Access to NHS Dentistry

Clive Efford Excerpts

Thursday 10th February 2022 Westminster Hall

[Clive Efford (in the Chair)]

Before we begin, I remind Members to observe social distancing and to wear masks. There is clearly a lot of interest in the debate. We will work out roughly how long people have to speak, but I do not intend to impose a strict time limit, unless people abuse the timings. We will give you an indication of how long to speak for, and if you could roughly stick to it that would be really helpful. I call Peter Aldous to move the motion.

[Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered access to NHS dentistry.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bradford South (Judith Cummins) for her work in helping to secure it.

NHS dentistry has been the No. 1 issue in my inbox for the past nine to 10 months. This is a national crisis, though the problem in my constituency—in Lowestoft and Waveney—is acute. Dentists have retired, which has led to resources and dental capacity being taken away from the area, notwithstanding the increased need and demand following the pandemic. Many of the remaining practices are experiencing difficulties in recruiting and retaining dentists, and the situation has been exacerbated by a lack of funding, with net Government spending on general dental practice being reduced by a third over the past decade. That said, the overall situation locally has improved since I first raised concerns in an Adjournment debate on 25 May last year, and I will outline the improvements later. They are welcome, but I am concerned that they might be a short-term sticking plaster and might not provide a long-term solution.

As we emerge from covid, the situation both locally and nationally has reached crisis point. Locally, that is due to covid, as well as retirements in two NHS dental practices in Lowestoft and the closure of the mydentist practice in Leiston, in the constituency of my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk Coastal (Dr Coffey). That practice closed due to the difficulty of recruiting dentists to work in the NHS in the area—a theme that is repeated across the country.

Access to NHS dentistry is a problem that has been brewing for a long time. The situation can be likened to a house built on shallow and poor foundations. The earthquake of covid has led to that house falling down. There are now parts of the country—particularly in, though not confined to, rural and coastal areas—that are dental deserts.

--- Later in debate ---

[Clive Efford (in the Chair)]

Order. Before the hon. Gentleman responds, I should just point out that a number of Members who have their names down to speak are intervening. To respect others who want to speak, could you please refrain.

[Peter Aldous]

I am grateful because, with those four interventions, we have re-emphasised the importance of fluoridation.

There is a need for greater accountability, and the Health and Care Bill can provide the framework within which that can be secured. It is welcome that the commissioning of dentistry is set to move to integrated care systems. That can make for a more transparent system, but there is a risk that dentistry and its impact on overall health could be overlooked in the integrated care proposals. It is important that dentists are properly represented on integrated care system boards.

At Report stage of the Health and Care Bill, I tabled new clause 18, which called on the Secretary of State to publish an annual report on access to NHS dentistry, to collect data on the length of waiting times for primary dental care treatment and, if necessary, to take action. The Minister for Health declined to accept the new clause. I do not know whether a similar clause will be introduced in the other place. If it is, I would urge the Government to give it serious consideration. Such a reporting mechanism can drive sustainable and meaningful improvement in access to NHS dentistry.

Mr Efford, you will be delighted to learn that I am coming to a conclusion. Tackling access for NHS dentistry, which has been neglected for 15 years, is an opportunity that we must grasp in order to demonstrate the levelling up of healthcare right across the UK. We must put in place an NHS dentistry system that is fit for the 21st century, instead of reversing into the 19th century.

[Clive Efford (in the Chair)]

I am grateful to the hon. Member. It looks like we have six minutes each for Back-Bench speeches. If anyone can deliver their speech in less time, it would be very helpful.

--- Later in debate ---

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Bradford South (Judith Cummins) and my hon. Friend the Member for Waveney (Peter Aldous) on securing this important debate. Our constituents in Norfolk and Waveney face similar challenges in getting access to NHS dentists.

This is a long-running problem, which my predecessor also pursued following the closure of a dentist in Snettisham. I raised this issue in my maiden speech and I have focused on it ever since due to the inadequate provision in west Norfolk. Of course, the restrictions put in place during covid have further reduced access, as others have said. The British Dental Association estimates that 40 million appointments were lost overall, but the situation before covid was poor.

The National Audit Office found that my constituency had the lowest number of dentists per head in the country. Moreover, Norfolk had the lowest level of dental activity delivered in the country, with only 65% of contracted NHS activity delivered compared with the national median figure of 96%. My right hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mrs Miller) also made that point. And, at 17.5%, Norfolk had the highest percentage of people who were unsuccessful in trying to get an NHS dental appointment.

Since being elected I have met the NHS East of England team regularly to press for better access to dentists, particularly following the closure of the mydentist practice in King’s Lynn. I am pleased that those discussions led to a procurement process, which, although delayed by covid, took place from summer last year, and that that procurement has been successful, with the NHS having just announced two new contracts for Smile Care Norfolk to increase access to dentists in King’s Lynn. I want to put on the record my thanks to the NHS East of England team for its efforts in successfully completing the procurement, which will mean that from 1 July my constituents will have better access.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Waveney said, it is disappointing that Fakenham and Thetford have not been successful in the procurement process. If my hon. Friend the Member for Broadland (Jerome Mayhew) catches your eye, Mr Efford, I am sure that he will speak about that.

Members have also touched on the supply of dentists. Office for Students figures show that there were 895 dental students in 2020, rising to 983 in 2020, compared with 810 in 2019. The 2022 intake, however, is just 809. Given the challenges in dentistry provision, we should be increasing that number, not reducing it. We should consider measures that enable those who are undertaking training to spend time in those areas where coverage is weakest. We should also be more direct and require those who have qualified to spend time in those areas as well.

I note that none of the 11 dental schools in England is in East Anglia. Given the low levels of dental coverage, I join the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) in putting in a bid for one in East Anglia, Norfolk, King’s Lynn, to help address that gap.

Another issue that has been raised is that the contract dates from 2006. My hon Friend the Minister candidly referred to it last month as a “disastrous contract” with perverse incentives—or disincentives—for NHS dentists to take on NHS work. I am sure she will be able to update us on when new measures will be introduced to provide a greater focus on prevention and care for individual patients.

In conclusion, the new services coming to King’s Lynn are warmly welcome and will improve access. However, further reforms are needed, including to training and the contract, to ensure that people have the access to dentistry that they need and deserve.

[Clive Efford (in the Chair)]

You have all been very disciplined in keeping speeches brief, so I am grateful for that. We are well on time. I call Wera Hobhouse.

--- Later in debate ---

[Giles Watling (Clacton) (Con)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford—[Interruption.] I will try to stand up without knocking the furniture over. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Waveney (Peter Aldous) for bringing this important debate. It is impressive that so many have attended. I have been listening to your entreaties from the Chair, Mr Efford. Many points have been made about the expansion of housing, covid, fluoridation and the UDA system, so I will not repeat all that, you will be delighted to hear; I will cut my speech very short.

Of the most common issues in my mailbag that constituents write to me about, at the very top is dental care, and NHS dental care in particular. That this issue is widespread is evidenced by all the Members here. I will bring out a few points that I mentioned in the Adjournment debate the other day, because they are so shocking. Some 85% of dental practices are now closed to new NHS patients. Nearly half of patients are forced to get private treatment because of access problems, as reflected in my mailbag. This horrifies me: one child is admitted to hospital every 10 minutes for tooth extractions. Imagine the cost of that, let alone the trauma involved. That is why we have to be proactive, rather than reactive, and why I was pleased to hear fluoridation mentioned.

Some 1,000 clinicians have left the profession in the last year, with yet more significantly reducing their NHS hours, as we heard. That is utterly unacceptable. I welcome the levelling-up agenda, but I do not believe we are being levelled up in an entirely fair manner. Areas such as Clacton are often considered to be rich and well-heeled because we fall into the wider eastern region—Essex is lovely and leafy and is an economic powerhouse—but the coastal areas have pockets of deprivation. I am not proud of it, but my constituency has the most deprived ward anywhere in Britain. Something has to be done about that. If we really want to level up public services, we must consider areas such as Clacton when it comes to dental care. We need to make sure that levelling up follows the data, if we can get it, and not just the rhetoric, and gives coastal communities the help they need.

To my mind, there are two key areas we really need to hit. In an age of integrated care systems and devolving more and more power over primary and acute care to local leaders, I increasingly question the role of certain state monoliths such as NHS England and NHS Improvement. My constituents do not need more national mandarins, they need local, empowered leaders with proper devolved budgets. I reflect on the outstanding leadership of my former CCG and its accountable officer, Ed Garratt; I mentioned him the other day, but I have to again, because he is so good. He has provided a great service to us locally. Thanks to his and his team’s work, Clacton primary care is in a much better state. I want to give local systems the commissioning powers and budget so that we will level up in a local, focused and measurable manner. The PCTs had their day and local care leadership is now delivering. It is time for NHS England to be devolved in the same manner.

Let us move on to the workforce. Increasing the number of UK-trained dentists will help but will take at least six years to make the difference. Urgent action is now needed to increase places on the overseas registration exam, develop an adaptation programme and recognise qualifications from top dental schools around the world.

Our membership of the EU forced us to look away from people in areas such as our wider Commonwealth who are being trained in first-class dental care, and the Asian subcontinent. We could see more of those practitioners in areas such as Clacton, which would be the very Brexit dividend we were led to expect.

I am delighted that Clacton has been selected as a pilot area for new dental training courses, but clarity is needed on how existing budgets can be used to support and improve dental access in constituencies such as Clacton.

To conclude, Mr Efford—I am doing this very quickly—

[Clive Efford (in the Chair)]

Order. I do not want the people of Clacton to miss out on this debate. You have all been so disciplined that we can be a little bit flexible with the six-minute limit. Please do not cut your speech too short so that we miss out on any points.

[Giles Watling]

Mr Efford, with all due respect, I have deliberately gone to the shorter version of my speech. If the Minister wishes to visit the wonderful constituency of Clacton, with its 35 miles of glorious coastline, I would love to discuss dental services with her.

Levelling up is not just about expanding employment outside London. It must be about addressing inequalities wherever we find them, such as decreasing NHS dental care in coastal communities such as Clacton. We can do that by forcing cash and power out of NHS England, alongside using our Brexit freedom to open the nation to the dentists of the world we have so long spurned.

Finally, I put in a plea—a plea for sympathy. In a couple of weeks, I am having root canal treatment. Our dentists are excellent, but I hope it goes well—[Laughter.]

[Clive Efford (in the Chair)]

I know I am going to regret saying that we can be quite relaxed about the six-minute limit, but we can. If you run over by a little bit, it should not cause too many problems for people speaking later in the debate, but do not abuse that generosity. I call Tan Dhesi.

Government Contracts: Randox Laboratories

Clive Efford Excerpts

Thursday 10th February 2022 Commons Chamber

[Maggie Throup]

That is really for the Treasury to look at, but I come back again to the fact that Randox was an established company in diagnostic testing and that at the time we looked at which businesses could deliver our testing requirements. I am delighted that since then we have built up our own additional testing structure; in fact, later today I will be visiting the Rosalind Franklin Laboratory in Leamington Spa to see the amazing testing work that we have set up there under the UK Health Security Agency.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

There were four meetings between Health Ministers and Randox that were not registered. Does the Minister accept that, if she had taken part in unregistered meetings of that kind, she would have breached the ministerial code?

[Maggie Throup]

I register all my meetings, as I should do.

Elective Care Recovery in England

Clive Efford Excerpts

Monday 7th February 2022 Commons Chamber

[Edward Argar]

My hon. Friend is a champion in this House for Scunthorpe General Hospital, and since her election she has never ceased to lobby, politely but firmly, on its behalf. I am delighted to agree to meet her.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

If we are going to deal with this backlog, we need to deal with vacancies in the NHS. That means we do not have time to wait for doctors and nurses to be trained; we need qualified staff now. Can the Minister say where he is going to get those staff? Is he looking abroad? Where is he going to find them?

[Edward Argar]

The hon. Gentleman makes a sensible and serious point. As I said earlier, it is about the workforce. Buildings and technology are fantastic, but it is the people who operate them who really make the difference. I can offer him the reassurance that we are already well on target to meeting our 50,000 nurses pledge from the 2019 manifesto. In October 2021 there were thousands more doctors and thousands more nurses in our NHS compared with October 2020. We continue to grow that workforce from a whole range of sources, including the additional medical school places that this Government delivered a few years ago.

Covid-19: Purchasing Effort

Clive Efford Excerpts

Thursday 3rd February 2022 Commons Chamber

[Edward Argar]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and join him in paying tribute to the work of his local healthcare system during the pandemic. He makes a couple of points. First, he is absolutely right to highlight that this was ramped up at pace. Initially, the NHS supplied PPE directly to about 250 hospital trusts and other trusts. In the early months of the pandemic, that was ramped up to supplying it to well over 50,000 different settings. That is a phenomenal ramping up of logistics and distribution capabilities. To his second point, he is absolutely right that, from about 1% of PPE being manufactured in the UK before the pandemic, we now have the capacity to manufacture about 70% of the PPE it is currently assessed we need in this country. That is a great British success story.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

What is absolutely clear from Exercise Cygnus is that the specific recommendations on PPE were not implemented by the Government. That led to the massive rush to purchase PPE during the pandemic. That added to the problem; it was not the only reason for it. The Government’s defence on the scandals of the contracts seems to be that we had to act very quickly. If that is the case, it does not explain why a disproportionate number of the contracts ended up in the hands of people who were members of the Conservative party, close associates of members of the Conservative party, or had given money to the Conservative party. If you were casting your net far and wide, you would not expect that to come to light, would you? You would expect there to be quite a wide number of contracts being issued. So the Government’s excuse does not hold water, does it?

[Edward Argar]

I take the hon. Gentleman’s point about speed and the context in which we were operating. I have to say all contracts were assessed through an eight-stage process undertaken by neutral civil servants. As the National Audit Office found, Ministers were not involved in the award of contracts.

Covid-19 Update

Clive Efford Excerpts

Thursday 13th January 2022 Commons Chamber

[Sajid Javid]

First, may I take this opportunity to thank my hon. Friend for the scrutiny he provides? As always, he makes important points that are worth discussing. He is right about the language I used earlier, because it is factually correct to say that. The reason this country is as free as it is now is the decision that nine out of 10 people have made to get vaccinated. Those people who decided not to be vaccinated when they could have been, because they are not medically exempt, for example, made a choice and that has consequences. It does not just have consequences for them; it has consequences for all of us.

My hon. Friend might be interested to know that when I visited the ICU ward looking after covid patients in King’s College Hospital in London last week, I was told by the consultant in charge that they estimate that 70% of patients in the ICU ward are unvaccinated. If those people had got vaccinated, they would not only have been safer, but space in hospitals, and not just in ICU wards, could have been used for others. There are 17,000 covid-positive patients in our hospitals. That could have been prevented if those who were unvaccinated or who decided not to take their booster shot had actually bothered to have their vaccination. Yes, getting vaccinated needs to be a positive choice: we need to encourage people and, with the exception of the health and social care high-risk settings, it should not be done by compulsion. I do not believe in that. I do not think it would work and I think it is unethical, but the people who have chosen not to get vaccinated should understand the consequences of their decision for the rest of society.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

Following on from that, I pay tribute to all NHS and care staff. We are 17 days away from the first deadline, when NHS and care staff will need to get their first vaccine if they are to be fully vaccinated by the deadline of 1 April. What we did not hear in the Secretary of State’s statement is anything about a long-term strategy for staffing in our NHS to deal with the current vacancies and, unfortunately, those that will come about as a result of the 1 April deadline. Where is the long-term plan that NHS managers are crying out for, and where are we going to get qualified staff from in future?

[Sajid Javid]

I hope that the hon. Gentleman heard my earlier comments about the importance of making sure that patients are as safe as possible in health and care settings; I hope that he agrees and therefore understands the new vaccination rules to whose importance he refers.

The hon. Gentleman is right to ask about the planning necessary to cope with the changes. I can reassure him that even before Parliament voted on them, the NHS had started planning in anticipation of its decision. It is working with each and every trust, but is rightly putting in most effort into convincing the 6% of people in NHS trusts who have not yet had a first dose of the covid-19 vaccine to do so. It is working to convince them in a positive way to make that positive choice, with all the information that they need about the vaccines being safe and effective. It is offering them meetings with clinicians, including one-on-one meetings. I hope that the hon. Gentleman supports that approach.

Public Health

Clive Efford Excerpts

Tuesday 14th December 2021 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

The hon. Gentleman has called repeatedly from a sedentary position that I do not know the science, but I have said nothing of any sort to contradict the points he has just made.

With respect to Conservative Members, particularly those who oppose these measures, what they are missing is that it is indisputable that the booster does provide greater protection than the first and second jabs, that vaccination—full stop—provides better protection, and that if we are talking about NHS pressures and workforce pressures, the biggest danger is that the virus sweeps through the health and social care workforce, knocks a load of people out in the middle of the busiest period for the NHS, and then the system topples over. I do not know why it has to be explained again and again to Conservative Members that the objective is to protect the NHS and to stop it toppling over at a critical time. The points about the severity of the virus and the efficacy of the vaccine in preventing transmission or serious illness are largely secondary. We know that the virus is spreading, and doing so rapidly, and we know that if it rips through the health and social care workforce, that is the biggest risk to the NHS—that is what will topple it over. Conservative Members’ constituents will not thank them one bit if they allow that to happen.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech and putting his case very forcefully. On the issue of coercion versus persuasion and involving trade unions and the royal colleges in NHS managers taking the staff with them, what was not respected by the Secretary of State when he was asked about redundancies is that this is a retrospective change in people’s terms and conditions, and even people who are vaccinated will be resistant to the change being imposed upon them. We have to go forward carefully and take the staff with us. Will my hon. Friend urge the Government to work with the royal colleges and trade unions to take this forward?

[Wes Streeting]

My hon. Friend makes such an important point. Going back to the staff surveys, particularly given that the overwhelming majority of staff are vaccinated, it is not that they do not want their colleagues to be vaccinated, but that they have concerns about the way in which the Government are going about this. We accepted from the Government and from NHS England a very clear view that omicron has raised the stakes in this regard, which has had a big bearing on our position. It is very difficult for me and my colleagues on the Labour Benches to put ourselves in a position that is on the other side of the argument from the NHS and from the public, but the point about engagement is really important. The Government must work with and take the workforce with them. It is not good enough for us to just clap for the NHS, or clap for carers; we must work in partnership with them and respect that these are people who have given their lives to public service and caring for others. They do care. They will instinctively be on the right side, but they just need some persuasion, some patience and genuine engagement and that is where the Government have gone slightly wrong.

Covid-19 Update

Clive Efford Excerpts

Monday 6th December 2021 Commons Chamber

[Sajid Javid]

Yes. I know my right hon. Friend speaks with experience and I agree with him absolutely.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

If we are going to have to live with covid and given the high infection rates among young children, what possible justification can there be for delaying funding to schools to improve ventilation to reduce transmission?

[Sajid Javid]

I believe that my right hon. Friend the Education Secretary said something about the importance of ventilation last week.

Covid-19 Update

Clive Efford Excerpts

Monday 29th November 2021 Commons Chamber

[Sajid Javid]

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. As I said in my statement, even in the case of the dominant delta variant, we have seen some rises in infections, but also falls in hospitalisation and death rates, thankfully. The reason for that is the power of the vaccines, and especially our booster programme, which is the largest in Europe. He is absolutely right: with the new variant, as we look ahead, what matters more than anything is hospitalisations.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

The second line in the Secretary of State’s statement was:

“We have always known that a worrying new variant could be a threat to the progress that we have made as a nation.”

With that in mind, does he think it was wrong for the Government to abandon mask wearing in public places and confined spaces? Will he listen to the recommendations of Doreen Lawrence’s report and start to issue full-face protection masks to care workers and health workers?

[Sajid Javid]

Surely the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that if we had had different rules on masks over the summer, this variant would not have emerged.

Health and Care Bill

Clive Efford Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 22nd November 2021 Commons Chamber

[Edward Argar]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who knows of what he speaks in terms of the operation of healthcare services. We would not wish to exclude GPs or groups of GPs from being able to participate in decision making. That expertise, as we have seen with clinical commissioning groups, can be hugely valuable. What we have sought to do, in an amendment that is technically worded, for want of a better way of putting it, is to strike the right balance while also ensuring that the additional measures on the constitutions of the ICBs and ICPs have to be approved by NHS England to avoid any obvious conflict of interest. But we are not seeking to avoid GPs being able to operate in that space and sitting on ICBs.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

Will the Minister give way?

[Edward Argar]

I would like to make a little progress and then I will give way to the hon. Gentleman, who has been bobbing for some time.

We believe—this may not answer the hon. Gentleman’s point, but I will make a little progress and then if there is time—[Interruption.] Well, we will see. Hope springs eternal. A blanket ban on employees of private companies would also, we fear, be arbitrary. It would not cover the full range of people involved in non-NHS providers, some of whom may not be suitable candidates to sit on ICBs because of their involvement, but not employment, within the private healthcare sector. With the complex corporate structures that providers may have established, a narrow definition in the Bill could be unhelpful and risk not capturing the people we wish to capture.

[Edward Argar]

My right hon. Friend makes a point that came out in some of the oral evidence sessions on the Bill. Our aim was to create a minimum membership for the ICBs and ICPs, but it is not prescriptive—it can go beyond that—so there is scope for mental health trusts or other health trusts to have seats on those boards. Indeed, Dame Gill Morgan, who runs the integrated care system in Gloucestershire, said that that is exactly what she has done and that she would be surprised if any ICB did not wish to do it. But we wanted to set a de minimis membership to allow for local flexibility.

[Clive Efford]

We have GP practices that are being privatised now—they are being bought up by private companies, with some foreign interests as well. If the Minister is saying that those companies can have representation on ICBs, we have already seen circumstances where people have tried to redact minutes of meetings, so does this not open up the possibility of private interests being served at these meetings but not being accountable through public scrutiny?

Randox Covid Contracts

Clive Efford Excerpts

Wednesday 17th November 2021 Commons Chamber

[Gillian Keegan]

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

rose—

[Gillian Keegan]

Can I please just get some of these points out?

Of course, there are a phenomenal set of safeguards in place. The National Audit Office has reviewed the testing contract, and it has confirmed that all the proper contracting procedures were followed.

--- Later in debate ---

[Brendan O’Hara (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)]

This debate may not be a particular pleasure for the Minister, but it is a pleasure to follow her and her valiant attempt at defending the indefensible. Her efforts might have been more credible if her colleagues had done more than abandon her to her fate. Even when the emergency Bat-Signal had gone out from the Whips Office, it seems that this paltry crew is all that could be assembled to support her. It very much looks to us as though that is an admission of guilt by Conservative Members. I was looking forward to hearing their stout defence of their Government, and I can only assume therefore that that stout defence does not actually exist.

I thank and congratulate the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner) on the way that she introduced this motion. I put on record our full support for it, because there has to be full transparency about exactly what went on between Owen Paterson when he was a member of this House, representatives of Randox, Lord Bethell, Government Ministers or former Government Ministers, and their special advisers and officials. That full transparency has to include all electronic communications, as well as notes and minutes of meetings between all or some of those parties in relation to the awarding of hundreds of millions of pounds-worth of contracts to Randox Laboratories.

[Clive Efford]

I tried to intervene on the Minister but she did not give way, so I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. The issue about Lord Bethell is not just about his mobile phone. During the period between 1 April and 6 April 2020, he held several meetings with companies that went on to win millions of pounds-worth of covid contracts from the Government, and they were not even in his diary, let alone minuted.

[Brendan O’Hara]

I absolutely take on board what the hon. Gentleman says, and I am sure the Government have heard it as well. There are many, many questions to be answered, including by Lord Bethell himself.

It is essential that this is done, because a stench of corruption is engulfing this Government, who now stand accused of making certain well-placed individuals fabulously wealthy during this pandemic, not because of their particular skill or acumen in business but primarily because of their political connections to the Conservative party. We should give thanks to Owen Paterson, because it was his behaviour and the bizarre attempt by the Prime Minister, the Tory Chief Whip and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster—albeit at the expense of the reputation of this House and all of us who sit in it—that has finally blown the lid off this scandal once and for all.

It was almost exactly a year ago that the National Audit Office revealed that companies with the right political connections who wanted to supply the UK with personal protective equipment had been directed to a “high priority” channel, purely on the recommendation of a Government Minister, an MP, a Member of the House of Lords or a senior Government official.