M6 Tenders
Dear Highways England Company Limited,
A subcontract worth £1.4 million was awarded to Kier in relation to a stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted to Smart Motorway.
Who tendered
What were the KPI
How did the tenders score
What was Kier winning criteria
How much has been paid to date
Yours faithfully,
Steve Taylor
Dear Steve Taylor
Thank you for your request relating to M6 Tenders dated 28/01/2022.
The due date for issuing a response is 25/02/2022.
Please feel free to contact our team if you have any queries quoting
FOI/3154 in any future communications
Kind regards
Andrea Bartlett
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [1]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
Dear Steve Taylor
M6 Tenders
I am writing regarding your request for information which we received 28
01 2022.
In that request, you asked us for the following information:
A subcontract worth £1.4 million was awarded to Kier in relation to a
stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted to Smart
Motorway.
Who tendered
What were the KPI
How did the tenders score
What was Kier winning criteria
How much has been paid to date
We are dealing with your request under the provisions of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.
Unfortunately, your request is unclear and I will be unable to proceed
with your request without clarification of the specific information you
wish to receive.
To help us locate and identify this, could you tell us more specific
details about the subcontract, as we are unable to identify the
subcontract you are referring to. For example, are you able to provide the
contract reference number or date the subcontract was awarded?
Please note that if I do not receive appropriate clarification of your
information requirements within two months from the date of this letter,
then I will consider your request closed.
Please remember to quote reference number FOI/3154 in any future
communications about this response.
Kind regards
Arshad Hussain
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [1]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
Dear [email address],
It's the one here:-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...
Separate papers also show that workers employed by the main contractor, Kier, for another scheme ‘manipulated’ tender processes, awarded a subcontract worth £1.4 million in breach of rules and that this was ‘influenced by bribery’.The claims were in relation to a stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted.
The internal National Highways papers state: ‘Evidence found during this investigation supports the allegations made but is insufficient to identify individuals.’
Yours sincerely,
Steve Taylor
Dear Steve Taylor
Thank you for your clarification relating to M6 Tenders dated 2 February
2022.
The due date for issuing a response is 2 March 2022.
Please feel free to contact our team if you have any queries quoting
FOI/3154 in any future communications
Kind regards
Amanda Speight
FOI Advice
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [1]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
Dear Steve Taylor
M6 Tenders
Thank you for your information request dated 02/02/2022 regarding M6
Tenders. We have dealt with your request under the provisions of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000.
You asked -
Dear Highways England Company Limited,
A subcontract worth £1.4 million was awarded to Kier in relation to a
stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted to Smart
Motorway.
Who tendered
What were the KPI
How did the tenders score
What was Kier winning criteria
How much has been paid to date
Yours faithfully,
Steve Taylor
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #828115 email]
I can confirm that under Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act
2000 that National Highways do not hold the information you have
requested.
In relation to your request, unfortunately we are not able to provide you
with the information requested, as it is not held by National Highways. We
are not able to identify the contract you are referring to.
Advice and Assistance
Potentially you are referring to a subcontract between Kier and it's
supplier. If you are referring to a National Highways contract, all
contracts are published and freely available via Government Contracts
Finder website. For ease of reference you can use this web link:
[1]https://www.gov.uk/contracts-finder
If you are not satisfied with your response you may ask for an internal
review within 40 working days of receiving the response, by replying to
this email. You can learn more about the internal review process [2]here.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
[3][email address]
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Please remember to quote reference number FOI/3154 in any future
communications about this response.
Kind regards
Commercial Delivery Services
Highways England | The Cube | 199 Wharfside Street | Birmingham | B1 1RN
Web: [4]http://www.highways.gov.uk
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [5]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. https://www.gov.uk/contracts-finder
2. https://highwaysengland.co.uk/media/a14h...
3. mailto:[email address]
4. http://www.highways.gov.uk/
5. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
Dear [email address],
It's the link posted contract
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...
the £1.4 million smart contract on a stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted.
Steve Taylor
Dear [email address],
Have you found the tender
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...
Separate papers also show that workers employed by the main contractor, Kier, for another scheme ‘manipulated’ tender processes, awarded a subcontract worth £1.4 million in breach of rules and that this was ‘influenced by bribery’.The claims were in relation to a stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted.
The internal National Highways papers state: ‘Evidence found during this investigation supports the allegations made but is insufficient to identify individuals.’
Tory MP Karl McCartney, who sits on the Commons transport committee, said: ‘I believe these alarming allegations need more investigation.’ It is understood no formal police probe was launched.
National Highways smart motorways programme director David Bray said: ‘We investigated, working collaboratively with our contractors, the allegations around the M1 and M6 schemes and prevented the payment of any amounts that we were not fully satisfied with.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Taylor
Dear Steve Taylor
Response: Internal Review in relation to request FOI/3154
Further to your e-mail, which was received on 7 March 2022 I have been
asked to undertake a review of the response to your request for
information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOI/3154).
You were dissatisfied with the response to your request because we had
said in our response of 25 February 2022 that National Highways did not
hold the information, you provided links to news articles regarding
investigations of potential fraud by subcontractor working on the M6
Junction 13-15 scheme.
How I have reviewed your request:
I have now had the opportunity to review the request and response
provided, and discuss this with the team who provided the response and I
am satisfied that National Highways does not hold the information
requested.
To explain further, and as was explained in the original response, the
contract in question was between Kier and one of their suppliers. National
Highways has no involvement in those contracts as the procurement for the
subcontractor is carried by Kier themselves and not National
Highways. Therefore, National Highways holds no information on how that
contract was awarded.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the response issued on the 25 February
2022 was correct and that the information is not held. Therefore, no
further action is required by National Highways on this case.
If you remain unhappy with the outcome of your internal review, you are
entitled to refer your complaint to the Information Commissioner's Office
(ICO) for a decision.
The ICO can be contacted [1]here or via the address below -
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
http://www.ico.org.uk
Kind Regards
Jonathan Drysdale
Freedom of Information Officer (NH)
Digital Services
National Highways | Piccadilly Gate | Store Street | Manchester | M1 2WD
Web: [2]https://nationalhighways.co.uk/
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [3]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/
2. https://nationalhighways.co.uk/
3. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
Dear [email address],
Okay you're saying it's not Kier.
I gave you the link saying
Separate papers also show that workers employed by the main contractor, Kier, for another scheme ‘manipulated’ tender processes, awarded a subcontract worth £1.4 million in breach of rules and that this was ‘influenced by bribery’.The claims were in relation to a stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted.
The internal National Highways papers state: ‘Evidence found during this investigation supports the allegations made but is insufficient to identify individuals.’
Who was it? What has the Mail reported after?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Taylor
Gadawodd Mr P Swift anodiad ()
You may find Kier hold the information on behalf of National Highways. a recent ICO DN can be read here:
https://www.englandhighways.co.uk/16-08-...
It seems odd that an Authority can appoint an agent to 'step into their shoes and yet have no oversight or responsibility when the contract's sub-contractor acts in a wayward fashion.
There also seems to be some confusion about who accepted the bribe and who gave it. But, again thinking in terms of the above DN, it appears Kier is one of the parties involved. If National Highways were not a party to the bribery with Kier, is it that Kier was involved with another i.e. no matter what the 'spin' on this, Kier was a party and Kier has a direct relationship with National Highways?
The Authority replied:
'To explain further, and as was explained in the original response, the contract in question was between Kier and one of their suppliers. National Highways has no involvement in those contracts as the procurement for the
subcontractor is carried by Kier themselves and not National Highways.'
Are they claiming the contract upon which Kier was working was not a National Highways one? Surely not.
The article https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article... appears to be based upon documents 'leaked from National Highways', stating:
'Separate papers also show that workers employed by the main contractor, Kier, for another scheme ‘manipulated’ tender processes, awarded a subcontract worth £1.4 million in breach of rules and that this was ‘influenced by bribery’.The claims were in relation to a stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted. The internal National Highways papers state: ‘Evidence found during this investigation supports the allegations made but is insufficient to identify individuals.’
It appears the papers are held by the Authority, albeit about a Kier/contractor relationship.
If so, then at the least National Highways should be able to ascertain Kier's involvement - the information as it appears they have demonstrated an interest - further evidence the activities of their subcontractor is of concern to them and in turn that Kier holds information on National Highways behalf, are subject to inquiry?
How can National Highways distance themselves from the activity of Kier in this fashion ... can they?
Dear [email address],
If you look at the annotation that's the point it's your contractor Kier doing things in your name so I can be given the information and it's your leaked information set the paper off. What's your agreement with Kier about dealing with other contractors?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Taylor
Dear Steve Taylor
M6 Tenders
I am writing regarding your request for information which we received 19
May 2022.
In that request, you asked us for the following information:
Okay you're saying it's not Kier.
I gave you the link saying
Separate papers also show that workers employed by the main contractor,
Kier, for another scheme ‘manipulated’ tender processes, awarded a
subcontract worth £1.4 million in breach of rules and that this was
‘influenced by bribery’.The claims were in relation to a stretch of the
M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted.
The internal National Highways papers state: ‘Evidence found during this
investigation supports the allegations made but is insufficient to
identify individuals.’
Who was it? What has the Mail reported after?
We are dealing with your request under the provisions of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.
Unfortunately, your request is unclear and I will be unable to proceed
with your request without clarification of the specific information you
wish to receive.
Please could you confirm what information you would like, we do not hold
the information regarding the mail and we please could you clarify who you
mean when you refer to 'who was it' because we have already confirmed we
are unable to identify individuals in our response to FOI/3154.
We have also received the following email on the 23 May 2022:
If you look at the annotation that's the point it's your contractor Kier
doing things in your name so I can be given the information and it's your
leaked information set the paper off. What's your agreement with Kier
about dealing with other contractors?
Please could you confirm whether this is clarification of your original
email on the 19 May 2022 or whether you are raising this as a new
request.
Please note that if I do not receive appropriate clarification of your
information requirements within two months from the date of this letter,
then I will consider your request closed.
Please remember to quote reference number FOI/3672 in any future
communications about this response.
Kind regards
Amanda Speight
Freedom of Information Officer
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [1]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
Dear [email address],
If you look at the history of the request, the stuff about Kier is held by them for you. Explain to me what the bribery is all about how Kier is involved and why this is nothing to do with you when you seem to be saying your contractors can do what they want in your name and you don't care
Yours sincerely,
Steve Taylor
Dear Steve Taylor
M6 Tenders
We are writing regarding your clarified request for information which we
received 30/05/2022.
In that clarification, you asked us for the following information:
If you look at the history of the request, the stuff about Kier is held by
them for you. Explain to me what the bribery is all about how Kier is
involved and why this is nothing to do with you when you seem to be saying
your contractors can do what they want in your name and you don't care
Unfortunately, your request is still unclear and we will be unable to
proceed with your request without clarification of the specific
information you wish to receive.
To help us locate and identify this, could you tell us if the information
you are seeking is that of the investigation carried out by National
Highways Counter Fraud team regarding the allegations reported by the
Mail.
Please note that if we do not receive appropriate clarification of your
information requirements within two months from the date of this letter,
then we will consider your request closed.
Please remember to quote reference number FOI/3672 in any future
communications about this response.
Kind regards
FOI Advice
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [1]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
Dear [email address],
the information
is that of the investigation carried out by National
Highways Counter Fraud team regarding the allegations reported by the
Mail.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Taylor
Dear Steve Taylor
Thank you for your clarification relating to M6 Tenders dated 24 June
2022.
The due date for issuing a response is 22 July 2022.
Please feel free to contact our team if you have any queries quoting
FOI/3672 in any future communications
Kind regards
Amanda Speight
Freedom of Information Officer
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [1]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
Dear Steve Taylor
M6 Tenders
Thank you for your information request dated 24 June 2022 regarding M6
Tenders. We have dealt with your request under the provisions of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000.
You asked -
Dear [email address],
Okay you're saying it's not Kier.
I gave you the link saying
Separate papers also show that workers employed by the main contractor,
Kier, for another scheme ‘manipulated’ tender processes, awarded a
subcontract worth £1.4 million in breach of rules and that this was
‘influenced by bribery’.The claims were in relation to a stretch of the
M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted.
The internal National Highways papers state: ‘Evidence found during this
investigation supports the allegations made but is insufficient to
identify individuals.’
Who was it? What has the Mail reported after?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Taylor
Clarified request 24 June 2022
Dear [1][email address],
the information is that of the investigation carried out by
National Highways Counter Fraud team regarding the allegations reported by
the Mail.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Taylor
We can confirm that we hold the information you have requested, however on
this occasion we have decided that this information cannot be released.
Information withheld
This information has been withheld under the exemption in [2]Section 30 of
the Freedom of Information Act 2000 namely Section 30(1)(a) for duty to
investigate offences and Section 30(2)(b) for obtaining information from
confidential sources. This is because disclosing this information could
prejudice National Highways ability to investigate any future cases at a
detriment to the public and public purse.
In applying this exemption, we have had to balance the public interest in
withholding the information against the public interest in disclosure. The
key public interest factors for and against disclosure are attached.
If you are not satisfied with your response you may ask for an internal
review within 40 working days of receiving the response, by replying to
this email. You can learn more about the internal review process
at [3]https://nationalhighways.co.uk/media/a14....
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted
at [4]https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/ or via the address below -
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Please remember to quote reference number FOI/3672 in any future
communications about this response.
Kind regards
National Highways Counter Fraud Team
You can make new FOI requests and review published responses by
visiting [5]https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200...
3. https://nationalhighways.co.uk/media/a14...
4. https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/
5. https://foiform.highwaysengland.co.uk/
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now
Gadawodd Mr P Swift anodiad ()
You would think the sensible, logical approach would be to ask you for clarification if, in fact, the authority is unable to identify the contract you are referring to.
It appears this is the contract referred to here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...
Separate papers also show that workers employed by the main contractor, Kier, for another scheme ‘manipulated’ tender processes, awarded a subcontract worth £1.4 million in breach of rules and that this was ‘influenced by bribery’.The claims were in relation to a stretch of the M6, junctions 13 to 15, also being converted.
The internal National Highways papers state: ‘Evidence found during this investigation supports the allegations made but is insufficient to identify individuals.’
Tory MP Karl McCartney, who sits on the Commons transport committee, said: ‘I believe these alarming allegations need more investigation.’ It is understood no formal police probe was launched.
Possibly the DfT know more or can assist National Highways - they clearly know of the issue - https://www.englandhighways.co.uk/dft/