Debates between Ian Byrne and Julia Lopez during the 2019-2024 Parliament

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Ian Byrne and Julia Lopez
Thursday 1st October 2020

(4 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ian Byrne Portrait Ian Byrne (Liverpool, West Derby) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

What assessment he has made of the adequacy of (a) supplier performance and (b) value for money achieved under Government contracts established in response to the covid-19 outbreak.

Julia Lopez Portrait The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Julia Lopez)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The private sector has played a vital role in the Government’s response to the covid-19 outbreak, such as delivering over 15,000 ventilators in under four months to support the NHS and changing production facilities so that by December we expect that UK manufacturers will be meeting 70% of the demand for personal protective equipment, compared with just 1% before the pandemic. Being able to procure at speed has been critical in providing that response. However, we have been clear that all contracts, including those designed to help tackle coronavirus, must continue to offer quality public services and achieve value for money for taxpayers.

--- Later in debate ---
Julia Lopez Portrait Julia Lopez
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It has been an extremely challenging time, as I have said, and the private sector has been a valuable partner in everything we have done. The contracts awarded have been extremely valuable in ensuring that we can deliver capacity at pace. If the hon. Lady has any concerns, I am happy to look into them.

Ian Byrne Portrait Ian Byrne [V]
- Hansard - -

The Minister will be aware that the Competition and Markets Authority is now investigating the proposed merger of two outsourcing giants in the facilities management industry: Mitie and Interserve. Given that both companies hold Government contracts worth over £2 billion, what steps is she taking to review the implications of the merger, considering the clear risk to public funds, as well as to the terms and conditions and future employment of over 80,000 workers?