Corporate Travel Management has won 26 new UK public-sector contracts worth about £420m while continuing to repay government bodies affected by billing irregularities that have kept the Australian travel group under financial and regulatory scrutiny.
Corporate Travel Management has repaid £42.8m to UK public bodies, according to figures compiled from procurement and agency data. Its recent awards include a Ministry of Defence contract worth about £170m connected with the Afghan resettlement programme.
The new contracts have been awarded while CTM continues to address the findings of a forensic review into billing involving UK clients. KPMG identified erroneous billing that could total as much as £118m, around £40m more than had initially been identified.
Repayments reported so far include £32.8m to the Welsh government, £2.9m to the Department of Health and Social Care, and £929,082 to NHS England. The amount specifically recovered by the Home Office from CTM has not been disclosed publicly.
The Home Office has said it has recovered more than £70m across asylum accommodation contracts that were not delivering value for money, although that total extends beyond CTM and cannot be treated as a repayment by the company alone.
CTM has been a substantial supplier to the UK public sector for years, providing travel, accommodation, and related services to departments and public bodies. Its government work has included contracts associated with asylum accommodation and the Bibby Stockholm barge alongside other travel-management services.
The company’s shares have been suspended from trading on the Australian Securities Exchange since August 2025 as it works through accounting issues and delayed financial reporting. Australian regulators have also been examining the group.
CTM dismissed its former UK chief executive Michael Healy in December 2025 over alleged breaches of contractual obligations. The company has also said agreements may have been falsified and has referred matters to relevant authorities. Those allegations remain subject to investigation.
Founder Jamie Pherous subsequently stepped down as chief executive as CTM dealt with delayed accounts, creditor discussions, and the consequences of the forensic review. The company has said it intends to reimburse affected customers fully.
The continued award of UK contracts demonstrates that the billing findings have not resulted in an automatic exclusion from public procurement. Contracting authorities instead have to assess supplier capability, financial position, performance history, risk controls, and the operational consequences of switching providers.
Large government contracts can require specialist systems, security processes, established inventories, and rapid mobilisation. That can limit the number of providers capable of taking over complex work at short notice, particularly where a service supports migration, defence, or other operational programmes.
Supplier continuity does not remove the need for stronger controls. Departments awarding further work to CTM will face scrutiny over how they have assessed the company’s financial reporting, pricing systems, governance, and repayment arrangements since the billing problems emerged.
The £170m Ministry of Defence award is particularly notable because it was made while CTM remained suspended from the Australian market. The MoD has said it was not overcharged on its previous contracts with the company, distinguishing its own supplier experience from that of agencies seeking repayments.
Public procurement reform has increasingly focused on supplier performance and the ability of contracting authorities to take previous delivery into account. Large suppliers can nevertheless remain difficult to replace where they operate complex services across several departments.
CTM’s future eligibility for government work will ultimately be shaped by its ability to restore audited reporting, complete repayments, and demonstrate that the systems responsible for the erroneous billing have been corrected. Its latest contract wins put those questions alongside the practical reality that Whitehall continues to regard the company as capable of delivering significant public programmes.
You must be logged in to post a comment.