Covid-19: One Year Report

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts

Thursday 25th March 2021 Lords Chamber

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

I thank my noble friend the Minister for presenting the regulations before us. I declare my interest in working for the Dispensing Doctors’ Association. The importance of these regulations is the consistency and clarity of the message, so that the public and others can fully understand what we are being required to do.

I turn first to the regulation requiring the wearing of face coverings, the Explanatory Memorandum for which tells us what the road map outlining the four steps will be. They are:

“The vaccine deployment programme continues successfully; Evidence shows vaccines are sufficiently effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths in those vaccinated; Infection rates do not risk a surge in hospitalisations which would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS”


and

“Our assessment of the risks is not fundamentally changed by new Variants of Concern.”


The problem I have is that we have been told to expect a third wave and that we will have to adapt to any serious mutations and variations. We have now seen such a third wave in many continental countries, along with what they call the British variant, which I rather take offence to—I think we call it the Kent or the South African variation here. What are the plans to deal with a third wave, and with more serious variations and mutations? Should these not have been put into the regulations? I am not convinced that we have that information before us today.

I also support the conclusions of the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee. In particular, it highlights that subsequent steps may not be brought into effect if

“local hotspots of infection … delay the lifting of national restrictions.”

I shall press my noble friend the Minister on this. What will the circumstances be under which those restrictions would not proceed?

In its report, the committee also talks about the fact that

“these Regulations impose a ban on all travel from England to a destination outside the UK”,

in which I have an interest because I have family in Denmark. To be honest, I would rather see them while they are alive than have to attend a funeral, which would be too late an event.

We are then told by the scrutiny committee that:

“A fine of £5,000 is imposed on anyone leaving England or being present at an embarkation point for the purpose of travelling outside the UK, without a reasonable excuse or an exemption”


and that

“Changes to these provisions are separate from the Steps and will be linked to reviews by the Global Travel Taskforce which will first report on 12 April”.


Are we going to have further regulations after that review? Since many of these things, as my noble friend Lord Lansley pointed out, are dealt with in the schedules to the steps regulations before us, it would be helpful to know that while we debate them today.

I pay tribute to all those involved in the success of the vaccination programme and congratulate my noble friend for being with us and appearing before us on so many occasions to facilitate our greater understanding of the regulations as they have been rolled out.

I would like to pause for a moment to look at the rural aspect not just of this but of so many parts of health policy and ask whether we can learn from recent experience. I hope that my noble friend will agree that vaccination delivery in rural areas has outstripped that in urban areas, and I think that the main reason for that is because primary care has taken the lead—they have outperformed and we should recognise that. The large, urban vaccination centres, which often cannot be accessed by those most in need, the vulnerable and the elderly, have not been as successful, and I understand that they have had many vaccinations left over at the end of the day.

That leads me to my general final point, which recurs in every aspect of policy but particularly in health policy. We are told that all health policy is rural-proofed, but we have it on record from the Department of Health that, in its view, Defra is responsible for rural-proofing. I ask my noble friend: have the regulations before us been submitted to Defra, or have they been rural-proofed by the department officials themselves? It is extremely important that vaccinations and testing take place as close as possible to where the patients live to enable us to drum down on any further outbreaks or mutations.