\n<\/p>\n
W<\/span>hen Mrs Justice Cockerill handed down her judgment in the high court against PPE Medpro, the company linked to the Conservative peer Michelle Mone, for supplying unsafe personal protective equipment during the pandemic, her findings were a landmark in a five-year saga that cast the opaque world of government deal making into stark light.<\/p>\n PPE Medpro was ordered to refund the full \u00a3122m that the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) paid for unusable gowns in the summer of 2020, as Boris Johnson\u2019s government scrambled to refill the UK\u2019s depleted stocks.<\/p>\n But Cockerill\u2019s 87-page judgment also offered an intriguing glimpse into another company whose contracts, with a combined value of \u00a31.4bn, dwarfed the PPE Medpro deals, a firm so much less well-known that even a politician involved in the deals could not remember its name.<\/p>\n To people familiar with the frantic multibillion pound spending of public money and the \u201cVIP lane\u201d for politically connected companies seeking PPE contracts, it was jolting that Cockerill found this firm was also at fault in the supply of unusable PPE. Its name is Uniserve.<\/p>\n Uniserve was a big winner of contracts as it became key to the government\u2019s buying of vast quantities of PPE from China. An established logistics company based in the suburban town of Upminster, near the border between Greater London and Essex, it is owned by its founder and managing director, Iain Liddell.<\/p>\n The DHSC commissioned Uniserve early in the pandemic to transport ventilators to the UK, which developed into a \u201cfreight contract\u201d for bringing PPE from China, and ultimately ran from 31 March 2020 through to December 2021, paying the company \u00a3573m.<\/p>\n <\/span>Uniserve is a well-established logistics company based in Upminster.<\/span> Photograph: MediaWorldImages\/Alamy<\/p>\n Liddell moved quickly into offering to supply PPE directly and Uniserve was awarded seven contracts worth \u00a3304m, processed through the VIP lane. Altogether, for an array of Covid contracts, the DHSC paid Uniserve a total of \u00a31.4bn.<\/p>\n The freight contract involved Uniserve shipping the gowns supplied by PPE Medpro, the company owned by Mone\u2019s husband, the Isle of Man-based businessman Doug Barrowman. This brought Uniserve into the scope of Cockerill\u2019s deliberations.<\/p>\n In her judgment, Cockerill concluded that the contract required Uniserve to inspect the PPE Medpro gowns in China, before they were shipped. She said there was a \u201cdegree of doubt\u201d about whether Uniserve ever did conduct inspections. Whatever process was followed, it failed to spot the glaring fault with the gowns\u2019 technical labelling, which indicated they were not certified to be sterile.<\/p>\n Crucially, the DHSC had to pay for the gowns when they were approved for shipping, so the government paid the full \u00a3122m to PPE Medpro with no effective inspection having been carried out.<\/p>\n It was only after the gowns arrived in England that a vigilant public health official, Zarah Naeem, inspected and saw the invalid labelling, and the gowns were rejected. Despite winning the court battle, the DHSC faces difficulties recovering the millions it paid, because no funds were left in PPE Medpro, which is now in administration.<\/p>\n If the gowns had been inspected in China by Uniserve as the judge considered they should have been, the shipment may never have set sail, and the taxpayer may not have paid to PPE Medpro the money ministers are now scrambling to recover.<\/p>\n The Guardian asked Liddell about Uniserve\u2019s alleged failure of inspection in the judgment and he replied through lawyers, claiming that the judge was mistaken. Liddell said the DHSC had not required Uniserve to carry out quality control inspections at the relevant time and only added this to the freight contract in late August 2020. The DHSC\u2019s barrister, Paul Stanley KC, appeared to support that position in court, saying Uniserve had subcontracted factory collections in China and depicting the operation as a \u201cChinese truck driver\u201d not versed in European PPE safety regulations.<\/p>\n If that is correct \u2013 and the published freight contract appears to support Liddell\u2019s position \u2013 it points to a much bigger procurement issue: massive government spending without basic checks for quality.<\/p>\n Chris Smith, a procurement consultant who works with Transparency International in the UK Anti-Corruption Coalition (UKACC), has calculated that the DHSC paid \u00a39.35bn for PPE during those first four months before inspections began. The DHSC subsequently reported it had paid \u00a33.3bn for PPE that was unusable in the NHS.<\/p>\n Uniserve\u2019s remarkable accumulation of government contracts did attract public scrutiny at the time, including reporting by the Guardian. A central question was how the company came to the attention of ministers, who would sign off on contracts of such enormous value.<\/p>\n The DHSC said later <\/strong>that the Conservative peer Theodore Agnew was the politician who introduced Uniserve to the VIP lane. Agnew, a former City finance executive, was one of several new ministers, headed by Michael Gove, appointed to the Cabinet Office in Johnson\u2019s reshuffle of February 2020.<\/p>\n Agnew did not respond to the Guardian\u2019s invitations to comment for this article, but he was asked about Uniserve at the Covid public inquiry in March. He described himself as the \u201cgodparent\u201d of the VIP lane saying, as other former ministers have, that fast-tracking companies referred by politicians and officials was a way to prioritise credible offers. Remarkably, considering the huge public money paid to Uniserve and the company\u2019s key role in the government\u2019s pandemic response, Agnew appeared to know very little about it.<\/p>\n \u201cWas Iain Liddell somebody that you knew personally, or through political connections or otherwise?\u201d Anna Morris KC asked. \u201cNo, I mean, I don\u2019t even know what Uniserve is,\u201d Agnew replied. \u201cWhat is it? What is it?\u201d<\/p>\n <\/span>‘I don’t even know what Uniserve is’ Theodore Agnew tells Covid inquiry \u2013\u00a0video <\/span><\/p>\n One politician who does know the company better is Julia Lopez, the Conservative MP for Upminster. Lopez is close to Uniserve \u2013 literally: her constituency office was on the company\u2019s site, in effect, Liddell is the MP\u2019s landlord.<\/p>\n In June 2018, Lopez posted about the company enthusiastically on social media, pictured with Liddell in hi-vis jackets, describing Uniserve as \u201cthe UK\u2019s number one independent logistics and global trade management provider\u201d.<\/p>\n The question has always been asked as to whether she was involved in Uniserve being awarded PPE contracts. Lopez was also newly appointed to the Cabinet Office in February 2020, although she was on maternity leave until June.<\/p>\n Map showing Julia Lopez\u2019s constituency office next to Uniserve\u2019s head office on their site<\/p>\n In 2020, Liddell and the Cabinet Office denied that the connection with Lopez played a role in Uniserve being awarded contracts. The Guardian asked Liddell then if he was \u201cever in contact with Julia Lopez MP regarding bidding for these [government Covid] contracts\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cNo,\u201d Liddell replied, \u201cUniserve or Mr Liddell were never in contact with Julia Lopez regarding bidding for these contracts.\u201d<\/p>\n The Cabinet Office said at the time: \u201cMinister Julia Lopez [was] not involved in the procurement of these contracts.\u201d<\/p>\n The Guardian also asked Liddell if he or Uniserve were ever in contact with any other member of the government or officials, in relation to securing the Covid contracts.<\/p>\n Liddell replied: \u201cNo. Uniserve and Mr Liddell were contacted by the [DHSC\u2019s] emergency PPE team and Uniserve had to go through \u2026 the process all suppliers of PPE and services had to go through.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/span>Julia Lopez MP, left, touring one of Uniserve\u2019s warehouses in a clip from her website.<\/span> Photograph: julialopez.co.uk<\/p>\n In May 2021, Liddell replied to a letter from Meg Hillier, the chair of the public accounts committee (PAC), which was conducting an inquiry into PPE procurement and the VIP lane. She asked if he had submitted his offer to supply PPE through the DHSC\u2019s \u201cnormal process\u201d, or \u201cthrough other routes (for examples through a minister, MP or senior official)?\u201d.<\/p>\n Liddell replied in written evidence that the DHSC had approached Uniserve first, then it awarded the company more contracts because Uniserve \u201cdemonstrated our expertise\u201d and delivered on it.<\/p>\n \u201cFor the avoidance of doubt,\u201d Liddell wrote, \u201cUniserve has not sought to market its services to government via ministers, MPs or senior officials.\u201d<\/p>\n During the years since, campaigning by the Covid Bereaved Families for Justice (CBFFJ), which represents 7,000 families whose relatives died of the virus, was instrumental in pressuring Johnson to set up a public inquiry into his government\u2019s handling of the pandemic.<\/p>\n The inquiry allocated time to procurement and, while it did not examine the Uniserve contracts in detail, the CBFFJ and UKACC raised questions, which prompted some evidence to be provided for the first time.<\/p>\n A civil servant who worked closely with Uniserve, Jonathan Arrowsmith, made a written statement, which has given some insights into how the company was steered into the VIP lane.<\/p>\n Liddell\u2019s lawyers said the DHSC\u2019s first request came on 22 March 2020 and the company was asked owing to a personal connection, as a senior DHSC official had previously worked with a Uniserve director, in 2009. Arrowsmith\u2019s evidence shows that after this first commission, Liddell pushed to provide more services, including supplying PPE directly, and contacted many ministers and officials.<\/p>\n On 26 March 2020, a civil servant in Johnson\u2019s office introduced Liddell to Steve Oldfield, the DHSC\u2019s commercial director-general, saying: \u201cUniserve have been working with DHSC so far on PPE supplies, but there\u2019s definitely a lot more nationally and internationally that they could do to help.\u201d<\/p>\n Liddell then told Oldfield that Uniserve had \u201cgreat resources and capabilities across air, road and sea freight,\u201d adding: \u201cI am sure we can contribute an enormous amount to the supply chain effort getting PPE and any goods to where you need them.\u201d<\/p>\n Arrowsmith referred in his statement to an email chain within the Cabinet Office that referred to Uniserve, \u201ccommencing with an email from Iain Liddell\u201d of 2 April 2020. The email chain contained \u201ca reference to Iain Liddell\u2019s constituency member of parliament\u201d, asked if there had been an \u201cescalation\u201d of Uniserve, and proposed checking with \u201cLord Agnew\u2019s private office\u201d. The emails themselves have not been made public.<\/p>\n Two days later, in another email chain, Max Cairnduff, a senior civil servant, was apparently responding to concerns that Uniserve was a \u201cVIP opportunity\u201d not being processed quickly enough. Uniserve was said to have contacted \u201cmultiple ministers\u201d.<\/p>\n Agnew was then named the \u201cVIP link\u201d for Uniserve in Cabinet Office spreadsheets on 13 and 14 April 2020. Uniserve was awarded the first three PPE contracts, worth a total \u00a387m, on 14 April.<\/p>\n Last week, the Guardian asked Lopez if she was the constituency MP referred to in the April 2020 email chain.<\/p>\n She replied that perhaps it referred not to her but the MP for where Liddell lived, and she said: \u201cI played no role in the personal recommendation, referral or award of any contract to Uniserve \u2026 Any suggestion that I was personally involved in the commercial preferment or advancement of Uniserve would be false.\u201d<\/p>\n However, two days later, Liddell revealed for the first time that he did contact Lopez in the run-up to the PPE contracts being awarded. His lawyers said he emailed her on 2 April 2020 \u2013 an admission that appears to suggest a link between Uniserve, its tenant Conservative MP and its VIP lane referral.<\/p>\n Liddell sent the email \u201cto complain about difficulties in relation to [PPE] supply proposals \u2026 and delays which Mr Liddell felt may cost lives\u201d.<\/p>\n Lopez then declined to explain whether she acted on Liddell\u2019s email, or why she had never mentioned it. A Conservative party spokesperson replied on her behalf, saying: \u201cMrs Lopez had no involvement in any procurement decision by the government. Mrs Lopez was on maternity leave at the time and government ministers were not involved in operational decisions.\u201d<\/p>\n In May 2020, Arrowsmith referred Uniserve to the VIP, \u201chigh priority\u201d lane, although the company was already on it by then. Liddell had become \u201cincreasingly vocal and critical about the process\u201d, Arrowsmith said, and \u201cfrustrated that his offers were not being processed quickly enough\u201d.<\/p>\n Liddell requested his offer to supply face masks be \u201cput through the fast track and high volume approval process\u201d. His lawyers said he was not aware at the time that there was a designated VIP lane. Arrowsmith said Uniserve was referred to the high-priority lane \u201cin part, to placate the increasing frustrations of Iain Liddell\u201d. But also, he said, \u201cUniserve had established themselves as a very credible partner who were making credible offers.\u201d<\/p>\n In 2022, it emerged that PPE worth \u00a3178.5m provided by Uniserve was in a list deemed \u201cdo not supply\u201d. The DHSC, even under Labour, still claims commercial confidentiality over such PPE contract questions and declined to provide information about Uniserve. Liddell indicated that <\/strong>the \u00a3178.5m <\/strong>of PPE was never used, <\/strong>but insisted that it passed quality standards.<\/p>\n The government Covid contracts spectacularly boosted Uniserve financially; its accounts for the 15 months to 30 June 2020 show revenues almost tripled to \u00a3562m, pre-tax profits increased sevenfold to \u00a346m. In the next 18 months to 31 December 2021, turnover doubled again to \u00a31.4bn, profits grew to \u00a3144m.<\/p>\n In a statement, Liddell said: \u201cOur engagement with the DHSC was based on our longstanding expertise in international logistics \u2026 Contracts were awarded on the basis of proven performance and capability to deliver, not on the basis of political connection.<\/p>\n \u201cUniserve helped deliver over 44bn units of PPE and vital equipment to the UK. I am proud of the role Uniserve played in delivering vital PPE when and wherever the nation needed it most during the unprecedented and uncertain Covid-19 pandemic.\u201d<\/p>\n Liddell\u2019s lawyers said he stood by his original answers to the Guardian and the PAC, and that Uniserve submitted its bids for contracts \u201cthrough the proper channels\u201d.<\/p>\n On 18 March this year, Gove and Agnew gave their evidence to the Covid inquiry. Gove described Agnew as a \u201chero\u201d for the work he did. Agnew said the government did its best in the circumstances and said it was \u201cbollocks\u201d to suggest the VIP lane was a \u201cheinous plan to enrich a few of our mates \u2026 This was not some kind of plan, rightwing people trying to enrich themselves\u201d.<\/p>\n Morris, the CBFFJ\u2019s barrister, asked Agnew why he introduced Uniserve into the VIP lane.<\/p>\n \u201cWere you aware that they had no track record in the supply of PPE?\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cNo,\u201d Agnew replied, \u201cbut we used a lot of people who didn\u2019t, because we had to go wherever we could. But I had no relationship with them.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cOK, so if that\u2019s correct,\u201d Morris asked, \u201con what basis did you consider their offers merited urgent or priority consideration within the VIP lane?\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cI can\u2019t remember,\u201d Agnew replied.<\/p>\n Quick Guide<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span>Show<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know.<\/p>\n If you have something to share on this subject you can contact our investigations team confidentially using the following methods.<\/p>\n Secure Messaging in the Guardian app<\/strong><\/p>\n The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said.<\/p>\n If you don’t already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS\/Android) and go to the app menu. Pick \u2018Secure Messaging\u2019, follow the instructions to compose your message and select \u2018UK Investigations Team\u2019 as the recipient.<\/p>\n SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post<\/strong><\/p>\n If you can safely use the tor network without being observed or monitored you can send messages and documents to the Guardian via our SecureDrop platform.<\/p>\n Finally, our guide at theguardian.com\/tips\u00a0lists several ways to contact us securely, and discusses the pros and cons of each.\u00a0<\/p>\n Illustration: Guardian Design \/ Rich Cousins<\/p>\n Thank you for your feedback.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When Mrs Justice Cockerill handed down her judgment in the high court against PPE Medpro, the company linked to the Conservative peer Michelle Mone, for supplying unsafe personal protective equipment during the pandemic, her findings were a landmark in a five-year saga that cast the opaque world of government deal making into stark light. PPE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":32694,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[48],"tags":[18831,18832,5333,357,15189,7138,1068,2268],"class_list":{"0":"post-32693","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-politics","8":"tag-billionpound","9":"tag-contractor","10":"tag-covid","11":"tag-inquiry","12":"tag-ppe","13":"tag-revealed","14":"tag-site","15":"tag-tory"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32693","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=32693"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32693\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/32694"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=32693"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=32693"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=32693"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}A question of access<\/h2>\n
Into the VIP lane<\/h2>\n
\u2018Do not supply\u2019<\/h2>\n
How to contact our investigations team<\/h4>\n