Eurotunnel Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Lord Browne of Ladyton

Main Page: Lord Browne of Ladyton (Labour - Life peer)
Monday 4th March 2019

(5 years, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Earl of Courtown Portrait The Earl of Courtown
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, my noble friend is right. Patients can have confidence in the Government’s contingency plans to work with suppliers who provide medicines and other medical supplies to the UK to ensure the continuity of supply. We have selected the best way of ensuring that patients continue to receive the medicines, devices and medical supplies they need.

Lord Browne of Ladyton Portrait Lord Browne of Ladyton (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, no one believes that this £33 million was paid to Eurotunnel to secure medicines post Brexit. Anyone who knows anything about the legal process knows that, at the door of the court, the Government’s lawyers told them, “We need to settle this case”—and they settled it for £33 million to Eurotunnel. The question, which has been posed to the noble Earl twice now, is: did or did not Chris Grayling, when he personally signed these contracts, sign them against any advice that the process that had been undertaken and was challenged in court was anticompetitive and could not be protected against a legal challenge? If all the legal advice was that the process could be protected, are the Government ever going to use these lawyers again?

Earl of Courtown Portrait The Earl of Courtown
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are not publishing our legal advice, but we did not go against it. We had to enter into these contracts—the expedited form of competitive tendering—because the planning assumptions changed and the maritime market was not responding to the risk. As a responsible Government we had to react to ensure the supply of important medicines if we ended up in a no-deal scenario.