(Leicester South) (Lab/Co-op)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Health and
Social Care, if he will update the House on the pandemic
preparedness of the Department of Health and Social Care.
The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care ()
What we have done to handle this coronavirus pandemic has been
unprecedented in modern times. Throughout, we have been straight
with people and this House about the challenges that we as a
nation face together. The nation, in my view, has risen to these
challenges. Of course, there were unprecedented difficulties that
come with preparation for an unprecedented event.
This pandemic is not over yet. Our vaccination programme has
reached 73% of the adult population, but that means that more
than a quarter still have not been jabbed; 43% of adults have had
both jabs, but that means that more than half are yet to get the
fullest possible protection that two jabs give.
Yesterday, we saw 3,180 new cases of coronavirus—the highest
since 12 April—but thanks to the power of vaccination, in which I
have always believed, the link from cases to hospitalisations and
deaths is being severed. About 90% of those in hospital in
hotspot areas have not yet had both jabs, so the continued
delivery of the vaccination effort and the ongoing work to
control the virus through testing, tracing and isolation are
vital.
Yesterday, we saw the opening of vaccinations to all those aged
30 and above. I am delighted to tell the House that the
vaccination programme is on track to meet its goal of offering a
jab to all adults by the end of July. It has met every goal that
we have set. Setting and meeting ambitious targets is how you get
stuff done in Government.
As a nation, we have many challenges still to come. I know, and
one of the things I have learned, is that the best way through is
to work together with a can-do spirit of positive collaboration.
The team who have worked so hard together to get us this far
deserve our highest praise. I am proud of everyone in my
Department, all those working in healthcare and public health,
the armed forces who fought on the home front, the volunteers who
stood in cold car parks with a smile, colleagues across the House
who have done their bit and, most of all, the British people.
Whether it is the science, the NHS or the people queuing for
vaccines in their droves, Britain is rising to this challenge. We
have come together as one nation, and we will overcome.
Families who lost loved ones will have noticed that the Secretary
of State, in his opening remarks, did not respond to any of the
specific allegations from yesterday—allegations that are grave
and serious: that the Prime Minister is unfit for office; that
his inaction meant that tens of thousands needlessly died. We had
allegations from that the Secretary of State, specifically, misled
colleagues—an allegation from Mr Cummings, Mr Speaker—on our
preparedness and lack of protection for people in care homes.
The allegations from Cummings are either true, and if so the
Secretary of State potentially stands in breach of the
ministerial code and the Nolan principles, or they are false, and
the Prime Minister brought a fantasist and a liar into the heart
of Downing Street. Which is it? Families who have lost loved ones
deserve full answers from the Secretary of State today. Is he
ashamed that he promised a protective shield around care homes
and more than 30,000 care home residents have died? Why were
25,000 elderly people discharged from hospitals into care homes
without any test? Did he tell Downing Street in March that people
discharged from hospital had been tested, even though it was not
until 15 April that there was a requirement for testing to take
place?
In public, the Secretary of State has often claimed that little
was known of asymptomatic transmission at the time, so testing
was not necessary, but the Scientific Advisory Group for
Emergencies in January flagged evidence of asymptomatic
transmission. A study in The Lancet in February flagged it. On 5
March, the chief medical officer said that
“there may well be a lot of people who are infected and have no
symptoms”,
so why did the Secretary of State not insist on a precautionary
approach and test all going into care homes?
On 6 May, at the Dispatch Box, the Secretary of State claimed
that it is
“safer for them to go to a care home.”
Yet 12,000 people had died in those early months. How could he
justify that comment? In April, he told the House:
“What is important is that infection control procedures are in
place in that care home”.—[Official Report, 19 May 2020; Vol.
676, c. 494.]
However, care homes, like the NHS, struggled with the most
desperate of personal protective equipment shortages. He was
telling us in March from the Dispatch Box that supplies were
extensive, but apparently in private, in Downing Street, he was
blaming Simon Stevens for the lack of PPE.
The reality is that the Secretary of State and his Department
were responsible for PPE, and the National Audit Office report
said that the supplies were inadequate. Some 850 healthcare
workers died. How many could have been saved had they had PPE?
Families lost loved ones and have been let down by the
Government, the Prime Minister and the Health Secretary, but the
truth matters. Those families and the country deserve clear
answers from the Health Secretary and the Prime Minister today.
The allegations that were put yesterday and repeated by the right
hon. Gentleman are serious, and I welcome the opportunity to come
to the House to put formally on the record that these
unsubstantiated allegations around honesty are not true, and that
I have been straight with people in public and in private
throughout. Every day since I began working on the response to
the pandemic last January, I have got up each morning and asked,
“What must I do to protect life?” That is the job of a Health
Secretary in a pandemic.
We have taken an approach of openness, transparency and
explanation of both what we know and what we do not know. I was
looking at it this morning. Since last January,
I have attended this House more than 60 times. With the Prime
Minister, we have together hosted 84 press conferences. I have
answered 2,667 contributions to this House and answered questions
from colleagues, the media and the public, and we will keep on
with that spirit of openness and transparency throughout. As well
as coming to the House today, I will answer questions and host
another press conference later.
Sometimes what we have had to say has not been easy. We have had
to level with people when it has been tough—when things have been
going in the wrong direction. Also, we have learned throughout.
We have applied that learning both to tackling this pandemic and
ensuring that we are as well prepared in the future as possible,
but beyond all that what matters remains the same: getting
vaccinated, getting tested, delivering for our country,
overcoming this disease and saving lives. That is what matters to
the British people.
(South West Surrey) (Con)
The House should know that when serious allegations were made at
yesterday’s Joint Committee hearing, we asked for evidence to be
provided, and until such evidence is provided, those allegations
should be regarded as unproven. In the meantime, we are in the
midst of a pandemic, and we need the Health Secretary to be doing
his job with his customary energy and commitment.
I want to ask my right hon. Friend about comments made by Neil
Ferguson on this morning’s “Today” programme. He said that the
Indian variant is now dominant in the majority of local authority
areas and, indeed, is the dominant variant, and that the opening
date of 21 June is now in the balance. Given how desperate
businesses up and down the country are to return to normal, what
additional measures can my right hon. Friend take in the short
term to ensure that, in terms of surge testing, the vaccine
roll-out and improvements to Test and Trace, we really are able
to open up as everyone wants on 21 June?
It is true that the Indian variant is spreading across the
country, and estimates vary as to what proportion of new cases
each day involve that variant first identified in India, which is
more transmissible. My assessment is that it is too early to say
whether we can take the full step 4 on 21 June. Like my right
hon. Friend, I desperately want us to do so, but we will only do
that if it is safe. We will make a formal assessment ahead of 14
June as to what step we can take on 21 June, and we will be
driven by the data and advised on and guided by the science, and
we will be fully transparent in those decisions, both with this
House and with the public. That is the approach we have taken,
that is the approach he and his Select Committee would expect,
and that is what we will deliver.
(Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP) [V]
In Dominic Cummings’ opening statement yesterday, he said:
“The truth is that senior Ministers, senior officials and senior
advisers… fell disastrously short of the standards that the
public has a right to expect of its Government in a crisis like
this. When the public needed us most,”
we “failed.” We then heard a litany of evidence that the disease
was not taken seriously in February last year, further compounded
by the ignoring of SAGE advice to lockdown in September,
resulting in a worse second wave. Does the Health Secretary agree
that the UK Government failed the public? Had he acted sooner,
how many lives could have been saved or restrictions avoided?
Will he act urgently to prevent further unnecessary suffering and
death in the immediate future by holding a comprehensive public
inquiry immediately?
I have been working on the pandemic since January of last
year—before the disease was even evident in this country. That is
when we kicked off work on the vaccine, and I was told at first
that it would typically take five years to develop a vaccine. I
insisted that we drove at that as fast as we possibly could, and
I am delighted at the progress that we have been able to make.
Of course it is right that we learn from everything that we
understand and everything that we see and all the scientific
advances. We should do that all the way through. This idea that
we should wait for an inquiry in order to learn is wrong, but it
is right that we go through all that happened at the appropriate
time in order to ensure that we are best prepared for the
inevitable pandemics of the future.
(Truro and
Falmouth) (Con) [V]
I thank my right hon. Friend for his visit to the Royal Cornwall
hospital in Truro earlier this week. We met staff, toured the
site of the new oncology wing and looked at the start-of-the-art
plans for the new women and children’s hospital—part of our
manifesto promise for 40 new hospitals.
Given the gravity of the situation that the Government faced at
the beginning of the pandemic, and considering we now know that
was a hugely disruptive force, I congratulate
Ministers, not least my right hon. Friend, on staying focused on
the evidence presented by the experts at the time as events
changed quickly. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that he will
ignore unsubstantiated Westminster gossip and stay focused on
delivering the vaccine roll-out and our manifesto promises?
I think that is what the public expect us to do. I had a
brilliant visit to Cornwall on Monday. It was a pleasure to go to
Treliske to see my hon. Friend there and to talk about the new
women and children’s hospital that we are building as part of the
biggest ever investment in healthcare in Cornwall. Delivering on
these priorities on which we were elected, and of course dealing
with this pandemic and keeping people safe, is what the public
want to see. That is what the expectations of the public are and
it is my total focus.
(Dudley
South) (Con) [V]
There was no manual to guide Governments going into this new
global pandemic and most people feel that the Government
responded as well as anybody could. In particular, over the past
six months government has worked well together to deliver a
phenomenal amount of testing and one of the best vaccine
roll-outs in the world. Is the Secretary of State aware of
anything that has changed during that time to help the way that
government has worked on improving the covid response?
All I would say to my hon. Friend is that it is very difficult
responding to an unprecedented challenge of this scale, but over
the past six months people have seen that governing has become a
little easier and we are being able to deliver.
(Bolton South East) (Lab) [V]
In February, I called for localised, community-based vaccination
centres, and I want to pay tribute to Dr Helen Wall, Bolton’s
clinical commissioning group, the NHS and volunteers for the
roll-out of the vaccine. Last week, my constituents were wrongly
accused of vaccine hesitancy, and then we had a quasi-lockdown
that no one knew about and many people’s travel plans were thrown
into chaos. My constituents can forgive the Government for that,
but I am sure I speak for the country when I say that we cannot
forgive the fact that:
“Tens of thousands of people died, who didn't need to die”.
Those were the chilling words of . Will the Secretary of State tell me when the Prime
Minister and others will be investigated by the police for
alleged corporate manslaughter? Why did we not follow the example
of New Zealand, where they managed to control the virus with a
minimum number of deaths?
What I would say to the people of Bolton is that they have again
risen to this challenge. The number of vaccinations happening in
Bolton right now is phenomenal—tens of thousands every single
day. It is heartening to see the queues of people coming forward
both for testing and for vaccinations in Bolton. This has not
been an easy pandemic anywhere, but it has been especially
difficult in Bolton. In particular I want to pay tribute to the
leadership of Bolton Council and Councillor David Greenhalgh, who
has done such a remarkable job in very difficult circumstances.
(North Devon) (Con) [V]
I thank my right hon. Friend for visiting North Devon District
Hospital this week, where he personally thanked the wonderful
staff and discussed future development plans. While this
Government have worked tirelessly to save lives and protect our
NHS, Labour has spent the past year flip-flopping over curfews,
lockdowns, schools and our borders, and I am sure he shares my
disappointment that even now the Labour party is still more
interested in playing politics than working constructively with
us. So may I seek his reassurance that as we emerge from the
pandemic he is committed to lowering NHS waiting times and
improving access to vital GP services, as he continues to make
sure that everybody who need care gets care?
Absolutely I am. GP access, in particular, is very important.
This morning, I met the British Medical Association and the BMA
GP leadership to talk about what more we can do to strengthen
access to GPs. These are the sorts of things that matter to our
constituents, as does the new hospital that we are going to build
in my hon. Friend’s constituency. It was a wonderful visit to
Devon on Tuesday, and it has been great going around the country
to look at what we can do to invest further in the NHS,
strengthen it and support it to deliver better care. North Devon
does not have a better champion than my hon. Friend. As for what
she said about the Opposition, all I can say is that sometimes
the right hon. Member for Leicester South () offers constructive criticism, he has generally had
a good crisis and perhaps he will return to that approach soon.
(Twickenham) (LD) [V]
In the words of the Prime Minister’s former chief adviser:
“Quite the opposite of putting a shield around them, we sent
people with covid back to the care homes.”
If that is true, this is one of the biggest scandals and
tragedies of the pandemic. Can the Secretary of State please
confirm when testing on discharge from hospitals into care homes
was routinely offered? Will he apologise to the tens of thousands
of bereaved family members whose relatives died in care homes?
It has been an incredibly difficult time for those who have
worked in and lived in care homes throughout this pandemic. That
has been true across the world, and I pay tribute to the staff in
social care who have done so much. It was, of course, a difficult
challenge, especially at the start when many characteristics of
this virus were unknown. As I have answered many times in this
House, we have published full details of the approach that we are
taking and that we have taken. We have worked with the care home
sector as much as possible to keep people safe and followed the
clinical advice on the appropriate way forward.
(Forest of Dean) (Con)
May I take the Secretary of State back to what he said in his
statement about the B1617.2 variant first discovered in India,
which I think will be of the most concern to my constituents and
the country in the days and weeks ahead? We are bound to see an
increase in cases as we open up; that is inevitable. The
important thing is breaking that link between cases,
hospitalisations and deaths. My understanding of all the current
evidence is that our vaccines are very effective in stopping
serious disease, including from that B1617.2 variant. If that
remains the case, does he agree that, on 15 June, there would be
no reason not to go ahead with opening up fully on 21 June? That
is the important question to which we need an answer.
That is literally the most important question to which we do not
yet have a full answer. The data that we have suggest that, in
the hotspot areas, around one in 10 of those in hospital are
people who have had both jabs. That is a function both of the
protection that we get from the vaccine against this variant and
also of the age profile of those who are catching the disease.
Those who have not been vaccinated include those who are old
enough to have been offered the jab and those who have not yet
been offered the jab. The fact that 90% of the people in hospital
are those who have not yet been double vaccinated gives us a high
degree of confidence that the vaccine is highly effective, but
the fact that 10% of people in hospital have been double
vaccinated shows that the vaccine is not 100% effective. We
already knew that, but we are better able to calibrate as we see
these data. We will learn more about this over the forthcoming
week or two before we make and publish an assessment ahead of 14
June about what the data are saying about taking the step that is
pencilled in for not before 21 June.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State for all that he has done to deal
with the coronavirus disease and for the roll-out of the vaccine.
My mother-in-law died last year from the virus. On Monday, she
was taken to hospital, and five days later we lost her. I want to
put it on record that we do not blame anybody, but we miss her
every single day.
There are those in Northern Ireland who have questions to which
they need answers. Our Prime Minister has committed himself to an
inquiry, and the Secretary of State has committed himself to that
inquiry. I want to ensure that those people from Northern Ireland
who have lost loved ones and who have sincere questions can ask
their questions—they do not want to blame anybody—and get an
answer. Will the Secretary of State assure us that people from
Northern Ireland who have those questions can and will be part of
that inquiry?
Yes, of course. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman, like me, will
welcome the fact that this morning Northern Ireland has been able
to open up vaccination to all adults over the age of 18, showing
the progress that we are able to make working together with the
UK vaccination programme and local delivery through the
Department of Health in Northern Ireland. Of course the inquiry
must and will cover the entire United Kingdom. In the three
nations that have devolved Administrations, of course it will
have to cover the activities both of the UK Government and of the
devolved Administrations. Exactly how that is structured is yet
to be determined and it will be done in consultation with the
devolved Administrations. But as he rightly says, it is vital
that we use the inquiry to ensure that people can ask questions
and get answers in all parts of the United Kingdom.
(St Ives) (Con) [V]
Everyone recognises that lessons can be learned as a result of
this pandemic and we do not necessarily need to wait for the
inquiry to take place. Does the Secretary of State share my view
that integration of health and social care is critical and would
absolutely be a lesson to be learned from the pandemic? I was
delighted to welcome him to the Isles of Scilly on Monday—the
first visit of a Health Secretary, we understand, at any time.
Will he affirm that the model that we are developing on the Isles
of Scilly to integrate health and social care and improve the
outcomes for everyone living there is right for the islands but
also a model that could be used elsewhere across the United
Kingdom?
Yes, absolutely. It was an enormous pleasure to go to the Isles
of Scilly on Monday morning. I did not know that I was the first
Health Secretary ever to visit the Isle of Scilly, but frankly it
is so wonderful that I would really quite like to be back there
before too long. The integration of health and social care that
my hon. Friend mentions is happening on Scilly. It is important
on Scilly, but it is actually a lesson for everywhere. I have
discussed it with the new Conservative-led Cornwall Council—the
first ever majority Conservative-led Cornwall Council. The team
there and on the Isles of Scilly are doing a great job of
integrating health and social care. Scilly, in particular, needs
investment in its health infrastructure and support because it is
more remote than almost anywhere else. We will deliver these
things. Throughout the length and breadth of this country, we
will invest in the NHS and integrate health and social care. The
Isles of Scilly could hope for no better advocate than my hon.
Friend.
(Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath) (Alba) [V]
Yesterday’s revelations have only served to reinforce what many
have suspected: a tale of chaos, deception, dishonesty and
failure, including the reckless suggestion of herd immunity and
chickenpox parties. While so many watched aghast, the Secretary
of State chose to respond to these very serious allegations by
claiming he had been too busy saving lives to even bother. My
enduring memory of the Secretary of State yesterday will be of
him quite literally running away from his responsibilities.
I want to focus on one vitally important matter that emerged
yesterday regarding deaths in care homes. Did the Secretary of
State, as alleged, categorically tell Mr Cummings and unspecified
others that people would be tested before being transferred into
care homes? If he did not, why then was transfer without testing
the adopted policy across England and the devolved Governments,
including Scotland? On 17 October last year, I asked the
Secretary of State to consider tendering his resignation. Surely
if all these allegations are substantiated, he must do so.
So many of the allegations yesterday were unsubstantiated. The
hon. Gentleman’s most important point was that the Scottish
Government, with their responsibilities for social care, had to
respond to the same challenges and dilemmas as we did, as did
other countries across Europe and across the world. We were
driving incredibly hard as one United Kingdom to increase testing
volumes. We successfully increased testing volumes, including
through the important use of the 100,000 testing target, which
had a material impact on accelerating the increase in testing,
and because of this increased testing we were able to spread the
use of tests more broadly. It was the same challenge for the
Administration in Edinburgh as it was here in Westminster, and
the best way to rise to these challenges is to do so working
together.
Mr Speaker
We have a connection problem with the line to so we will
go straight to .
(Brighton, Pavilion) (Green) [V]
The families of the bereaved deserve better than the grotesque
pantomime of the Cummings evidence session yesterday. At the very
least, they deserve the publication of the internal lessons
learned review. A constituent of mine whose father died from
covid acquired in hospital wrote to me to say that the refusal to
release it is
“an insult to bereaved family members, who, in the midst of our
own suffering, are determined to prevent other families from
experiencing the loss we have”.
She is right because the big question is not just about mistakes
the Government made last March, but why Ministers never learn
from those errors and continue on a path that risks lives and
livelihoods. The Secretary of State says he is being straight
with the public and this House, so as continued Government
negligence risks a third wave of the pandemic, will he finally
publish that review urgently, not least so that it can be
scrutinised before restrictions are due to be lifted next month?
Of course, we learn lessons all the way through and we follow the
scientific developments that teach us more about this virus all
the way through, and then we will also have a full inquiry
afterwards to make sure that we can learn further lessons for the
future. The thing I did not quite understand about the hon.
Lady’s question is why she did not refer to the single most
important programme that is saving lives, which is the
vaccination programme. She should be urging her constituents and
others to come forward and get the jab because that is our way
out of this pandemic.
(Redcar) (Con)
Thanks to this Government and the vaccine taskforce led by Kate
Bingham, it is Britain that has led the way in vaccinations and
it is Britain that has given so much to the world through our
vaccination technology and innovation. Globally, over 1 billion
jabs have now been given, most of them Pfizer, Moderna or
Oxford-AstraZeneca, and it is this Government who backed Oxford
university with over £60 million of funding to give the gift of
hope to the world. So may I thank the Secretary of State for his
efforts and his remarkable achievements in this regard, and may I
ask him when he thinks the Teesside vaccine, Novavax, will be
approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory
Agency?
The last point is very tempting, but I will leave it to the
independent regulator to make that decision and determine its
timing—but we are all very excited about the progress of the
Teesside vaccine, as my hon. Friend calls it, the Novavax
vaccine. He is also right to raise the point about vaccinations
around the world. The UK can be very proud of having played such
a critical role because of the investment we made in the
Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine right at the start of this pandemic,
and because we decided together with Oxford university and
AstraZeneca to make this vaccine available at cost around the
world. I can give the House an update: over 450 million doses of
the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine have now been deployed around the
world at cost. That is the single biggest gift to the world that
we could make with respect to vaccines. It is because of the
attitude that the Government took, working with one of our
greatest universities and working with one of our greatest
industrial partners. It is another example of the big team effort
that is helping in this case the whole world get out of this
pandemic.
(Bedford)
(Lab) [V]
At Prime Minister’s Question Time in July, I raised concerns of a
care home owner in Bedford who was told as late as 21 May that,
if she refused to accept the return from hospital of a
covid-positive patient, they would be discharged to an unfamiliar
home. I know the Secretary of State is desperate to dismiss Mr
Cummings’ version of events on care homes, but to do so would
mean calling the care home owner a liar. Who is responsible for
the high numbers of unnecessary deaths: the Health Secretary or
the Prime Minister?
As I said, we have answered this question many times before. What
I would add to those answers is that it is another example of
constantly learning about the virus. As we learned the impact of
asymptomatic transmission in particular, we changed the protocols
in care homes over the summer and put in place the winter plan
that led to a greater degree of protection in care homes over the
second peak. We are constantly looking to make sure that we can
learn as much as possible and work with the sector to help people
to stay as safe as possible.
(Bolton North
East) (Con) [V]
Mr Speaker,
“When it comes to the Health Secretary, I’m a fan.”
Those are not my effusive words; they come from some of the
highest levels among our health team in Bolton. Like colleagues
on both sides of the House, we have been on countless calls with
the Health Secretary, with upwards of 100 MPs on many occasions.
As he has done today, he has taken the time to respond or come
back after each and every interaction with helpful advice and
solutions. I say this in private, I say it in public, and I say
it—this is a plug—in the “Red Box” in The Times today: these last
two weeks, he has thrown his Department’s kitchen sink at Bolton
to help us through the recent variant-driven spike. Can he
provide an update on the current situation, as well as giving a
continued commitment to work hard for Bolton?
Mr Speaker
I presume it’s your red box the hon. Gentleman refers to,
Secretary of State.
There are issues around Bolton in my red box very regularly, Mr
Speaker. I was waiting on tenterhooks to find out whether, as
well as his constituent being a fan, my hon. Friend is a
fan—maybe he can tell me later in private. But he makes a very
serious point: we have a significant challenge in Bolton right
now, with a high rate of covid transmission, and we have done
everything we possibly can to support Boltonians to solve this
problem with increased vaccination. It is great to see the huge
enthusiasm for vaccination and the queues of people coming
forward. I say to everybody in Bolton, “Please come forward if
you have not had both jabs yet.” Also, the testing effort, which
has seen people come forward and get tested, is helping us to
break the chains of transmission. That is the approach that we
are trying to take now that we have built this huge vaccine and
testing infrastructure over the past few months.
(Warwick and Leamington) (Lab) [V]
The Secretary of State claims that he has always been straight,
yet his response to my question last week suggests otherwise.
Remember, he was not straight over the need for higher-grade FFP3
masks for our frontline NHS and care workers, he was not straight
over the need for the public to wear masks at the start of the
pandemic, and he has not been straight over Test and Trace, for
example with his fabricated test numbers last April. Given
yesterday’s revelations, however, will he apologise to
Warwickshire families for the 344 excess deaths resulting from
his decision to discharge hospital patients directly into our
care homes?
I do not recognise those figures, but I do recognise the enormous
challenge of keeping people safe in care homes at the height of a
pandemic in unprecedented circumstances. The other thing that I
would say is that in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency we are
building one of the biggest testing laboratories, if not the
biggest, that this country has ever seen. The ability to have
this huge testing capacity is an asset that this country has. It
will mean not only that we can help to tackle the virus now, spot
the new variants and make sure that we have an understanding of
where it might be popping up—such as in Bolton, for instance—but
that we are better prepared in future. I would like to work with
the hon. Gentleman to deliver this brilliant laboratory in
Leamington Spa and make sure that it is a model for how we do
diagnostics. That working together is the best approach that we
can take.
(South West
Wiltshire) (Con) [V]
How does my right hon. Friend account for the yawning difference
between the account given to the Select Committee yesterday and
rehearsed by the Opposition today, and the balanced and objective
accounts that continue to be given by the National Audit Office
on this pandemic, notably the one published earlier this month
detailing the Government’s response to the pandemic? May I ask
specifically how he will take forward one of the principal
recommendations of that report—that we need to plan for a
sustainable healthcare workforce that can be organised at pace in
the event of a future emergency of this sort, and that we
particularly need individuals who are properly skilled and
updated to fill gaps that may arise as a result of a future
pandemic?
My right hon. Friend is quite right on both points. Not only have
we been transparent and accountable to this House, and straight
with this House about the challenges, but we have welcomed the
National Audit Office into Government throughout the pandemic,
and it has published repeatedly. For instance, it published on
personal protective equipment, showing that we successfully
avoided a national outage of PPE. It has reported on every aspect
of the pandemic, and we have learned the lessons that are in
those reports. I recommend to the House the National Audit
Office’s latest publication, which summarises all these lessons
and learnings. My right hon. Friend is absolutely right that one
of those is making sure that we have high-quality workforce
planning for the future.
(Hazel Grove) (Con)
Has my right hon. Friend noted the various ironies of yesterday’s
Committee? It must be personally difficult for him and others who
needlessly defended someone so willing to throw them into the
road—presumably a road full of those behind the wheel testing
their eyesight. But is not the greater irony the strange epiphany
in many who have gone from regarding the Prime Minister’s former
adviser as a latter-day King Herod whose words and deeds could
not be trusted, to regarding him as a prophet who, fresh from the
wilderness, brings with him supposed truths written on tablets of
stone? Irony of ironies, all is irony.
I think what the constituents we serve are looking for is a
Government who are focused four-square on delivering for them,
getting us out of this pandemic and building back better.
Observations on ironies I will leave to my hon. Friend.
(Glasgow South West) (SNP) [V]
Delaying a public inquiry until 2022 could lead to the rewriting
of memories, the potential loss of key documents and a lack of
full transparency on the decisions that were taken based on the
evidence. Given the seriousness of the testimony of Mr Cummings,
including that statement, the scale of the disaster is so big
that people need to understand how the Government failed them and
learn from it. Does the Secretary of State agree that we need a
quicker start to a public inquiry than the Government currently
plan?
No.
(Wellingborough)
(Con)
What do we know about the Secretary of State? We know that he is
exceptionally hard-working, and that every day he woke up to try
to save lives. He has been exceptionally good at coming to the
House and answering questions. He has also held press conferences
and answered questions from journalists. Yet yesterday, we had
some outrageous claims by an unelected Spad who broke covid
regulations, admitted he had leaked stuff to the BBC, and by his
own admission was not fit to be in No. 10 Downing Street. Does
the Secretary of State agree that the only mistake the Prime
Minister made in this pandemic was that he did not fire early enough?
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for that question. I will
continue to compliment him while I think of how to respond. The
honest truth is that, from the start, I have been totally focused
on how to get out of this pandemic. It is absolutely true that
the operation and functioning of Government has got easier these
last six months, and I think all the public can see that. We are
laser focused on getting through this, getting this country out
of it and delivering the vaccine programme that we have now been
working on for almost a year and a half, which is remarkable. I
pay tribute to all those who have been working on this effort.
The way to fight a pandemic is by bringing people together and
inspiring hope.
(Bethnal Green
and Bow) (Lab) [V]
Five hundred and nineteen residents in my borough of Tower
Hamlets have lost their lives to covid—in my own family, we have
lost five of our relatives—and their family members are grappling
with that loss to this day. The hearings yesterday were
incredibly distressing. Mr Cummings has admitted to Government
failures in handling the pandemic, and said that it meant
“tens of thousands of people died who did not need to die”.
Out of respect for the over 128,000 families of people who have
lost their lives, will the Secretary of State admit to the
failures today and apologise? Will he, instead of his simple no
to the earlier question, bring forward urgently the date of the
inquiry, because families like ours, those of my constituents and
all those who have lost loved ones up and down the country
deserve answers now and deserve for lessons to be learned so that
these mistakes are never made again?
The pandemic has taken far too many people away far too soon, and
that has happened in the hon. Member’s family and it has happened
in mine. She is absolutely right that we need to ensure that we
learn as a country how to prepare as well as we possibly can for
pandemics in the future—because it is likely that pandemics will
become more frequent, not less—and it is vital that people have
the opportunity to get answers. We must learn the lessons all the
way through, not just wait until afterwards, and we must have a
full inquiry afterwards, so that we can ensure that every detail
is assessed and everybody has the opportunity to ask those
questions. I think that is the right approach.
(Bolsover)
(Con)
On Sunday, I had the absolute joy of going to the Winding Wheel
in Chesterfield and receiving my first vaccine. Will my right
hon. Friend thank all the volunteers and staff at the Winding
Wheel for what they have been doing? Can he tell me what
monitoring has been happening at the Department of Health of an
outbreak of opportunism and revisionism that seems to be
spreading through Opposition politicians? If it helps, I have an
idea of who patient zero might be for that outbreak—Captain
Hindsight, if you will.
I am absolutely delighted my hon. Friend has had his first jab; I
did not know he was old enough yet. It is very important that you
take decisions in government based on the information that you
have at the time. Of course, you can go and assess things based
on information you have afterwards, but you can only take
decisions on the information that you have, and that is why an
unprecedented crisis like this leads to unprecedented challenges,
and what you have to do is tackle those challenges as best you
possibly can.
(Worsley and Eccles South) (Lab) [V]
At the start of this pandemic, covid-19 was seeded into care
homes by a discharge policy that required care homes to take
asymptomatic patients. A letter from Kent and Medway CCG to care
providers dated 26 March 2020 made it clear that they were asked
to take such patients whether they had been tested or not.
Yesterday, the joint Select Committee inquiry heard that the
Prime Minister was told by the Secretary of State that testing
would be in place for these patients. I am asking quite
specifically: did he know that the discharge process did not
require testing, and did he sign off this policy, which led to
thousands of avoidable deaths of vulnerable people and many
deaths of care staff?
I have answered this question many times, and the challenge is
that we had to build the testing capacity. At that time, of
course I was focused on protecting people in care homes and in
building that testing capacity, so that we had the daily tests to
be able to ensure that availability was more widespread. That is
at the heart of the importance of the then 100,000 target, and we
are now up to a position where we have millions of tests
available per day.
(Sutton
Coldfield) (Con)
Surely it cannot be in anyone’s interests, least of all those who
are mourning loved ones, for the mob to descend and judge and
preoccupy my right hon. Friend at this point in the pandemic. The
Government have made clear that there will be a full public
inquiry, and that is when hindsight can and should prevail. Now,
surely, it is in all our interests that he gets on with his work,
bringing his experience to bear on saving lives and carrying out
this excellent vaccination programme. Will he meet a cross-party
delegation of West Midlands metropolitan leaders who are keen to
work with him to deliver those common objectives?
Yes, those are common objectives. The way my right hon. Friend
puts it is absolutely spot on. I would be delighted to meet him
and west midlands leaders to ensure we can roll out the
vaccination effort as quickly and as effectively as possible in
order to both save lives and get us out of this pandemic.
(Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op) [V]
Is the Secretary of State aware that, by and large, many of us
who have been in Parliament for a long time prefer Select
Committee inquiries to public inquiries, because we get a faster
and sharper look at a problem while the evidence is fresh? I know
he has been very good at coming back quickly to Members of
Parliament, including myself in Huddersfield in Kirklees.
However, last week was not as good as possible. It seemed that he
did not give us a heads-up and we were very much taken aback by
the new advice given to local authorities like mine.
One last point: the fact of the matter is that this pandemic and
these viruses have not gone away. The disturbing thing that came
out of yesterday’s evidence was that there seemed not to have
been any national plan for this sort of emergency. Every local
authority has an emergency plan. Have we now got one?
Of course, we have learned a huge amount about how to respond to
a pandemic. We have built assets and capabilities such as the
vaccination programme and the testing, which is so important both
to protect people directly and break the chains of transmission,
and to understand where the virus is spreading.
I am glad that we cleared up the issue the hon. Gentleman raised
with respect to Kirklees. I worked with colleagues in Kirklees
and elsewhere while I was in the west country to make sure that
we got the best possible solution to the need in Kirklees: to
have a turbocharge on the vaccination programme, to have mass
testing to break the chains of transmission, and for people to be
cautious and take personal responsibility as we lift measures to
make sure that things stay under control.
I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he said about
me personally, and for the leadership he has shown in his
community.
(Bosworth) (Con) [V]
Yesterday, our Committee meeting was supposed to be about lessons
learned. In that spirit, we know that the World Health
Organisation stated on 14 January that there was no human
transmission. On 11 February, the WHO actually named the virus.
We then know that on 14 February, the European Centre for Disease
Prevention and Control, in update No. 4, stated that the risk to
health systems in the EU and the UK was “low to moderate” and the
risk to the population was “low”. We also know that the UK had a
plan, but it was mainly based around flu, not brand new viruses.
Look at where we are now. Is not the biggest lesson learned that
we need a global response and a global resilience plan? Will the
Health Secretary be pushing the Prime Minister to make that case
at the G7, when we host it here in the UK in June?
I think that is one of the lessons. I do not need to push the
Prime Minister on that; he is absolutely seized of the point. We
will be developing the work on that next week at the Health
Ministers G7, which is being held in Oxford, and then, of course,
at the leaders’ summit which is being held in Cornwall later next
month. My hon. Friend is absolutely right in the view he takes as
to the importance of reforming and strengthening the global
institutions, as well as learning the lessons here at home.
(Glasgow North) (SNP)
The Secretary of State spoke earlier about the donation of
surplus vaccines and other PPE and medical equipment to India and
other developing countries. How does that square with the
Government’s determination to cut their overall contribution to
international aid? Are those donations being counted towards the
0.7% or 0.5% targets and, if they are, can he assure us that that
will not be to the detriment of other projects that were already
committed towards those targets?
Of course we are donating items directly—for instance, to India,
Nepal and others—but the single biggest global contribution that
the UK has made is the Oxford vaccine, which is being delivered
at cost by AstraZeneca around the world following funding from
Oxford, AstraZeneca and the UK Government. That has already led
to 450 million jabs globally, two thirds of which are in low and
middle-income countries. Everybody, in all parts of this country,
should be proud of that, and there was Scottish support in the
development of that vaccine. Of course, we will do as much as we
can within the official development assistance budget directly,
but that decision to waive the intellectual property charge has
been called for from others—from President Biden down—but it is
something that we in this House and the whole country should be
very proud of.
(Winchester) (Con)
The vaccine roll-out is going really well in my area and I cannot
help but note that the turning of the tide against covid, because
of that roll-out, seemed to exactly mirror the turning of the
year. Is not it the case that, far from the world being divided
into people who are either useless or brilliant and the British
state failing at every turn, we have a Government in this country
who did their best and a public who came together, as always in
the UK, when the chips were down?
My hon. Friend, who was a superb Health Minister, has captured
not just the spirit of what this country has been through in the
last 18 months, but the spirit of the debate today in this House.
The truth of the matter is that we work best when we work
together, and we work together when we have a common mission, and
the common mission has been tackling this virus. It is absolutely
true that we must always do that with an open mind on how to do
it better in future, but, in my view, the attitude needed is one
where you welcome people in and take things forward in a spirit
of positive partnership. That is how you get stuff done, and that
is how we have made the progress we have been able to make.
