Will there be a stitch-up over the recruitment of the Chancellor's Covid Counter-Fraud Commissioner?

Why is the Government not following Public Appointments Guidance in recruiting for this sensitive role? What is the purpose of the role? And why are some worried that it has been downgraded?

A few days ago HM Treasury launched a recruitment competition for a Covid Counter-Fraud Commissioner.

Rachel Reeves referenced it herself, when she was challenged in Parliament, by Jeremy Hunt, over her failure to declare the donation of Ian Corfield to her Permanent Secretary. She said:

‘we are appointing a covid corruption commissioner to get that money back for taxpayers; because unlike the last Government, we are determined that taxpayers’ money is treated with respect, and not handed out to donors of the party’.

But - despite the Government’s repeated, earnest commitments to ‘process’ and the importance they have placed on this specific role ‘restoring public trust’ - the Government have in this competition short-circuited best practice for public appointments.

Some may wonder why - beyond an attempt at political point-scoring - Rachel Reeves is establishing this Commissioner. There has already been a National Audit Office ‘investigation into government procurement during the COVID-19 pandemic’ in November 2020. Then in 2021, there was the Boardman Review of Government Procurement in the COVID-19 pandemic. And the actual judge-led UK Covid Inquiry, under Baroness Heather Hallet, has an entire module - Module 5 - on procurement, which will cover PPE and Covid contracts.

[Personally, I have always had little time for Rachel Reeves on this topic, given the absurdly embarrassing missive she sent Michael Gove in Spring 2020 when he was running the Cabinet Office. She asked him to consider buying PPE from, amongst others, a sole trader specialising in bespoke clothing, and suggested a football agent could secure ventilators. Do have a read.]

Of course it’s right to address fraud and to recover taxpayer money. But I think it’s clear that a better way to address fraud is, firstly, to focus on improving bodies like the National Crime Agency, and, secondly and more generally, to implement the recommendations from a series of Government reports into Fraud, Error and Debt. See for example this annual report produced by the Government which details various actions that have been taken to deal with Covid fraud. Or this announcement detailing action by the last Government on fraud, including in Covid support schemes.

Overall, more can certainly be done on fraud - and Covid fraud - as a succession of Conservative ministers argued, including Lord Agnew. But the wheel doesn’t need reinventing - and I’m not sure this role is the best way to get results.

[Depressingly - and despite this Government’s claims that is wants to address fraud - ministers are reportedly considering weakening the cross-Government functions established by Francis Maude which cover fraud, commercial, procurement etc. More on that another time….]

---

The new Covid Counter-Fraud Commissioner will be asked to:

• ‘Assess recovery efforts to date and determine where additional recoveries can be made and ensure those are vigorously pursued

• ‘Ensure that the maximum recovery efforts have been taken and provide assurance on this to the public and Parliament

• ‘Review individual contracts to provide additional attention and assurance to spending that is disputed

• ‘From this work, generate lessons and make recommendations for the future.’

The description emphasises that the role is about providing ‘assurance’ to the public and Parliament.

But in recruiting for this role HM Treasury has failed to follow the Guidance on Public Appointments. That Guidance has a statutory basis in line with the Public Appointments (No.2) Order in Council 2023, and sets out how recruitment panels (technically - Advisory Assessment Panels) for public appointments should work.

Because the recruitment is not following the right process, the role will inevitably be dismissed as a stitch up.

If the Government wants this Covid Counter-Fraud Commissioner to enjoy public confidence and provide ‘assurance’, they should re-start the competition with an advisory panel which is in line with the actual Guidance.