Foreign aid profiteers free to apply for more taxpayer-funded work
A DISGRACED foreign aid firm which made huge profits on the back of taxpayer funding could be awarded even more contracts by the government.
Adam Smith International was lambasted by MPs last year for ‘acting improperly’ by profiteering – overcharging for handling foreign aid work.
It withdrew from submitting any new bids for work after revelations that the company had falsified testimonials from beneficiaries. It also emerged their taxpayer-funded work in Nigeria had led to electricity consumers facing huge price rises.
The firm is understood to be one of those highlighted by former International Development Secretary Priti Patel for ‘excessive profiteering’. Its latest accounts show income of £154million and profits of £17.9million.
Despite these failings, the Department for International Development has now cleared the way for ASI to apply for new contracts.
The firm submitted its first new bid at the end of January.
DfID admits it cannot legally refuse to consider any bid, or decide not to grant a contract on the basis of previous mistakes.
The news comes weeks after a BBC Panorama investigation alleged funds from one of ASI’s aid projects in northern Syria have ended up in the hands of terrorist organisations. The firm strenuously denies these claims.
The foreign aid sector has been hit by a series of scandals over the past fortnight, amid allegations that Oxfam aid workers used prostitutes in earthquake-hit Haiti.
Last week aid minister Penny Mordaunt said she had agreed with Oxfam that it would no longer bid for funding in the wake of the Haiti sex scandal. However, ASI’s submission of a bid for funding just one year after it voluntarily withdrew from doing so will raise questions over whether the deal with Oxfam will be effective.
ASI’s decision to bid again was announced by its interim chairman Rachel English. She said: ‘After a year when we decided not to tender for new business with DfID, ASI now looks forward to re-entering the competitive market for contracts that deliver Britain’s assistance and foreign policy priorities in some of the world’s most fragile countries.’
The company spent £450million of UK development cash from 201117. But last February it was hit by claims it tried to profiteer by exploiting leaked DfID documents.
The company was also alleged to have tried to unduly influence a parliamentary inquiry by engineering ‘letters of appreciation’ from beneficiaries of its projects. The Commons international development select committee said ASI’s actions were deplorable, entirely inappropriate and showed a serious lack of judgment.
DfID said it had serious concerns over ASI’s ethical integrity, culture and behaviour. The company’s three founding executives, Andrew Kuhn, Amitabh Shrivastava and Peter Young, stepped down along with chairman William Morrison.
New policies and procedures were brought in to raise ethical standards and improve governance.
A DfID spokesman said: ‘All bids from ASI will be rigorously scrutinised, as is the case with any bidder.
‘ASI will only be awarded contracts where they demonstrate their ability to adhere to the high standards of integrity expected from government contractors while delivering the best results for the world’s poorest and value for money for UK taxpayers.
‘We have clamped down on the risk of profiteering, excessive charges and unethical practices by suppliers with the threat of legal repercussions for those who break these stricter rules.’