the idea for using the attack line in the Commons, the cabinet minister told ConservativeHome’s podcast: “That isn’t my recollection.”The former Commons leader, given the new role of Brexit opportunities minister, said: “I think it came from behind us, but it seemed to me a perfectly fair point to use. I wasn’t sitting next to the prime minister, so I wasn’t in a particularly good position to be feeding him lines.”A snap poll by Savanta ComRes on Tuesday found that two thirds (68 per cent) of voters believed the prime minister should apologise for the Savile comments in the House of Commons. The survey also found that 69 per cent believed he was responsible for the behaviour of protesters who harassed Sir Keir. More

Government plans to improve the energy efficiency of 20,000 council houses are “wholly inadequate” and a “drop in the ocean” compared to what is needed, the Green Party has said. Environmental groups and local leaders said a new pot of funding to upgrade social housing does not go far enough to help keep down fuel bills and reduce emissions from homes across England. Around £179m has been spread across under 70 councils in England for projects aimed at improving the energy performance of homes in the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund’s first wave of funding. The second wave is set to run next financial year. The government said this support would help thousands of council houses to become more efficient, helping to reduce household bills and their carbon footprint.But Polly Billington, the chief executive of the UK100 network of local leaders, told The Independent: “Any new money to improve social housing is welcome, but helping 20,000 homes is a drop in the ocean when 2.5 million households live in fuel poverty.”She added: “We need to accelerate plans to support our homes, which are some of the leakiest in Europe, and ensure the Conservative manifesto commitment to spend £9bn on energy efficiency is met in full.”Cara Jenkinson from the climate change charity Ashden said the £179m pledge represented the “fraction” of the estimated £100bn needed to decarbonise all social housing. The 2019 Tory manifesto pledged £3.8bn to the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund over 10 years.Zoe Nicholson from the Green Party said the fund was “wholly inadequate”. “It is a drop in the ocean compared to what is needed to make all social homes warm and healthy,” she said. “Some councils report that their award under this fund represents around just three per cent of what is needed.”Green groups and councils toldThe Independent last month progress in decarbonising council houses and private properties was being hindered due to the way schemes work and gaps in support. Councils bid for funding in the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund’s first wave last year, with a trial run before this handing out £62m to 16 local authorities for projects. Ms Nicolson told The Independent this scheme was an “inefficient way of allocating funds”. “Writing bids involves a huge amount of work which is completely wasted for those authorities which are unsuccessful,” the Green New Deal spokesperson for the Green Party said. “Addressing the climate emergency and helping those facing fuel poverty are too important to be dependent on a competitive bidding process.”Homes are estimated to account for around a fifth of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions. Experts say reducing their reliance on fossil fuels and improving their energy efficiency – for example, with better insulation – is key to tackling the climate crisis.Last autumn, the government published its Heat and Building strategy, which, among other measures, included a grant for homeowners to upgrade gas boilers to heat pumps.The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy has been approached for comment. More

Boris Johnson spent hours in a state of fury in No 10 after claims about his wife were published in the serialisation of an unauthorised biography by a Tory peer – even threatening to take legal action, according to Downing Street insiders.The prime minister claimed the book by Lord Ashcroft, which has been serialised in the Mail, was defamatory and told one worker he was getting advice from lawyers, The Independent understands.Biography First Lady: Intrigue at the Court of Carrie and Boris Johnson alleges that Ms Johnson wields influence over her husband and, by extension, government decisions – though a spokesperson for Ms Johnson said she played no role in government. The prime minister was focused on how to fight back against the negative press faced by his wife Carrie on Friday and over much of the weekend, sources claimed, describing him as “distracted and furious”.This week one of the key pillars of the No 10 operation to get the Johnson premiership back on track, its plan to address the NHS backlog was not able to be unveiled on Monday as planned. Instead, the plan was published on Tuesday with reports suggesting it had been held up due to disagreements between No 10 and the Treasury over health service targets and funding. Health secretary Sajid Javid denied that was the case, saying that it was instead delayed by efforts to get cross-Whitehall and NHS support for the drive. The response to the reports about Ms Johnson’s influence over the prime minister has been mixed. Mr Javid is among those claiming the allegations in Lord Ashcroft’s book against Ms Johnson are sexist, telling Sky News on Monday that he thought “the partners of politicians should be off limits”. It is rare for a sitting prime minister to issue legal proceedings. In 1993 Sir John Major successfully brought a libel case against satirical magazine Scallywag and the New Statesman over a report claiming he had had an affair with a member of No 11 catering staff. It later emerged that Sir John did have an affair, though it was with Edwina Currie, a fellow Conservative politician, in the 1980s.In 2012, Mr Johnson used the services of legal firm Collyer Bristow to defend himself against a libel claim by union leader Bob Crow. Mr Johnson was successful in having the claim struck out.When contacted for comment, No 10 said it was “completely untrue” legal action was being considered by the prime minister, who a spokesperson said was “entirely focused on delivering on the people’s priorities”. A spokesperson for Biteback, the publisher of Lord Ashcroft’s book, said of possible legal action: “That should help worldwide book sales and international publicity. All authors’ royalties are being donated to NHS charities.” More

Jacob Rees-Mogg has said he does not recall feeding the prime minister the controversial jibe about Sir Keir Starmer failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile while he was director of public prosecutions.The Sunday Times reported that Mr Rees-Mogg, who has been moved from Commons Leader to the newly minted position of Brexit opportunities minister in the mini-reshuffle, “originally whispered” the idea of using the attack to Boris Johnson in the Commons last week.But the Cabinet minister said that while he “mentioned the point about journalists”, he was not close enough to Mr Johnson to “feed him lines”.The Conservative Party leader last week accused the Labour leader of having used his time as head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to pursue journalists and “failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile”, the notorious celebrity paedophile.

I wasn’t sitting next to the Prime Minister, so I wasn’t in a particularly good position to be feeding him linesJacob Rees-MoggThe comments sparked a political row and critics both on the Conservative and opposition benches have blamed the remarks for protesters targeting Sir Keir outside Parliament on Monday, with the mob accusing him of being a “paedophile protector” before he was escorted away in a police vehicle.Mr Johnson has sought to clarify his comments made in an exchange following a Commons statement on 31 January about the interim Sue Gray report into alleged lockdown-breaking events in No 10, but he has refused to apologise.During an interview with Conservative Home’s The Moggcast, Mr Rees-Mogg was asked about the suggestion that he was the person who initially handed the PM the idea for the Savile remark.He said: “That isn’t my recollection.“What was going on at the time was a very noisy chamber and people were shouting things out.“I think it came from behind us, but it seemed to me a perfectly fair point to use.”Pressed on whether he was sure it did not come from him, the senior Tory replied: “I certainly mentioned the point about journalists in the back and forth across the chamber, but I think it came from behind both of us.“I wasn’t sitting next to the Prime Minister, so I wasn’t in a particularly good position to be feeding him lines.”At least six Tory MPs – including one former Cabinet minister – have called for Mr Johnson to formally apologise for the remarks. His long-standing ally Munira Mirza quit as head of policy at No 10 last week in protest at his refusal to withdraw what she called a “scurrilous accusation”.Although Sir Keir was head of the Crown Prosecution Service in 2009 when a decision was taken not to prosecute Savile, he had no personal involvement in the deliberations.However, supporters of the prime minister argue that they are entitled to hold him to account for the failings of the organisation.Mr Rees-Mogg, during the podcast interview – which was recorded on Monday, before his ministerial job change – likened the situation with Sir Keir to the Crichel Down affair, in which a minister resigned after taking responsibility for actions taken by civil servants.“You are responsible for what goes on within your department, even if you don’t know about it at the point at which it takes place,” Mr Rees-Mogg said. More