Covid-19: Contracts and Public Inquiry

Cartlidge interjects to challenge Blackford's statement about Scotland becoming the covid capital of Europe and questions his responsibility in light of rising cases.

Edwards raises concerns about the Government’s priorities, questioning why extra borrowing capacity was denied to other governments while a 'VIP lane' seems to exist for certain contracts.

Shelbrooke rises but does not deliver a substantial speech as recorded.

Bowie defends the UK Government's actions, suggesting that the SNP is in no position to criticise given their own procurement practices during the pandemic.

Brown supports Blackford’s argument by highlighting additional instances of potential conflict of interest within the UK government’s pandemic response.

Order. Let me just say that we do not call Members by their names; we use their constituency. We need to take the tension out and take the heat out. Everybody should quite rightly be listened to.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way, and totally share in the point she just made about the vaccine. As she will have seen, when I intervened on the SNP spokesperson earlier I raised the point that Scotland has been described recently as the covid capital of Europe, and the SNP is refusing to take responsibility, and indeed is blaming the UK Government because of the delta variant. But is it not the case that since it became identified as a variant of concern, England played Scotland and the Scottish Government could have stopped thousands of Scots travelling south of the border? There was nothing to stop them doing that; they must take some responsibility for the fact that there are so many covid cases in Scotland.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way. Does she agree that, because of the investment the UK Government made in the AstraZeneca vaccine and the Government’s worldwide collaborations and investment, not only have we been able to produce the vaccine in 10% of the predicted time but we unlocked technology that will serve the health service and people of this country for many years to come?

I thank the Minister for giving way. The emergency tender procedure that she highlights is the one that was previously used to award a ferry contract to a company with no ferries, so we know how bad the governance is from this Government. On governance, openDemocracy recently confirmed that 16 non-executive directors appointed to various Departments are Vote Leave compadres, Tory chums and Tory donors. They are the ones who are supposed to hold the Government to account. Can she explain the selection process for these non-executive director roles?

The hon. Member raises concerns about the transparency of Government procurement during the pandemic, questioning whether contracts were awarded to the right companies and whether there was undue weight given to certain processes. She lists 15 specific questions for the Minister regarding private email use, contract approvals, conflicts of interest, and more.

The hon. Member interjects that only the British Government has been found twice to have acted unlawfully, drawing attention to differences between UK procurement practices and those in Scotland and Wales.

The hon. Member counters the Labour criticism by pointing out that Opposition Members, including the then shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, also pushed for rapid procurement processes without proper oversight.

The hon. Member asks about the cost implications of an investigation into former Mayor of Liverpool's activities, reflecting broader concerns over investigative expenses and potential financial impacts.

The hon. Member supports the call for a detailed inquiry into procurement practices but also highlights the need for an urgent investigation into hospital-acquired infections in Wales, indicating that similar issues may exist across different regions of the UK.

Welcomed the opportunity to speak on the debate about awarding of covid contracts. Highlighted that decisions were made quickly in February and March last year, urging not to prejudge these with benefit of hindsight. Mentioned his work on Public Accounts Committee focusing on procurement and money during pandemic response. Discussed SNP manifesto commitment regarding Scotland covid review, urging for a rethink. Acknowledged disappointing news about Edinburgh being considered the covid capital of Europe but urged constructive criticism. Emphasised that Conservative Government ensured PPE supply amidst fears of shortage by using accelerated procurement process allowed under Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Noted phenomenal figures in terms of additional ventilators, PPE and vaccine doses procured during pandemic, urging further investigation on procurement issues by relevant bodies like National Audit Office.

Critiqued the UK Government's handling of covid contracts as 'corruption'. Highlighted unforgivable outcome with high death rates compared to other countries. Emphasised British exceptionalism combined with delay, dithering led to high death tolls. Criticised the previous Health Secretary for poor decisions and noted his removal only recently. Urged immediate commencement of a public inquiry. Discussed three examples of breaking laws by the Government and criticised distribution of contracts without competitive tender process to politically connected companies. Mentioned National Audit Office revelations regarding £10.5 billion-worth of pandemic-related contracts awarded without competition, highlighting the privileged attitude within UK government and their lack of opposition in Parliament.

Shelbrooke argues that the pandemic has highlighted issues with global supply chains, leading to shortages of PPE. He mentions the pressure on the government to act quickly and the importance of learning from past mistakes. He criticises the opposition for focusing on independence rather than addressing the procurement challenges faced during the crisis.

Qaisar-Javed highlights the death toll from the pandemic and emphasises the need for accountability in government actions related to PPE procurement. She criticises the Government for failing to uphold public standards of integrity, openness, and leadership. She argues that Scotland could benefit from independence by building a fairer society.

The Government is committed to an independent inquiry into the handling of the pandemic, which will begin in spring 2022 with full statutory powers under the Inquiries Act 2005. The speaker argues against initiating the inquiry immediately due to ongoing challenges such as vaccine roll-out and NHS pressures. She highlights achievements like securing billions of PPE items for key workers and over half a billion doses of vaccines through the vaccine taskforce. She emphasises community contributions during the pandemic, including businesses adapting to produce hand sanitiser and other necessary products.

Intervened by questioning why a contract was specifically seeking Scottish views on independence if the motion has nothing to do with it. Implies there might be political motives behind this action.

Argued that the purpose of the inquiry should be learning lessons for future preparedness rather than scoring political points. He also mentioned discrimination in response to another intervention.

Acknowledged the vaccine roll-out success but questioned if it was the sole positive aspect of the Government's pandemic handling. Stressed that a vaccine cannot bring back those who have died.

Highlighted the development of groundbreaking treatments like dexamethasone, which played a crucial role in improving recovery rates for seriously ill patients.

Responded by raising concerns about high covid levels in Scotland, questioning why Scotland has the highest rates of infection in Europe.

Intervened to correct the perception that The Scotsman is a supporter of the Scottish National party and highlighted external factors like the delta variant contributing to high case numbers.

Asked when an inquiry into government practices should start if not now, given the end of the emergency period.

Suggested waiting until autumn booster programmes are in place before starting inquiries to avoid disrupting ongoing efforts.

Critiqued the government's approach to scrutiny, noting their dislike of judicial review and lack of parliamentary debate for regulations. Emphasised the importance of evidence-based policymaking and highlighted court challenges revealing issues with contract awarding during the pandemic.

He raises concerns about the delay in publishing data relating to care home deaths in Scotland, suggesting it was ill-advised.

Welcomes the announcement of a public inquiry and acknowledges the need for lessons learned from the pandemic. He argues against immediate commencement of an inquiry due to ongoing risks posed by the virus. Emphasises the need for caution in drawing conclusions and criticises those who seek to predetermine the outcome of the inquiry. Advocates for a careful approach that does not undermine efforts to mitigate future risks.

Intervenes to clarify that there is no dispute about the emergency contract tendering process but argues against bias in awarding contracts, referencing court rulings on the matter.

Carmichael emphasises the importance of an early inquiry into government decisions during the pandemic, highlighting the need for transparency regarding the use of powers granted by Parliament. He criticises the delay in initiating the inquiry, suggesting it could undermine the public's trust in governance. Carmichael also draws parallels with previous inquiries such as Chilcot to argue for prompt investigation and resolution of issues related to the pandemic response.

Mayhew criticises SNP's focus on questioning the UK government’s procurement process during the pandemic, arguing that it distracts from addressing current challenges. He defends the government's actions by pointing out transparency measures and guidance published for procurement decisions. Mayhew also highlights the role of local businesses in contributing to efforts during the crisis.

Mr Newlands highlighted that despite the exceptional circumstances of the pandemic, it is unacceptable for Ministers to excuse themselves from transparency and accountability. He mentioned specific examples where significant sums were given to companies with questionable credentials or small net assets. He argued that emergency procurement rules should not be used as a means to promote political agendas.

Mr Gibson defended the Government's procurement process during the pandemic, arguing that it sped up Whitehall bureaucracy without breaking existing legislation. He highlighted the independent verification of every PPE recommendation through an eight-stage process and praised the delivery of over 22,000 extra ventilators and billions of items of PPE across the UK. Mr Gibson also criticised the SNP-led Government in Scotland for failing to launch their own inquiry into pandemic handling.

Thanked frontline workers for their efforts during the pandemic, highlighted the Government's actions to secure medical equipment and PPE, praised the vaccination programme which has vaccinated over 86% of people with a first dose. Criticised the SNP for opposing the UK's independent vaccine programme, dismissed claims of conflicts of interest in PPE procurement as false, emphasised the need for transparency through an upcoming public inquiry into pandemic response, and stressed that the Government's actions have allowed for reopening the economy.

Mr Thompson raised serious allegations of cronyism in awarding emergency contracts, citing specific examples like Public First and other companies with political connections. He questioned why inexperienced suppliers were awarded crucial PPE contracts when many others had offered similar services. Mr Thompson urged the Government to provide more transparency on the use of VIP channels and called for an immediate public inquiry into these issues.

Mr. Bowie criticised the SNP for what he perceived as hypocrisy in their approach to handling the pandemic, noting that Scotland has six of the top ten covid hotspots in Europe despite the government's claim of wanting to eradicate the virus. He also pointed out failures in test and trace systems and educational standards under SNP leadership. Mr. Bowie emphasised the success of the UK-wide vaccination programme but criticised the SNP for not acknowledging its contribution. He further highlighted the inconsistency in calling for a public inquiry while refusing one themselves.

Mr. Evans briefly intervened to remind other speakers that there were limited time left and only three people remaining to contribute, urging them to be mindful of the time constraints.

Critiques the UK Government's handling of the pandemic, highlighting concerns over PPE contracts and allegations of wrongdoing. Emphasises the need for a public inquiry into the pandemic's management to ensure accountability and transparency.

Highlights the hardships faced by many during the pandemic while pointing out how some have profited from it. Criticises the Conservative party for using public contracts as a reward system for their donors and friends, undermining public confidence in democratic institutions.

Responds to Andrew Bowie's comments about Scotland's increasing cases of covid-19, expressing distaste at the celebratory tone taken by the Conservative MP regarding these numbers.

Cartlidge sought to clarify his earlier remarks, stating that he did not blame Scottish football fans but rather pointed out that SNP Members could have stopped fans from travelling if they wished to reduce the spread of covid in Scotland.

Mordaunt thanked Members for their contributions in the debate, paid tribute to those who lost their lives and contributed during the pandemic. She highlighted that less than 1% of PPE was not fit for purpose out of a total procurement volume of over 32 billion items and 15,000 ventilators. Mordaunt emphasised that public bodies recognised the government's efforts, with the National Audit Office in its November report confirming the same.