好色先生TV

The question of whether firms should pay dividends before handing back furlough money has resurfaced after BDP鈥檚 accounts revealed it is giving 拢16m to its Japanese parent 鈥� while hanging onto more than 拢2m of government cash.

The country鈥檚 second biggest architect, which worked on a series of Nightingale hospitals during the first wave of the covid-19 pandemic last spring, said in its latest accounts that it had paid Nippon Koei an 拢8m dividend during its last financial year, covering the 12 months to June 2021.

And it said it would be paying the firm, which bought BDP five years ago for just over 拢100m, another 拢8m dividend in a move rubber-stamped at a BDP board meeting in October.

BDP鈥檚 accounts reveal it was handed just over 拢705,500 by the UK government after it furloughed a peak of 150 staff last July.

It also claimed nearly 拢1.6m from government furlough schemes overseas after a number of staff based in Canada as well as those from its offices in Dublin and Rotterdam were also furloughed.

A spokesperson confirmed it had not paid the furlough money back and in a statement BDP said: 鈥淭he furlough scheme has been a welcome support in times of uncertainty and was used predominantly to cover those who were unable to work from home such as modelmakers and front of house.

鈥淚n the uncertainty of the early stages of the pandemic it was also used for staff in response to reduced workload and stalling projects - on-site and in design phases.鈥�

It said the money had allowed it to 鈥渞etain staff who are integral to the future of the business and helps underpin what we predict to be a challenging year鈥�. It also left the door open that it would look at paying the money back eventually: 鈥淲e will continue to review the situation over the coming months as we address the on-going challenges of the pandemic.鈥�

The issue of whether firms should be morally obliged to pay back government money before handing out dividends has been an ongoing one since last summer when Morgan Sindall said it would hand back the 拢9.5m of furlough cash it received because it was 鈥渢he right thing to do鈥�.

Chief executive John Morgan told 好色先生TV last autumn: 鈥淧aying out dividends when receiving government help is difficult. Taking government money because you need it is one thing. Taking it and giving it to shareholders isn鈥檛 what it鈥檚 designed for. If you鈥檙e doing that, the company probably didn鈥檛 need the money.鈥�

Last November, the country鈥檚 biggest architect, Foster & Partners, said it had returned the 拢500,000 it received from the government initiative for 70 staff it was forced to furlough during the first lockdown. The announcement came after the architect鈥檚 latest accounts revealed that its 154 partners had recently shared a 拢31m bonus.

Housebuilder Redrow said it had turned its back on 拢8m of government furlough money because it could not justify taking taxpayers鈥� cash and then start paying out dividends to shareholders. Its then executive chairman John Tutte said last year: 鈥淸We were] still profitable and generating cash. It didn鈥檛 feel right to be taking government money when we could have afforded it. There was a moral dimension to it.鈥�

And earlier this year, Galliford Try said it was paying back around 拢1.5m of furlough money it claimed in the first two months of its last financial year ahead of resuming dividend payments.

Called the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, the initiative was introduced at the start of the pandemic last March and was wound up at the end of September. According to estimates from the Office for Budget Responsibility, the cost of furlough will come to about 拢66bn.

In its latest set of results, BDP saw turnover slip 5% to 拢124m but pre-tax profit edged up 3% to 拢13.1m. The firm employs just over 1,370 people and has 10 offices in the UK.