Oversight in the UK?! Lessons for avoiding abuse and corruption in government contracting

Session overview

Chaired by Professor Anne Davies, our panellists included Sir Gary Hickinbottom chair of a recent JUSTICE report on outsourcing, Kate Eves OBE chair of a public inquiry into mistreatment of individuals detained at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre, and Daniel Bruce Chief Executive of Transparency International UK (TI-UK) which has recently released a report on COVID-19 contracts. We also invited comments from Sally Morshead, lead solicitor at housing charity Shelter, Andy Door, Head of Procurement, Scottish Prison Service and from Michael Hyatt, Professional Practice Lead, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

Thanks to Philip Armitage for his critical help in organising this session. 

Background reading

Earlier this year, law reform charity JUSTICE released a landmark report, Beyond the Blame Game – A responsible and rights-centred approach to government contracting. The committee behind the report was chaired by a former Judge of the Court of Appeal, Sir Gary Hickinbottom. The report concludes that outsourced public services often lack oversight, accountability and transparency, to the detriment of individual service users. The report calls for more collaborative practices and highlighted that government commissioners often lack information about the quality of outsourced public services, and so are often unaware of rights abuses until too late.

Last year, Kate Eves OBE, the Chair of The Brook House Inquiry, published her report into the mistreatment of individuals who were detained at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre (IRC). The Inquiry was a responce to a BBC Panorama programme, ‘Undercover: Britain’s Immigration Secrets’ which aired in 2017 revealing shocking violence and distress filmed covertly at Brook House IRC. In the UK, IRCs are managed by private firms contracted by the Home Office. The Inquiry report offers 33 recommendations, the first of which is, 'Robust monitoring of contract performance.' Recommendation 2 is for a contractual term requiring compliance with the 'overriding purpose' of the rule describing the balance between security and freedom in immigration detention. (See the Recommendations section in Volume 2, p 333.)

In September 2024, Transparency International UK (TI-UK) published a report Behind the Masks; Corruption red flags in COVID-19 public procurement, which identifies 135 contracts representing £15.3 billion of public funds that TI-UK believes carry a high risk of corruption. The report describes a widespread suspension of procurement checks and safeguards, including failure to publish information of high-value contracts within 30 days — a process which TI-UK says 'completely collapsed' (p iv). The report also outlines 15 key issues and associated recommendations. The analysis behind the report focused on 'corruption red flags.' The report notes that, 'while red flags cannot be the sole basis for legal action, they are useful in pinpointing issues that warrant deeper investigation' (p 36). (The red flags are detailed in Annex 3 of the TI-UK report.)

For England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, any lessons will be implemented under the Procurement Act 2023 which will now 'go live' in February 2025 and includes a new Procurement Review Unit (PRU). The Cabinet Office has a guidance document on the new PRU, titled Raising Standards: Our Ambition.