The prime minister’s skin seems to get thinner by the day. Outraged at the publication in this newspaper of a leaked memo last month which criticised Whitehall’s preparations for Brexit, Downing Street has browbeaten the consultancy linked to the document into dropping bids for government contracts for six months. The freeze, which will mean that the firm misses out on competing for Whitehall contracts worth many millions of pounds, is supposedly voluntary. It looks more like a punishment for dissent.
The memo was written by a consultant from Deloitte. Assessing the government’s work on Brexit so far, it argued that Theresa May’s habit of “drawing in decisions and details to settle matters herself” could not be sustained, and that ministers lacked an overall negotiating strategy. The author raised concerns about Whitehall’s capacity to deliver, claiming that 10,000-30,000 new officials could be required.
Mrs May was said to be “personally affronted” by the publication of the memo, insisting that it had “nothing to do with the government”. Apparently under pressure from Downing Street to resile from the document’s conclusions, Deloitte said that it had been prepared without access to No 10 or other government departments. In fact Whitehall sources said that it had been informed by the views of senior civil servants.
That Deloitte should have reiterated its contrition today is unsurprising. By imposing what is in effect a six-month ban on the company from central government bids, the government has shown itself overly sensitive to criticism. There have been freezes before, but not for expressing a view that endangered no one and cost nothing. In 2014 the security company G4S held off from public sector bids for a year after it was found to have overcharged by more than £100 million for prisoner tagging. In 2008, when PA Consulting lost a memory stick containing personal details of the entire prison population, a contract with the Home Office was terminated. These were serious and costly blunders, deserving tough treatment.
The government’s reaction has hardly reassured critics of its commitment to free speech or the interests of business. Deloitte has lost the opportunity to bid for contracts, valued at several million pounds, to set up shared human resources and procurement services across government. Nor will it seek the many sector-specific studies to be commissioned by the Brexit department.
Advertisement
The deeper worry is of government by pique. Only days after No 10 embroiled itself in an unseemly row with text-message tantrums about the price of the prime minister’s trousers, Downing Street should be seeking to remind the public of its focus on the public interest. Contracts should be awarded on the basis of who will deliver the best value for the taxpayer, not who is in the prime minister’s good books.
No doubt No 10 thinks that in violating the government’s confidence, Deloitte has committed a misdemeanour worthy of punishment. But as one civil servant recently demonstrated by leaking a memo warning civil servants not to leak memos, leaks are an inevitable part of government and help the public to know what is going on in their name. Politicians have leaked to their advantage as often as they have been leaked against. A slap on the wrist is par for the course. This response is disproportionate.