Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) Regulations 2020 Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department of Health and Social Care

Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) Regulations 2020

Lord Oates Excerpts
Friday 24th July 2020

(4 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Oates Portrait Lord Oates (LD)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I have four questions for the Minister.

First, why were face coverings not mandated at the same time as the relaxation of these rules or the earlier decision to allow non-essential retail to open? Indeed, why were they not mandated from the outset when the medical advice from south-east Asia, which had the most experience of the pandemic, was that they were a key element in tackling the coronavirus?

Secondly, on 14 July, when the Secretary of State announced that they would become compulsory, he told the House of Commons:

“The death rate of sales and retail assistants is 75% higher among men and 60% higher among women than in the general population.”—[Official Report, Commons, 14/7/20; col. 1395.]


Was he aware of those statistics when these regulations, and those allowing shops to open, were being considered? If not, what assessment was made of the risks to staff?

Thirdly, in the light of these shocking figures, can the Minister explain why it has taken 10 days for the mask mandate to come into effect? Finally, what assessment has been made of the number of deaths that could have been avoided if face coverings had been compulsory from the start of lockdown?