Thangam Debbonaire
Main Page: Thangam Debbonaire (Labour - Bristol West)(2 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberWe will work our way through the points of order, starting on the Opposition Front Bench.
On a point of order, Mr Speaker, and on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), who has now miraculously appeared. Yesterday during Prime Minister’s questions the Prime Minister responded to the High Court ruling that found the Government broke the law in discharging patients to care homes without testing them for covid first in 2020, saying that
“the thing we did not know in particular was that covid could be transmitted asymptomatically”.—[Official Report, 27 April 2022; Vol. 712, c. 762.]
I am afraid that I believe the Prime Minister may have inadvertently misled the House, because on 28 January 2020 advice from the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies—I have checked—on asymptomatic transmission included that
“early indications imply some is occurring.”
On 24 February The Lancet—again I have checked—published a paper which stated that
“infected individuals can be infectious before they become symptomatic”,
and on 13 March the chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, told the “Today” programme that
“it’s quite likely that there is some degree of symptomatic transmission.”
Yet it was not until 15 April that the Government guidance was changed to require patients to be tested before being discharged to care homes. That appears to us to contradict what the Prime Minister said yesterday. I am sure that is inadvertent, but can you, Mr Speaker, advise me on how we can best ensure the Prime Minister returns to the House and corrects the record?
I thank the hon. Lady for giving notice of her point of order. As has often been said before, it is vital that statements made in the House are accurate; however, the Chair is not responsible for the contents of a Minister’s speech. What I would say is that I am sure nobody would want to leave an inaccuracy, and I would have thought they would wish to correct the record so that it is not left in abeyance. I am sure that those on the Treasury Bench will have heard the hon. Member’s point of order and a correction will be forthcoming if one is needed; I would think it is better for the House to have accurate information, so let’s see what we can do.