Asked by: Kirsty Blackman (Scottish National Party - Aberdeen North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to the PPE High Priority Lane during the covid-19 pandemic, what recent steps he has taken to pursue contractual remedies to recover funding in instances where contracts failed to deliver.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The High Priority Lane prioritised offers of personal protective equipment (PPE), with all offers of PPE going through a structured, documented process regardless of the source of the offer.
The Department established a Contract Dissolution Team to maximise the value obtained from contracts for PPE. Where a contract has been found to have underperformed, or the PPE provided was not up to standard, the team will commence a process, up to and including legal action, to reach the best possible outcome for taxpayer’s money.
We cannot go into the detail of individual contracts at this stage while negotiations and other activities, including legal process, are on-going. Once all activity is complete, we will be able to release more information.
Asked by: John Hayes (Conservative - South Holland and The Deepings)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to the Answer of 28 March 2022 to Question 125389 on Protective clothing: Procurement, how much his Department has spent on defending legal challenges from the Good Law Project regarding the use of the high priority lane for personal protective equipment contracts; and how much was paid by the Good Law Project towards the Department's costs.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
Up to the end of October 2023, the Department has spent £3,884,214 excluding VAT on defending legal challenges from the Good Law Project. £337,000 has been recovered to date from the Good Law Project in costs.
Asked by: Nick Smith (Labour - Blaenau Gwent)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 16 May 2023 to Question 184346 on Protective Clothing: Contracts and with reference to the National Audit Office report entitled Investigation into the management of PPE contracts published 30 Mar 2022, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of that report's findings that not all due diligence checks on companies not were completed before contracts were awarded for personal protective equipment procurement.
Answered by Will Quince
The 2022 National Audit Office (NAO) refers to an ‘eight stage due diligence process’, a term used by the NAO to describe a structured process of checks and due diligence on potential suppliers of personal protective equipment (PPE) which formalised the checks quickly put in place by the cross-Government PPE procurement cell and which evolved in March and April 2020. The final step was the introduction of a central clearance board on 4 May 2020 to perform checks previously performed by the Department’s Accounting Officer to add an extra level of assurance that the deal met our requirements. From the start all suppliers were evaluated by officials on financial standing, technical compliance and ability to perform the contract.
Asked by: Angela Rayner (Labour - Ashton-under-Lyne)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many companies have been excluded from participating in public procurement due to legal action being initiated by Government relating to contracts to supply personal protective equipment.
Answered by Alex Burghart - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
Exclusion decisions are for individual departments. In the most serious of cases, the Cabinet Office may undertake a review of a supplier and issue guidance to departments but the decision on exclusion remains with the contracting authority.
The Procurement Bill, which is making its way through Parliament, further strengthens the rules on supplier exclusion for fraud and corruption. It will also create a new 'debarment register', accessible to all public sector organisations, which will list companies who should be excluded from contracts.
Information about exclusions relating to legal action being initiated by the Government relating to contracts to supply personal protective equipment is not held centrally.
Asked by: Wes Streeting (Labour - Ilford North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, when he plans to publish details of the contract agreed for the purchase of Single Use Theatre Protective Clothing by Collaborative Procurement Partnership LLP (CPP LLP) acting on behalf of Supply Chain Coordination Ltd (SCCL), which was valued at £1,774,730,734.19 and awarded on 1 April 2020.
Answered by Will Quince
This order for Single Use Theatre Protective Clothing was placed by Collaborative Procurement Partnership LLP, acting on behalf of Supply Chain Coordination Ltd (SCCL), using an existing SCCL framework agreement and the associated terms and conditions, so no new contracts were put in place.
Asked by: Ellie Reeves (Labour - Lewisham West and Penge)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the value for money of personal protective equipment procured under covid-19 emergency regulations.
Answered by Neil O'Brien
I refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Bristol South on 6 February 2023 to Question 903412.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the value for money of personal protective equipment procured under covid-19 emergency regulations.
Answered by Neil O'Brien
I refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Bristol South on 6 February 2023 to Question 903412.
Asked by: Owen Thompson (Scottish National Party - Midlothian)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what means of communication was used to inform of the existence of an expedited route for supplying personal protective equipment during the covid-19 outbreak; which organisations and individuals were made aware of that route; and where any promotion of that route was published.
Answered by Alex Burghart - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
The High Priority appraisals mailbox was available across government and with Parliamentarians. Email correspondence with ministerial private offices and senior officials in the PPE sourcing programme provided notification that the mailbox had been set up and this was widely known.
The mailbox allowed MPs, ministers and senior officials to directly pass on offers of support which they had received from suppliers and individuals to a dedicated location for triage. The high priority team used the same criteria to assess offers as those used to assess any other offers of PPE. Referral to the mailbox was not a guarantee of a contract.
Asked by: Brendan O'Hara (Scottish National Party - Argyll and Bute)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he has taken recent action with ministerial colleagues to assess the extent to which contracts entered into by the UK government to procure PPE in the last five years represented value for money.
Answered by Will Quince
The Government Internal Audit Agency analysed the prices paid for individual products in the personal protective equipment (PPE) supply chain. This included 12 contracts where the Agency found a proportionate control environment which balanced the need to urgently procure PPE with the need to secure value for money.
Asked by: Fleur Anderson (Labour - Putney)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much personal protective equipment has been procured by the Government under emergency procurement procedures in the last 6 months.
Answered by Will Quince
The Department has not procured any personal protective equipment under emergency procurement procedures in the last six months.