UK Inquiry Tracker

COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of personal protective equipment

Public Accounts Committee Closed Inquiry

Opened: 22 Oct 2020 Closed: 19 Apr 2021 Parliament page

In responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, public sector bodies have had to procure goods and services with extreme urgency. Under emergency laws brought in at the start of the pandemic crisis, the Cabinet Office - which oversees government’s buying policies - has changed some of the procurement rules for contracts … Read more In responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, public sector bodies have had to procure goods and services with extreme urgency. Under emergency laws brought in at the start of the pandemic crisis, the Cabinet Office - which oversees government’s buying policies - has changed some of the procurement rules for contracts relating to the government’s response to COVID-19. Concerns have been raised about some of these procurements, including around a lack of transparency. The NAO has now published two major reports, one on the way government has handled procurement during the COVID-19 pandemic , and one specifically on its procurement and contracts for personal protective equipment (PPE) , including: - How PPE was supplied to NHS and social care organisations before the COVID-19 pandemic started - What government did, between the pandemic emerging in other countries and arriving in the UK, to prepare for the provision of PPE in the NHS and social care organisations - How government responded when problems arose in the supply of PPE - The scale of problems in the availability of PPE throughout the emergency This inquiry will take evidence on both reports, examining the scale of Government’s COVID-19-related contracting, how procurement rules have changed and how the government is managing the risks associated with these changes. For a chosen sample of these contracts it will look specifically at who bought what, from whom, and at what cost, during the pandemic - and whether this is delivering value for taxpayers money in the crisis. In mid-December the Committee will hold two evidence hearings on the findings across both these reports. In the first hearing, the Committee will question representatives of frontline medical and care associations. In the second hearing, the Committee will question senior officials at the Cabinet Office and Department for Health and Social Care. If you have evidence on the issues raised in this inquiry please submit it here before 6.00pm on Monday 7 December. Show less

11 Recommendations

18 Conclusions

1 Report

2 Oral sessions

4 Letters

2 Events

Activity timeline 8 events

10 Sep
2021

Correspondence

Correspondence from Sir Chris Wormald KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Health and Social Care, re PPE Procurement and Supply, dated …

3 Sep
2021

Report published

Treasury minutes: Government response to the Committee of Public Accounts on the Forty-second report from Session 2019-21

10 Jun
2021

Correspondence

Correspondence from Public Accounts Chair Meg Hillier to Sir Chris Wormald KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Health and Social Care, …

20 May
2021

Correspondence

Copy letter sent to various PPE Suppliers in connection to the inquiry COVID-19 Government procurement and supply of protective equipment

14 May
2021

Correspondence

Correspondence from the Department of Health and Social Care on the Committee's 42nd report of Session 2019-21 - COVID-19 Government Procur…

10 Feb
2021

Report published

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment

14 Dec
2020

Oral evidence

COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment

10 Dec
2020

Oral evidence

COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment

Oral evidence sessions 2 sessions

14 Dec 2020

View on parliament.uk

COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment

Alex Chisholm · Cabinet Office David Williams · Daily Mail Gareth Rhys Williams · Crown Commercial Service Jonathan Marron · Department for Health and Social Care Michael Brodie · NHS Business Service Authority

10 Dec 2020

View on parliament.uk

COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment

Dr Chaand Nagpaul · Council of the British Medical Association Dr Emily McWhirter · Royal College of Nursing Gavin Edwards · UNISON Professor Martin Green · Care England

Reports 1 report · click to expand

Title	HC No.	Published	Items	Response
Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Government procurement and suppl…	HC 928	10 Feb 2021	29	Responded

Recommendations & Conclusions

8 results

2 Recommendation Not Addressed

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Go…

While government had plans and a stockpile of PPE, this proved inadequate for the COVID-19...

While government had plans and a stockpile of PPE, this proved inadequate for the COVID-19 pandemic. The Department had a strategy for managing an influenza pandemic, which included a stockpile of PPE owned and managed by Public Health England. In … Read more While government had plans and a stockpile of PPE, this proved inadequate for the COVID-19 pandemic. The Department had a strategy for managing an influenza pandemic, which included a stockpile of PPE owned and managed by Public Health England. In March 2020, NHS England & NHS Improvement gave public assurances to the Health and Social Care Committee that the stockpile would be sufficient to manage the pandemic, but this confidence was misplaced since the stockpile held no more than two-weeks’ worth of most types of PPE. Furthermore, it did not hold all of the planned PPE, such as visors and gowns, and some of the PPE it did hold had expired or did not meet current safety standards. Government and its contractors also struggled to distribute the stockpiled PPE quickly. In response to these problems the Department created a parallel supply chain to buy and distribute PPE. However, because of the time lag between ordering PPE and it being available, this could barely satisfy local organisations’ requirements. Frontline staff in health and social care experienced shortages of PPE, with surveys by staff representative organisations showing that at least 30% of participating care workers, doctors and nurses reported having insufficient PPE, even in high-risk settings. Provider organisations attempted to buy PPE at short notice, in an overheated market, and COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment 7 found they needed to pay hugely inflated prices to suppliers they were unfamiliar with. The PPE from central government was sometimes not usable and providers told us that emergency helplines referred them to suppliers which did not have PPE. Recommendation: The Department must improve its approach to managing and distributing stocks of PPE to ensure the correct equipment gets to those who need it, when they need it. The Department should write to us by July 2021 to confirm that: • Stockpiles hold everything required as specified in the Depa Show less

Government Response

The government response did not address the recommendation about improving PPE management and distribution, instead discussing an unrelated HMRC conclusion.

HM Treasury

View details

3 Recommendation Not Addressed

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Go…

The high-priority lane was not designed well enough to be a wholly effective way of...

The high-priority lane was not designed well enough to be a wholly effective way of sifting credible leads to supply PPE. Government’s PPE buying team, within the parallel supply chain, received over 15,000 offers to supply PPE. This cross- government … Read more The high-priority lane was not designed well enough to be a wholly effective way of sifting credible leads to supply PPE. Government’s PPE buying team, within the parallel supply chain, received over 15,000 offers to supply PPE. This cross- government PPE buying team set up a high-priority lane to separately assess and process high-priority leads that it considered more credible, which sat alongside an ordinary lane to process other leads. Leads that were considered more credible were those from government officials, ministers’ offices, MPs and members of the House of Lords but it is not clear why this assumption was made. The priority lane did not include organisations with expertise in the health and social care sector that had existing relationships with suppliers through their members or directly and were well-placed to assess the credibility of potential PPE suppliers, such as the British Medical Association. Around one in ten suppliers that came through the high-priority lane were awarded a contract compared with one in a hundred for the ordinary lane. There were no written rules to support those making referrals in deciding which leads to put forward. Some of those making referrals that were considered high priority, such as MPs, passed on leads on the basis that others would assess their suitability rather than vouching for the credibility of those offers. The same eight-stage process for assessing and processing offers was applied to both lanes, but the Cabinet Office and the Department accepted that leads that went through the high-priority lane were handled better. Recommendation: The Cabinet Office and the Department should by July 2021 publish the lessons it has learnt from the procurement of PPE during the pandemic for future emergencies and disseminate these lessons to the wider government commercial function. This should include guidance for determining what is considered a credible offer and how this is communicated to potential suppliers. Show less

Government Response

The government response refers to a PAC conclusion about the Home Office breaching its Net Cash Requirement, which is entirely irrelevant and does not address the recommendation on publishing lessons learned from PPE procurement.

HM Treasury

View details

4 Recommendation Not Addressed

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Go…

The Department’s focus on supporting hospitals meant assistance to social care providers was neglected.

The Department’s focus on supporting hospitals meant assistance to social care providers was neglected. The pandemic has shown the tragic impact of delaying much needed social care reform and treating the sector as the NHS’s poor relation. This is an … Read more The Department’s focus on supporting hospitals meant assistance to social care providers was neglected. The pandemic has shown the tragic impact of delaying much needed social care reform and treating the sector as the NHS’s poor relation. This is an issue this Committee has raised concerns about before when we examined 8 COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment the Department’s approach to readying the NHS and social care for the COVID-19 peak, and in our earlier examinations of the interface between health and social care and on the adult social care workforce. The Department provided NHS trusts with 1.9 billion items of PPE between March 2020 and July 2020, equivalent to 80% of their estimated need. In contrast, it provided the adult social care sector with 331 million items of PPE, equivalent to10% of its estimated need. Social care representatives told us their usual suppliers could not provide PPE, in part because some of it was diverted to the NHS, and consequently some providers ran out of PPE. Some 25,000 patients were discharged to care homes from hospitals, some without being tested for COVID-19, even after it became clear that people could transmit the virus without having symptoms. This contributed significantly to the deaths in care homes during the first wave. Social care was only taken seriously after the high mortality rate in care homes became apparent. Key workers outside of health and social care, including transport and supermarket workers, security guards and taxi drivers, were not provided with PPE, yet doing so could have prevented them becoming ill or passing on the virus. Recommendation: The Department should write to the Committee by the end of April 2021 to explain how it will revise its emergency response plans so that they include who will be supported, how and when. This must give appropriate weight to all sectors of health and social care, as well as occupations outside these sectors which are also Show less

Government Response

The government response states that HM Treasury breached its Capital Annually Managed Expenditure total by £32 million, which does not address the recommendation for the Department to explain how it will revise its emergency response plans for various sectors.

HM Treasury

View details

1 Conclusion Not Addressed

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Go…

On the basis of two reports by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence...

On the basis of two reports by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Cabinet Office, Department of Health & Social Care (the Department) and Public Health England about government procurement during the COVID-19 pandemic and the … Read more

Government Response

The government response addresses a different PAC conclusion regarding the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy's expenditure, and does not engage with the substance of this introductory conclusion about the inquiry's scope.

HM Treasury

View details

10 Conclusion Not Addressed

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Go…

The British Medical Association and the Royal College of Nursing told us that their organisations...

The British Medical Association and the Royal College of Nursing told us that their organisations did not have access to the high-priority lane, even though they were being contacted by, and therefore would have been able to put forward, credible … Read more

Government Response

The government response explicitly addresses a recommendation about publishing lessons learned from procurement, which does not address the committee's conclusion about medical associations' lack of access to the high-priority PPE lane.

HM Treasury

View details

14 Conclusion Not Addressed

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Go…

Not all of the PPE the Department bought can be used.

Not all of the PPE the Department bought can be used. The Department told us that only 0.5% of the 18 billion items of PPE it had received and checked so far had failed to meet clinical safety standards and … Read more

Government Response

The government response explicitly addressed PAC recommendation 7a, concerning a detailed breakdown of unusable PPE, rather than the provided committee conclusion about the Department's figures on unusable PPE.

HM Treasury

View details

19 Conclusion Not Addressed

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Go…

The Department told us that it had not been complacent over the stockpiles, but that...

The Department told us that it had not been complacent over the stockpiles, but that COVID-19 was a novel virus and it learned more about it over time. Unlike influenza, COVID-19 can be passed on by people who are not … Read more

Government Response

The government response addressed a different PAC recommendation (PAC recommendation 2) concerning PPE management and distribution, rather than the provided conclusion about the Department's perspective on stockpiles and the nature of COVID-19.

HM Treasury

View details

24 Conclusion Not Addressed

Forty-Second Report - COVID-19: Go…

Witnesses from organisations representing staff working in health and social care told us that providers...

Witnesses from organisations representing staff working in health and social care told us that providers received unusable PPE from central government. The Royal College of Nursing told us of instances where it had received masks on which the elastic was … Read more

Government Response

The government response explicitly addressed PAC recommendation 7a, concerning a detailed breakdown of unusable PPE, rather than the provided committee conclusion about witnesses' experiences with unusable PPE.

HM Treasury

View details

Government Response AI assessment · 29 of 11 classified

Accepted 14

Acknowledged 6

Deferred 1

Not Addressed 8

Total 11 recs + 18 conclusions

Correspondence 4 letters

10 Sep 2021 Correspondence from Sir Chris Wormald KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Health and Social Care, re PPE Procurement and Supply, dated 27 July 2021

Parliament page

10 Jun 2021 Correspondence from Public Accounts Chair Meg Hillier to Sir Chris Wormald KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Health and Social Care, re Following on from COVID-19: Government procurement and supply of Personal Protective Equipment, dated 28 May 2021

Parliament page

20 May 2021 From committee Copy letter sent to various PPE Suppliers in connection to the inquiry COVID-19 Government procurement and supply of protective equipment

Parliament page

14 May 2021 Correspondence from the Department of Health and Social Care on the Committee's 42nd report of Session 2019-21 - COVID-19 Government Procurement and Supply of Personal Protective Equipment

Parliament page