Covid Fraud

Debate between Lord Pannick and Lord Livermore

Monday 29th June 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Livermore (Lab)]

I can fully understand the noble Baroness’s desire to stand back from this. On entering government, this Government found that £674 million of contracts were in dispute. However, we also inherited a recommendation from the previous Government that any attempt to reclaim that money should be abandoned. The commissioner’s report set out that £10.9 billion was lost to fraud and error from Covid spending. Failed pandemic-era PPE contracts cost the British taxpayer £1.4 billion and over £1.9 billion of bounce-back loans have been flagged as suspected fraud to the British Business Bank. The commissioner also found that the previous Government’s over-ordering of PPE and delays in quality-checking meant that £762 million is unlikely to ever be recovered, with substandard PPE gowns, masks and visors remaining uninspected for up to two years, preventing recovery of public money. Covid fraud and corruption is an appalling financial scandal which has cost UK taxpayers dearly. The noble Baroness asks for a commitment that we will do better next time; I think we could hardly do any worse.

[Lord Pannick (CB)]

My Lords, can the Minister say how much of the billions of pounds of public money which was wasted due to fraud and corruption in relation to Covid has now been recovered?

[Lord Livermore (Lab)]

As I said in my previous answer, the estimated level of fraud and error stands at £10.9 billion. Some £1.6 billion has so far been recovered and a further £1.5 billion is in the act of being repaid. The Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Act has extended the limitation period for Covid cases by a further six years, giving us longer to recover the outstanding amounts.

OBR: Resignation of Chair

Debate between Lord Pannick and Lord Livermore

Monday 8th December 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Livermore (Lab)]

I am not sure whether the noble Lord is saying that is his view or whether he thinks it should be the case. The Chancellor was aware of the letter that the OBR sent to the Treasury Select Committee. She was content for it to be published, and she agreed this with the Permanent Secretary. We put the utmost weight on Budget security. The OBR has chosen to publish some further information. That is set out fully in Richard Hughes’s letter to the Treasury Committee. We believe it is important to maintain a private space between the Treasury and the OBR for the exchange of forecast information and Budget policy development, so we welcome the OBR’s statement that this is not intended to become usual practice.

[Lord Pannick (CB)]

My Lords, over the last few weeks and today, the Minister has studiously avoided confirming that Ministers and officials briefed possible announcements in the Budget prior to the Budget occurring. Does he really deny that this occurred?

[Lord Livermore (Lab)]

As I have said before, we take the Budget process extremely seriously and we put the utmost weight on Budget secrecy. A leak inquiry is now under way with the full support of the Chancellor, and the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury will also conduct a review of the Treasury’s security processes to inform future fiscal events.

Forthcoming Fiscal Changes

Debate between Lord Pannick and Lord Livermore

Tuesday 25th November 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Livermore (Lab)]

As I have said already, I am not going to comment on individual measures ahead of the Budget.

[Lord Pannick (CB)]

Can I ask the Minister a question of facts and not speculation? Will he confirm that Ministers and officials have been floating possible Budget proposals over the last few weeks?

[Lord Livermore (Lab)]

As the noble Lord well knows, I am not going to comment on the ongoing Budget process, which will conclude tomorrow when the Chancellor delivers the Budget.

National Insurance: Partnerships

Debate between Lord Pannick and Lord Livermore

Monday 10th November 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Livermore (Lab)]

My reason is very simple: I am not going to speculate on the next Budget now. I am, of course, grateful for my noble friend’s expertise in these matters.

[Lord Pannick (CB)]

My Lords, will the Minister accept that it not speculation but fact that the legal services sector brought in exports worth £9.5 billion last year? Will he also accept that it is fact, not speculation, that to increase the tax burden would inevitably damage the ability of law firms to attract cases such as international arbitration and dispute resolution from abroad when we are in competition with Singapore, Dubai and other litigation centres?

[Lord Livermore (Lab)]

I certainly agree with the first fact that the noble Lord set out, and I am happy to do so. On his second fact, that is inviting me to speculate, which I think I have made clear I am not going to do.