advertisement


The Good Law Project


Good Law Project have teamed-up with Led By Donkeys to better get the message across as to the corruption that has been occurring throughout Johnson’s time in office.

I just received the same email.

Unfortunately I doubt it'll stick/amount to anything, as the government will say they had to do extraordinary things because of how much of an emergency the pandemic was. And bar the shouting, society will just wave it through on that basis.

Depressing.
 
This week on ‘Tories Gonna Tory’:

Cash for the Tories buys you access. And access means cash from the public purse. That’s the abysmal two-step that channels public cash to Party donors.

All of this happened secretly through the VIP backchannels for PPE and Test and Trace contracts unearthed by Good Law Project. But now the institutionalisation of favours for those with special access is out in the open.

Mandating Covid testing services for travellers entering and leaving the UK has meant a bonanza for those firms lucky enough to get approved. An investigation by Good Law Project into the process for obtaining that lucrative approval has revealed the apparent existence of another VIP lane.

Applicants for approval are asked to say whether they have a ‘sponsor’ who is a ‘Member of Parliament or Minister’ and to name them.

The fact of a Minister ‘sponsoring’ your application is – or should be – irrelevant to your prospects of gaining authorisation. It is hard to see any reason for this criteria– beyond a desire to red carpet those lucky enough to be on good terms with Government Ministers.

We also know that many of the firms operating in the lucrative PCR testing market have ties to the Conservative Party.

Rapid Clinics

Rapid Clinics was incorporated in December 2020 by Dr Ashraf Chohan and has a ‘poor’ rating on trust pilotwith users labelling their service as“terrible” and “unprofessional”.

On the other hand, Chohan does have strong ties to the Conservative Party. He is chairman of the ‘Conservative Friends of the NHS’, a Party donor and a member of the Party’s ‘treasury team’. He has also been snapped at events with Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Chancellor Rishi Sunak and Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab, and a host of other senior Conservative Party figures.


Quick Clinics

Dr Chohan’s son Jamal Chohan also operates a Government approved Covid testing firm - Quick Clinics. Like his father’s business it also has a ‘poor’ rating amongst consumers, who have labelled the firm “dishonest and avaricious”.

Qured

Qured, another Government approved testing company, was last week labelled a “joke” and a “fraud” by UK travellers let down by the firm.

Qured's company name is Health Technologies Ltd and the firm appointedStephen John Oakly Catlin as a director in April 2020. Catlin is a major Conservative Party donor and has handed the party £450,000 - including £50,000 as recently as February 2021.

Mr Catlin is also a member of the Conservative Party ‘Leader's group’’ - an elite Conservative dining club whose members get direct access to Boris Johnson.

We don’t make any allegations about how these firms won Government approval that many customers don’t think they deserve. But we do say as a general rule this: cronyism - welfare for the wealthy - gives short shrift to the public interest.

Thank you,

Jo Maugham - Good Law Project

Only with your support can we continue to hold the Government to account. If you are in a position to do so, you can make a donation here:

Donate
 
Good Law Project are suing the Conservative Party for partisan use of the ‘Levelling Up Fund’ (Independent). There is no pot of public money without grubby Tory fingers in it.
 
Be very interesting to see how Jenrick justifies funding for Newark & Sherwood DC over the needs of vastly poorer and more run down councils across the country.
 
Unimaginable resources” were thrown at Test and Trace. Yet it “cannot point to a measurable difference to the progress of the pandemic”. That’s what the Conservative-majority Public Accounts Committee found. There was a measurable difference, though, for the owners of the biggest of the pandemic contract winners, Innova. The LA Times reported that they flashed “an Innova bank statement with a $175-million balance as proof of funds”. They also went on “a corporate and personal luxury buying spree”, including several Gulfstream jets and luxury houses.

Things are no better when one turns to PPE procurement. The Government’s own Counter Fraud Function “assessed a high risk of fraud in the procurement of PPE”.

You might think this is cause for the Government’s Anti-Corruption Champion, John Penrose MP, to take a look. His role, after all, is to “scrutinise and challenge the performance of departments and agencies”. And the sums involved are no laughing matter. Together, the Test and Trace and PPE programmes cost a staggering £50bn – about the size of the whole annual defence budget.

But rather than chasing corruption, he seems to spend his time besmirching those who do. A follower of Good Law Project has shared with us an extraordinary letter he received from John Penrose, which contains a number of out-and-out falsehoods.

The letter says:

  • “Since the start of the pandemic [Good Law Project] have brought scores of legal cases against the Government and, so far, they’ve failed to make almost all of them stand up in court.”
That’s just not true. At the time of writing, we have had only two substantive court decisions and have won both of them. And, of the 14 cases we have issued since the start of 2020, the Court has granted permission in 11 at the first time of asking. Official statistics (beginning in 2010) show that this happens in only 17% of all judicial reviews. Good Law Project’s success rate is 78%.

It also says:

  • “In both cases, the judge said that their broader allegations of dishonesty or actual corruption (i.e. anything more than failing to follow the bureaucratic process precisely enough) weren’t proven.”
That is also false. In none of the decided cases did we allege dishonesty or corruption. So, his statement that judges dismissed our allegations of dishonesty or actual corruption is a pure and false figment of his imagination.

Is Penrose indifferent to the truth of what he says? Or is our notional anti-corruption champion telling out-and-out lies to try and smear those doing the job he should be doing?

Penrose goes on to say:

“I should probably add that a couple of their cases are against appointments at NHS Test & Trace, where my wife worked as a senior volunteer.”

That’s not entirely frank either.

The truth is that the person in charge of the programme that delivered unimaginable wealth to Innova’s owners but made no measurable difference to the progress of the pandemic is Baroness Dido Harding. And John Penrose is her husband. Yep, you read it right: he’s charged with scrutinising whether there was corruption in the programme headed up by his own wife. It’s laughable – but it’s no laughing matter.

In fact, Good Law Project is bringing a judicial review – for which a court has granted us permission – of the decision to put Harding to lead the £37bn Test and Trace fiasco.

What does all of this add up to?

We wouldn’t normally respond to baseless slurs from a Parliamentarian. But what makes Penrose’s letter significant is that the anti-corruption champion has a responsibility to “engage with external stakeholders, including… civil society organisations”.

There is likely to be – the Government itself has acknowledged – fraud in pandemic procurement. And despite being a small not-for-profit without the powers of a law enforcement agency, Good Law Project has uncovered two highly suspicious cases involving contracts worth hundreds of millions of pounds: one involving Priti Patel and another involving vast contracts awarded to a jeweller based in Florida.

Penrose’s letter tells the truth about his role. He’s not an anti-corruption champion – he’s a man speaking falsehoods to try and stop those working to uncover it.

Thank you,

Jo Maugham - Good Law Project

Only with your support can we continue to hold the Government to account. If you are in a position to do so, you can make a donation here:

Donate


Good Law Project
 
The UK Conservative Party really is a criminal endeavour these days. Penrose yet another Stasi apparatchik strategically positioned to block all truth and accountability.
 
The UK Conservative Party really is a criminal endeavour these days. Penrose yet another Stasi apparatchik strategically positioned to block all truth and accountability.
If the Labour Party can’t oppose the Tory party’s criminality and corruption, would a vote for Labour just be enabling more of the same criminality and corruption but with red rose on it?
 
From what I can tell Labour have little objection to till-dipping, they are just far less good at it than the Tories. IIRC one of their crooks in the ‘expenses scandal’ actually ended up in jail for infinitely less than this shower of Tories are stealing from us. Obviously UKIP/Farage etc are just as bad too, e.g. their well documented theft of EU expenses, false accounting etc.
 
From what I can tell Labour have little objection to till-dipping, they are just far less good at it than the Tories. IIRC one of their crooks in the ‘expenses scandal’ actually ended up in jail for infinitely less than this shower of Tories are stealing from us. Obviously UKIP/Farage etc are just as bad too, e.g. their well documented theft of EU expenses, false accounting etc.

Yes, many more Labour MPs faced criminal charges that Tory.

A certain Keir Starmer was in charge of prosecutions!

Keir Starmer, Director of Public Prosecutions for England and Wales announced on 5 February 2010 that three Labour MPs, Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine, and Conservative peer Lord Hanningfield would face criminal charges of false accounting in relation to their expense claims. He said that the Crown Prosecution Service had concluded that "there is sufficient evidence to bring criminal charges and that it is in the public interest to charge the individuals concerned".[127][128] All four denied wrongdoing and said they would fight the charges. A joint statement from Morley, Chaytor and Devine said "we totally refute any charges that we have committed an offence and we will defend our position robustly", while Hanningfield said "all the claims I have ever made were made in good faith".[155][181]

David Chaytor[edit]
David Chaytor (Labour) appealed along with Jim Devine and Elliot Morley to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom that his actions were protected by parliamentary privilege. The Supreme Court ruled against them and he subsequently pleaded guilty to charges of false accounting a total of £18,350, and was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.[182]

Jim Devine[edit]
Jim Devine (Labour) pleaded not guilty and was found guilty on two counts but cleared of a third (relating to £360) on 10 February 2011.[183] He had fraudulently claimed a total of £8,385 and on 31 March 2011 was sentenced to 16 months imprisonment.[134]

Eric Illsley[edit]
Eric Illsley (Labour) pleaded guilty to charges of false accounting totalling £14,000 and was sentenced at Southwark Crown Court to 12 months imprisonment.[184]

Denis MacShane[edit]
Denis MacShane (Labour) was jailed for six months on 23 December 2013 for expenses fraud, after admitting submitting 19 fake receipts amounting to £12,900, making him the fifth MP to get a prison sentence as a result of the scandal.[185]

Margaret Moran[edit]
Margaret Moran (Labour). On 6 September 2011 the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that Moran would face 21 criminal charges[186] 15 of false accounting and six charges of forgery. She was summoned to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 19 September 2011 where she was reported to have wept throughout the hearing.[187] Moran was sent to the Crown Court at Southwark for trial on 30 October 2011. She failed to appear and a 'not guilty' plea was entered by default in her absence. A date for the trial of an issue was set for 18 April with a directions hearing set for 15 December.[188] On 15 December 2011 Mr Justice Saunders was informed that psychiatrists considered Moran unfit to plead with the defence contending that the trial should therefore not proceed.[189] In April 2012, after receiving evidence from a number of psychiatrists, the judge determined that Moran was not fit to plead. On 13 November 2012 a jury found her guilty of the acts alleged.[190]In December, she was sentenced to a two-year supervision and treatment order, the judge commenting that although some might feel she had "got away with it", the court had acted "in accordance with the law of the land and on the basis of the evidence that it hears". Her false claims totalled more than £53,000, the largest fraud of any MP in the expenses scandal.[191]

Elliot Morley[edit]
Elliot Morley (Labour) admitted two charges of dishonesty and was sentenced at Southwark Crown Court on 20 May 2011 to 16 months imprisonment. His false claims totalled £31,333.54.[192][193] On 8 June 2011, he was expelled from the Privy Council, the first expulsion since Edgar Speyer in 1921, and thereby removing his right to use the honorific title The Right Honourable.[194]

Lord Taylor of Warwick[edit]
Lord Taylor of Warwick (Conservative) pleaded not guilty to six charges of false accounting, but was convicted at Southwark Crown Court on 25 January 2011.[195] His false claims amounted to £11,277 and on 31 May 2011 he was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment.

Lord Hanningfield[edit]
Paul White, Baron Hanningfield (Conservative) pleaded not guilty to six charges of false accounting, but was convicted at Chelmsford Crown Court on 26 May 2011.[196] He was given a 9-month sentence[197] which was confirmed when his appeal[198] against the conviction and sentence failed in July 2011. As a low-risk prisoner he was released in September 2011 on home detention after serving a quarter of the sentence.[199] After repaying the wrongly claimed £30,254.50 he returned to the House of Lords in April 2012.[200]
 
^^^
Sir Keir seems to have ended up where he started, kicking people out of the Labour Party?
 
For anyone interested, an update on the government's legal contortions:

Dear David,

You will recall in our hearing in July Government admitted that some of Health Minister Lord Bethell’s dealings in relation to the controversial £87.5 million testing contracts to Abingdon Health had been conducted via WhatsApp or text message, and were held only on his private mobile phone.

We wrote to Government to ask for the messages to be retrieved and preserved.

We were stunned to receive this response from Government in which Health Minister Lord Bethell changes his story, again, on why he can’t hand over the texts and What’s App messages.

This is now the Minister’s third different version of events:

First, he claimed his phone was “lost” so he couldn’t hand it over.

Then, a few weeks later he abandoned his tale that the phone had been “lost” and provided an entirely new explanation as to why he was no longer using it, claiming the phone was “broken”.

Now, unbelievably, he says the phone isn’t lost. Or broken. He actually passed the phone on to a family member.

Blimey, which is it, Minister?

It's far from clear that personal phones used extensively for Government business can safely be handed over to family members - one assumes children. What steps did Lord Bethell take, for example, to ensure that highly sensitive material couldn't be retrieved by a specialist? And if he did delete it, did he ensure he’d passed on all the relevant information to the Department of Health before doing so?

And the extraordinary change of story doesn’t stop there.

Back in June, No 10 issued a blanket denial that Ministers ever used private email accounts for Government business. But now their own lawyers have confirmed searches of Lord Bethell’s three private email addresses using keywords relating to Covid contracts turned up hits of between 18,000 and 36,000 separate documents that may be relevant to the case.

How on earth do we move from a blanket denial by No 10 that Ministers were using private email accounts for Government business, to an admission that a single Minister may in fact have used his private email for tens of thousands of official emails? Do they ever tell the truth?

We are fighting to get our hands on these messages. We will be able to reveal further twists in this extraordinary tale soon.

This fight for truth is only possible thanks to the support of hundreds of you. If you are in a position to do so, you can donate to the legal challenge here.

Thank you,

Jo Maugham - Good Law Project

Only with your support can we continue to hold the Government to account. If you are in a position to do so, you can make a donation here:

Donate
 
FFE12-F27-8-B59-4720-B4-D8-5-E65-D630-A45-D.jpg


LOL.
 
Last weekend, the then Secretary of State, Oliver Dowden, announced his intention to muzzle the third sector. In his blog about the process for appointing a new Chair of the Charity Commission - the Government’s regulator of charities - he complained about “a worrying trend in some charities that appear to have been hijacked by a vocal minority seeking to burnish their woke credentials”. He said the Chair will be selected based on how they “rebalance” charities away from that agenda using the Charity Commission’s powers. And that Ministers will only appoint someone who does this.

It’s a chilling thought. What would a politically motivated regulator mean for food banks who push back against policies that mean people don’t have enough to eat? What would it mean for a housing charity which challenges legislation that leaves people without a roof over their head? What about charities that campaign against Government policies that could do untold damage by baking in racial injustice or poverty? Will these fit with the Government's views?

Good Law Project is well aware from actual cases that these are not idle speculations. For that reason, we have written to Oliver Dowden’s successor, Nadine Dorries, firing the starting gun on the judicial review process. The legal challenge will be crowdfunded. If you are in a position to support us, you can do so here:

Donate
 
Britain Trump is Britain Trump. Much of the time I feel I’m watching a load of frogs being boiled. The trajectory is so clear to see now, but where is the civil unrest and public push-back? Having a nodding plastic dog liberated from the parcel shelf of a 1978 Austin Maxi’s as ‘Her Majesty’s Opposition’ isn’t helping much, but people really do need to fight this shit IMHO.
 
Britain Trump is Britain Trump. Much of the time I feel I’m watching a load of frogs being boiled. The trajectory is so clear to see now, but where is the civil unrest and public push-back? Having a nodding plastic dog liberated from the parcel shelf of a 1978 Austin Maxi’s as ‘Her Majesty’s Opposition’ isn’t helping much, but people really do need to fight this shit IMHO.
Unfortunately it isn’t just political parties, there seems to be an undercurrent of support for the War on Woke, which is odd, as there isn’t a real Woke thing going on to declare war on.

Yes, Labour is not worthy of the name of being called an ‘oppostion’ and will bend over to whatever political trend is going, but even here on pfm there has been a lot of support for the War on Woke in more than one thread suggesting that Culture wars also have a ready audience outside political parties

The fact that wokeness is a fictional threat doesn’t matter, it’s hitting it’s mark accurately and consistently, it is feeding into a fear that our traditions and identity are under attack and, as throughout history, governments will create and stoke that fear for political ends and authoritarian and anti democratic measures to control and consolidate power.
 
It is only going to get worse too. The latest round of government appointments are just shocking, especially the appointment of a Marjorie Taylor Greene-clone as ‘Culture Secretary’. I wonder how long until phrases such as ‘degenerate art’ start to appear.
 


advertisement


Back
Top