Markus Andrews

A firm employing David Cameron as an adviser won a multi-million pound contract after the former Conservative prime minister reportedly urged the ex-health secretary in a letter to attend a genomics conference.It comes after Mr Cameron’s work since leaving office was put under the spotlight once again this week for his separate advisory role with the collapsed finance company Greensill Capital, as BBC Panorama reported he made $10m (£7.2m). According to The Times, Mr Cameron, who was appointed as an adviser to Illumina in 2018, wrote to Matt Hancock in April 2019 “strongly” endorsing an invitation to a conference the US healthcare company had previously sent to his Whitehall office.“I understand Jay [Flatley, former executive chairman of Illumina) has sent this direct to your office, but I wanted to i) ensure that you had seen it personally; and ii) strongly endorse their invitation to this significant conference,” Mr Cameron said in his correspondence.The newspaper added that Mr Hancock agreed to attend the conference in September 2019 — which Mr Cameron also attended— after receiving the letter from the former Conservative leader.Following the conference Illumina was awarded a £123 million genetic sequencing contract — a deal that was reported earlier this year amid separate questions over Mr Cameron’s work with Greensill Capital.A spokesperson for Mr Cameron told The Independent, however: “David Cameron’s work for Illumina has never involved any discussion of commercial contracts.“It has predominantly involved promoting the benefits of genomic sequencing and the world-leading example of Genomics England to other countries around the world. He has done this in Australia, the US, the Gulf, India and more recently in online calls with interested parties in Japan and Holland”.They added: “As has been made clear on numerous occasions, David Cameron has never lobbied the government on behalf of Illumina or been involved in any contract or commercial discussions.”Mr Cameron was appointed as an adviser with Illumina in 2018 and when he applied for clearance for the role, he told the Advisory Committee on Business Appointment that he would be paid for working two to three days a month for the company.The former prime minister, who left office in 2016 following the Brexit vote, told the committee at the time he would not play any role in contract negotiations between the firm and Genomics England or the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC).“He noted the role might involve some very limited contact with UK ministers from time to time, but he was clear with the committee that he would not lobby ministers or the UK government in any way on behalf of Illumina or its partners,” they added. A government spokesperson also defended the awarding of the contract to Illumina, telling The Independent: “The contract, signed to help save lives through better diagnosis, was awarded in the correct way, through the proper process and any suggestion of undue ministerial involvement in the decision making is completely wrong.”The spokesperson added: “Extensive due diligence was carried out and as set out in the transparency notice the contract was awarded because Illumina was the only company considered to have the technical capability to deliver this crucial work.“The 2019 contract was a follow-on contract to the original sequencing contract with Illumina in 2014 and the company’s expertise is being used to help the government rollout the world’s first whole genome sequencing programme to better diagnose patients with rare disease and certain cancers.”Illumina said it “always follows the correct and necessary process in its negotiations with customers” and had worked with Genomics England since 2014 — when the company won a competitive tender process for a £78m contract.A spokesperson for Mr Hancock added: “The UK’s genomic sequencing capacity is one of the biggest in the world and has saved countless lives. Mr Hancock had no involvement in the awarding of these contracts and all normal processes were followed.”Earlier this week, BBC Panorama reported Mr Cameron made $10m (£7.2m) from his separate part-time advisory role with Greensill Capital. Documents seen by the programme showed the former prime minister cashed in shares, was paid $1m annual salary, and also got a $700,000 bonus.Mr Cameron hit the headlines in relation to the bank after it emerged he was using his closeness to current cabinet minister to try to persuade them to underwrite its loans with taxpayer cash.He was cleared of breaking any lobbying rules over the affair and his spokesperson insisted he “acted in good faith at all times and there was no wrongdoing in any of the actions he took”. However, some MPs said he showed a “significant lack of judgment”. More

Welsh Gower salt marsh lamb has become the first food product to receive protected status under a new post-Brexit regime.Similar to the pre-existing EU scheme, the Geographical Indication (GI) programme was introduced at the end of the transition period, guaranteeing a products authenticity and protection from imitation.The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said the registration of the meat produced from lambs born and reared in the Gower Peninsula in South Wales now has full recognition.The producers claim the seasonal product — available from June until the end of December — gets its unique flavour from the salt marsh environment on which the sheep graze.Food minister Victoria Prentis said: “Our new GI schemes guarantee equality and excellence for food lovers at home and around the world. I am really pleased to see Gower salt marsh lamb gain protected status, and I can think of no better to product to kick-start our new scheme with.”“We want people, at home and abroad, to be lining up to buy British. I would encourage producers from all around the UK to apply to the scheme, so that we can celebrate and protect our excellent local produce, and ensure it is given the recognition that it deserves,” she added.However, the announcement comes after the government provoked fury over the treatment of farmers in the UK-Australia trading agreement, with the sector fearing the deal will see them undercut by Australian rivals.Best for Britain chief executive Naomi Smith said: “The government’s new trade deals threaten to undermine food standards here and price British farmers out of the market with cheap meat from countries like Australia and the US.“Welsh lamb farmers would probably take stronger protections for their livelihoods over a new watermark for their packaging. It will also not be lost on the public that after years of calling the EU a protectionist racket, people in this government are now following Europe’s lead.”Dan and Will Pritchard from Weobley castle farm, who produce the product, said: “We are the third generation of Pritchards to farm in this amazing location, meaning that we’ve perfected our way of rearing lamb over the years.“We currently produce around 1,000 lambs a year — taking care of the whole process to create meat with a unique, local flavour of samphire and sea lavender,” they added.“This recognition means that the reputation of our regional product is protected, and it helps us promote traditional agricultural practices and eliminate non-genuine products”. More

The government could be about to significantly curb the scope of a scheme that pays consumers to return drinks bottles and cans for recycling, green experts are warning.A coalition of environmental charities says ministers could be about to make a “costly and misguided mistake” that will allow plastic to continue to pollute the countryside and seas, devastating wildlife.The start date of a planned deposit return scheme has been put back a year from 2023 to 2024.And one option being “seriously” considered is restricting the scheme to drink containers under 750ml in size and excluding those sold in multipacks.The Wildlife and Countryside Link, a coalition whose members include Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and WWF, warns in a report today against the moves.Under a deposit return scheme, the price of drinks in bottles or aluminium cans includes a small amount that goes towards recycling. The sum is returned to the buyer as an incentive to recycle when the empty container is returned.In its election manifesto, the government promised a scheme this Parliament, with an original start date of 2023, but a government consultation document earlier this year said the coronavirus had forced a delay in rolling it out.The consultation also considers restricting the scheme to smaller “on-the-go” containers rather than a wider “all-in” arrangement.Paula Chin, chairwoman of the coalition’s resources and waste group, said: “The evidence is clear that an ‘all-in’ deposit return scheme will provide a huge boost to the environment, helping make our streets, parks and natural spaces cleaner and healthier.“The government’s own figures show that there’s over £5bn in benefits by introducing this scheme in full.“However, ministers are currently weighing up whether to back a watered-down proposal which would cover just a third of drinks containers placed on the market and which may possibly exclude glass containers.”“As we face the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss, it’s essential that the government back the strongest possible scheme for tackling litter without delay.”In a first official consultation in 2019, public backing for a deposit return scheme was high, but held a fresh one because of the pandemic.A decision on that is imminent, and the coalition says it understands there is a “strong possibility” the watered-down option will be adopted.A scheme covering all types of containers is predicted to lead to 23.7 billion being recycled each year, against only 7.4 billion under the scaled-down option.The Link coalition says an “all-in” scheme has been judged to have benefits of £11bn against only £3.5bn for an “on-the-go” model – calculated from reduced litter, carbon dioxide savings and the value of recovered materials.The Link members also point out that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have already indicated their support for the “all-in” model, with Scotland set to introduce their scheme next year, ahead of the rest of the UK.“The Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted the economy and society in unimaginable ways, with many people reassessing their values, decisions and priorities,” the government document said.Lockdown has led to unprecedented levels of litter, evidence has suggested.Of the 13 billion plastic drinks bottles sold each year, less than half are recycled, and around 700,000 are dropped into the environment every day.Countries already operating deposit return schemes, such as Germany, have plastic bottle recycling rates of over 90 per cent, against 59 per cent in the UK.The government has set a target of eliminating all ‘avoidable’ plastic waste by 2042, with measures including a plastic packaging tax.In 2019, Greenpeace created a giant bottle out of plastic bottles, delivering it to the government in an effort to persuade ministers to introduce a bottle return scheme.The Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee last month launched an inquiry into plastic waste, sayig just a third of the five million tonnes of plastic used in the UK is recycled.Plastics that are not recycled are exported abroad, where some has been found being burnt or dumped, polluting waterways, not recycled.The Independent has asked the government to respond to the report. More

Temporary powers designed to help alleviate congestion caused by post-Brexit lorry tailbacks in Kent – codenamed Operation Brock – are to be made permanent, it has emerged.Under measures designed to ease congestion from traffic heading towards the port of Dover, steel barriers, roadside parking areas and a contraflow system were unveiled in 2019 with the intention of minimising the impact on people travelling within Kent ahead of a threatened no-deal Brexit.Those emergency traffic management powers were expected to finish in October 2021, but ministers are instead planning to remove the “sunset clause” from the measures in order to make them available indefinitely.The Department for Transport spokesperson said: “Operation Brock measures will remain temporary and will only be used when there is a significant risk of delays.“While Operation Brock was originally created to deal with disruption caused by EU exit and in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, removing the sunset clauses from Operation Brock will mean the Kent Resilience Forum (KRF) is better prepared to respond to any type of traffic disruption in the area, not solely related to EU exit, including strikes and severe weather.”Operation Brock has proved to be highly controversial, with complaints from local residents about disruption caused during work to install the necessary infrastructure. For example, safely installing the contraflow system involves Highways England closing the M20 overnight, resulting in local diversions.The contraflow system was reinstalled on the motorway last month to help ease the flow of traffic expected during the school holidays. Labour MP Jim McMahon, the shadow transport secretary, told The Guardian: “By removing the sunset clauses on Operation Brock it’s an admission that they’ve failed to plan for the outcome of their Brexit negotiations and failed to work with local people over the past 18 months to put in place a better scheme.”He added: “Operation Brock has proved unpopular locally and slipping out an announcement in the hope that no one notices shows a total disregard for the concerns of local people in Kent.” More

Assaults on front-line workers in Britain’s prison system have been “de-facto decriminalised”, a new report has claimed.One in four staff has been physically attacked at work over the last year, with one in ten having been assaulted twice or more in the same period, the research by trade union Community showed.The report, called Keep Us Safe, said that prisons are facing a worrying “spike in violence”, with assaults on prison staff in England and Wales increasing by 247 per cent since 2010. This equates to 21 prison officers being physically assaulted every single day, the report claimed.Some 87 per cent of workers reported incidents of assaults to their employer. However 64 per cent of members surveyed said their report about abuse at work did not lead to any consequences for the offender. More than a quarter (26 per cent) of staff in the justice sector said they were abused on a daily basis and another third (23 per cent) said they were abused weekly.During the pandemic, 36 per cent of Community members said they had noticed no difference to levels of violence and a further 29 per cent said that it had become worse.The report details multiple incidents of violence against prison staff. In one instance a male prison officer was struck with a metal flask, breaking his cheekbone, while one female prison officer recalled being kicked in the sternum by a prisoner she was trying to control.Roy Rickhuss general secretary of Community, said: “Too often during the pandemic, prison workers have been the forgotten emergency service.“The nature of their work has meant they have been unable to work from home, being in close contact with high numbers of people a day. This has meant a workforce highly exposed to Coronavirus, often having to work long shifts to cover for others who are at home isolating or unwell.“After an exhausting year and a half, the thought of returning to high levels violence is deeply troubling. Perhaps the most worrying revelation in the report is the scale to which assault is being committed against our brave Justice Sector workers with impunity. We’re calling for urgent reform from government. We’re asking them to keep us safe.”The report added that the sector is currently under-staffed due to a number of factors, including the high levels of violence and poor benefits.David Lammy , Labour’s shadow secretary of state for justice, said: “The Conservatives’ disastrous mishandling of the prison service has led to a huge spike in violence against the workers who sacrifice so much to keep the rest of us safe.“The government must act urgently to improve conditions in our overcrowded, understaffed and dangerous prisons, as well as to ensure those who assault prison workers are punished.”A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “While the latest figures show that assaults on prison staff are down by 24%, we will never tolerate violence against our hard working officers, which is why we’re doubling the maximum sentence for those who cause them harm. “This is on top of the millions we have already invested in tools such as PAVA to keep frontline staff safe.” More

Angela Rayner has insisted “every effort” should be made to retrieve any messages regarding Covid contracts on a health minister’s mobile device that was “broken” before it could be searched.Her demand comes after government lawyers told the Good Law Project — which is engaged in legal action against the Department of Health and Social Care over the award of contracts — that Lord Bethell’s phone had been replaced early in 2021 and that the data held on it was not contained on the new device.In their letter to the Good Law Project, they added that investigations were being carried out to establish whether the data could still be collected and retrieved.Following the revelation, Ms Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, last week wrote the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which announced in July an investigation into the use of private correspondence at the Department of Health and Social Care.Ms Rayner told the commissioner she was “deeply worried that the minister’s blatant disregard for propriety and coincidental technology failures are undermining every effort to seek transparency”.In a response, the ICO also clarified its investigation into private communication channels used at DHSC would include the use of WhatsApp messages.“To confirm that when we have previously referred to private communication channels in relation to our investigation, this includes messenger apps such as WhatsApp and any other private channels that fall outside the DHSC’s corporate systems”.It added: “This includes looking at the retention, security and deletion of matters relevant to the corporate record to ensure that these have been handled appropriately.”In a statement on Tuesday, Ms Rayner said: “A broken phone is a convenient excuse for the Conservatives to avoid scrutiny over yet more sleaze. Discussing millions of pounds of taxpayer-funded contracts on a private device is unacceptable. Why did he not use a government-issued phone for these messages?“Every effort needs to be made to retrieve them from the minister’s phone so that they can be presented in court and included in the pandemic public inquiry. These missing messages are vital evidence and bereaved families deserve nothing less than the whole truth.”Ms Rayner has also separately written to Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, urging the government to retrieve any messages and for Lord Bethell to be investigated under the ministerial code.The ICO announced its investigation on 6 July — shortly after the resignation of Matt Hancock from the cabinet — amid claims that ministers and senior officials had used private email accounts to conduct government business.“It concerns the public to feel there may be a loss of transparency about decisions affecting them and their loves ones,” said Elizabeth Denham. “And as the regulator of data protection and freedom of information laws, it concerns me.”She added: “To be clear, the use of private correspondence channels does not in itself break freedom of information or data protection rules. But my worry is that information in private email accounts or messaging services is forgotten, overlooked, autodeleted or otherwise not available when a freedom of information request is later made.“This frustrates the freedom of information process, and puts at risk the preservation of official records of decision making. I also worry that emails containing personal detail are not properly secured in people’s personal email accounts.”The Department of Health and Social Care has been contacted for comment. More

Poorer pupils are more likely than ever to miss out on top university courses, experts have warned, as this year’s A-level results widen the gap between private and state schools.The proportion of A-level students given top grades reached a record high, with nearly half achieving an A or above, after exams were cancelled and marks were determined by teachers. But data from regulator Ofqual showed the increase in A grades was 50 per cent higher in independent schools than in secondary comprehensives – prompting fears that this would combine with the record number of university applications to “compound” inequality in the education system.The data also showed that black students, those on free school meals and those living in areas of high deprivation were all less likely to achieve the top A or A* grades than their more privileged peers.The relative success of private schools means state school pupils still trying to pin down a place at university in the weeks ahead could be “elbowed out”, experts warned.Dr Lee Elliot Major, professor of social mobility at Exeter University, said he was worried many students from low-income backgrounds could lose out during the fierce battle for places – including on top courses at “selective” Russell Group and Oxbridge universities.“It is deeply concerning to see widening socioeconomic divides in this year’s A-level results, confirming our worst fears – that the pandemic has exacerbated educational inequalities that were already there,” Dr Elliot Major told The Independent.“On the basis of the results, my worry is that some disadvantaged students won’t get into the highly prestigious courses, and will be elbowed out by those from privileged backgrounds. I also worry whether some [disadvantaged students] who didn’t get the expected grades will get a university place at all.”The gap between the most privileged and least privileged pupils in securing university places has widened, according to data shared by Ucas on Tuesday. The admissions body admitted that the lack of progress in opening up higher education to all was “disappointing”.Ucas said a record number of students (395,770) had secured a place on their first-choice university course – up 8 per cent on last year. The data shows 20.7 per cent of all 18-year-olds from the most disadvantaged backgrounds in the UK have secured an undergraduate place, up 2 per cent on last year.However, the most privileged students are doing far better than before at securing university places. Some 48.4 per cent from the most privileged backgrounds have secured an undergraduate place this year – up 6 per cent on last year.Carl Cullinane, head of research at the Sutton Trust education think tank, said there is a danger of pupils from independent schools “pulling away” from those in state schools. “The widening gaps in top grades have obvious knock-on implications for admissions to selective universities and widening participation,” he told The Independent.“We fear it’s likely to have an impact on admissions for disadvantaged students. The scramble for places will be most sharp at the most selective universities. Applications to those universities have shot up this year, so they’re much more competitive than usual.”The proportion of A-level entries awarded an A grade or higher rose to an all-time high after students were given grades determined by teachers, rather than based on external exams. In total, more than two in five (44.8 per cent) of UK entries were awarded an A or A* grade, up by 6.3 percentage points on last year.Although teaching unions hailed the success of students in the face of Covid disruption, dismissing concerns about “grade inflation”, experts fear students from less privileged backgrounds won’t be able to take advantage of this year’s record results.Private schools have seen an absolute increase in A or A* grades of 9.3 per cent this year, compared to 6.2 per cent among secondary comprehensives. The gap in achieving A-level grades between candidates who are black, receive free school meals, or experience a very high level of deprivation and those who are not in those categories widened by 1.43, 1.42 and 1.39 per cent respectively.Kate Green MP, Labour’s shadow education secretary, said the government’s “chaotic” last-minute decision on exams and assessment over the past year had “opened the door to unfairness”.Research by the Sutton Trust found that independent, fee-charging schools are more likely than state schools to use a wide variety of assessments – including prior access to questions as well as “open book” tests, which allow pupils to refer to coursework notes.Parental pressure is also more prevalent at private schools, research has shown. Some 23 per cent of teachers at private schools said parents had approached or pressured them about their child’s grades this year, compared to just 11 per cent at the least affluent state schools, according to the Sutton Trust.Many pupils spent large parts of this year unable to study effectively due to a lack of appropriate devices, access to the internet or acceptable space to study – factors not included when assessing this year’s results.Sam Tuckett, senior researcher at the Education Policy Institute, said the impact of the attainment gap was likely to be felt among those trying to get places on the most popular courses at Russell Group universities.Recent analysis showed that just over two-thirds of applications to selective universities had resulted in offers by July, compared to almost three-quarters at the same stage last year. And the number of courses being offered by selective universities through clearing has fallen by a third, from 4,500 last year to only 3,000 this year.“We may see some universities unable to offer places to students who have just missed out on expected grades – especially when it comes to high-demand courses at selective universities,” said Mr Tuckett.“The clearing process could be even more competitive. The A-level results suggest that if you’re from a disadvantaged background, grades won’t have increased as much since last year on average – so you may be more likely to need to apply to university through clearing.”Educators and campaigners have expressed concerns that basing this year’s A-level results on teacher predictions rather than exams has left black students in particular at a disadvantage.Research shows that gaps indicating lower outcomes in 2020 for black African, black Caribbean and mixed white students relative to their white British counterparts have increased by between 1.85 and 2.97 percentage points in 2021.Lavinya Stennett, CEO and founder of The Black Curriculum, a social enterprise, said: “This form of assessment leaves room for teacher biases to determine a student’s worth. For black students in particular, grades will be predicted on the basis of assumed capabilities, stemming from generalised characteristics of their ethnic and socioeconomic background.”Meanwhile, education secretary Gavin Williamson joined the teaching unions to defend this year’s results amid concerns over grade inflation, calling on people to celebrate young people’s success during a difficult year.But influential Conservative MP Robert Halfon, chair of the Commons Education Committee, suggested that grade inflation was so “baked” into the system it could cause universities even more problems with admissions in the years ahead.He told BBC Radio 4’s The World At One: “I do think in the long term, because of the huge increase in As and A*s, that we need to look at our exam system in general.” More

The Scottish health secretary and his wife have started court proceedings against a nursery in Dundee over alleged racial discrimination.SNP politician Humza Yousaf and his partner Nadia El-Nakla took the step after Little Scholars Day Nursery in Broughty Ferry said it did not have enough space to accommodate their young daughter.They claim that the decision was discriminatory, given that the white child of a friend was later offered a place at the same facility.The Daily Record newspaper tested this notion by sending the nursery bogus enquiries from a white family and a Muslim family. While the former application was accepted, the latter was reportedly rejected.The nursery strongly denies allegations that it discriminated against the family. The couple first reported the institution to the Care Inspectorate, before choosing to go down the legal route, alleging its actions constituted a breach of the Equality Act 2010.In a statement shared by their solicitor, Mr Yousaf and Ms El-Nakla said Little Scholars Day Nursery had not apologised for its conduct.The pair added: “We have both stood against hatred our whole lives, often being the targets of vile abuse.“We will not accept our children being discriminated against by anyone.“Like any other parents we simply want our children to be treated equally, regardless of their colour of skin or religion.”Their lawyer Aamer Anwar has told the nursery that legal action will be taken unless it public apologises and agrees to make a donation to an “anti-racist charity of our client’s choosing” within the next fortnight.Mr Anwar has also instructed the Equality and Human Rights Commission to investigate the incident.A spokesperson for the nursery told The Daily Record: “Our nursery is extremely proud of being open and inclusive to all and any claim to the contrary is demonstrably false and an accusation that we would refute in the strongest possible terms.”The spokesperson added: “In addition to our owners being of Asian heritage, across more than a decade we have regularly welcomed both children and staff from a range of different religious, cultural, ethnic and racial backgrounds including two Muslim families currently.“We have also regularly made arrangements to accommodate different lifestyles by, for example, providing a halal menu for those children who come from Muslim families.”Additional reporting by PA More