Covid 19 Inquiry: Judicial Review Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office

Covid 19 Inquiry: Judicial Review

Steve McCabe Excerpts
Monday 5th June 2023

(11 months, 1 week ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

If we can find a way through without this, that would be helpful to all concerned. Everybody wants to get on with this inquiry, and, as I say, we will continue to deliver documents. I hope that we do not delay, in any way, the work of the inquiry while the courts determine on this technical point. I thank my hon. Friend for drawing attention to his Committee’s inquiries, but there is a huge amount that needs to be covered. I recognise that the chair’s remit is very broad and that there is a lot of work that the chair and the inquiry will wish to do, but the quicker we can get answers to this, the better.

Steve McCabe Portrait Steve McCabe (Birmingham, Selly Oak) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

As I understand it, this inquiry was negotiated and consulted on, with its terms of reference agreed, before it got going. Yet, astonishingly, it is only once it starts doing its job—only when it starts asking for evidence—that this vital point of principle surfaces. I do not blame the Minister for sticking to his brief, but does he honestly think anyone in the public is going to buy this?

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

This process started with the delivery of that section 21 notice; the earlier rule 9 notices were different in their construction. This is a wide request from the chair, which is perfectly legitimate, provided it is not including unambiguously irrelevant information—that is what we are focused on, only that. I must, once again, assert that every bit of information that is covid-related is not under any question at all—this is only about stuff that is unambiguously irrelevant.