Covid Counter-Fraud Commissioner

Question

Asked by

To ask His Majesty’s Government when they expect to receive a report from the Covid Counter-Fraud Commissioner.

My Lords, Tom Hayhoe has been appointed Covid Counter-Fraud Commissioner. He will use every means possible to recover public money lost in pandemic-related fraud and ensure that that money is returned to public services. At the end of this year, the commissioner will provide a report, which will be presented to Parliament, outlining his findings on PPE procurement and other areas of Covid fraud, as well as identifying lessons and recommendations for government procurement in the face of future crises.

I am grateful to my noble friend for that, but there seems to be some confusion about whether, after his all too short 12 months, the commissioner should report to Parliament on lessons to be learned for future pandemics, or whether he should report according to his job description: regularly, to the public and Parliament, about how much of the £8 billion—not just from Michelle Mone and the VIP lane but many others—has been recovered. Can we have an assurance that the public and Parliament will be told regularly how much of that money has been recovered?

I am grateful to my noble friend for his question, and he is absolutely right. We promised that we would act on the fraud and waste that took place during the Covid pandemic. Let us remember that billions of pounds were handed out to friends and donors of the Conservative Party, including a £40 million contract awarded to the then Health Secretary’s local pub landlord. Billions more were defrauded from the taxpayer, and more than £1 billion was spent on PPE that either did not arrive or was not fit for purpose.

On entering government, we found £674 million of contracts in dispute, but we inherited a recommendation from the previous Government that any attempt to reclaim that money should be abandoned. That is unacceptable. The Chancellor has instead put a block on any contract being abandoned or waived until it has been independently reviewed by the commissioner, and she will absolutely ensure that regular reports are given to Parliament, as my noble friend asks, on the progress of that work.

Can the Minister confirm that his colleague, the anti-corruption Minister, resigned over allegations of corruption, and can he please tell the House what assistance His Majesty’s Government or the police are giving to the authorities in Bangladesh investigating this?

I am not sure what that has to do with the Question before us, but the Prime Minister and the Minister involved absolutely have set out the circumstances of that case in the letters that they exchanged.

My Lords, does the Minister recognise that a key reason why exposing Covid fraud has been so slow and difficult is the inadequacy of whistleblowing protection, which exposes so many whistleblowers to financial ruin and career destruction? The harm is not tackled by the duty of candour, which is important but is not whistleblower protection. Will the Government please deliver urgent reform as a crucial way not just to solve this problem, but to deter or catch early any kind of future abuse? I recommend to the Minister proposals for an overarching office of the whistleblower.

I am very grateful to the noble Baroness for her question, and I absolutely agree with the underlying point she is making. I met Tom Hayhoe, the Covid Counter-Fraud Commissioner, last Friday, to make sure that I was fully prepared for this Question. I discussed his work with him, and he told me that he is considering a whistleblowing mechanism to enable the public to draw attention to abuses they are aware of. The work he is doing is absolutely in line with what the noble Baroness is asking for.

My Lords, can my noble friend ask the commissioner—and maybe take an interest in this himself—about the shortage of yachts for sale at the end of Covid? I was told by one of these yacht owners—this is not something I have ever indulged in—that he could not buy one for love or money. The reason was that people had been given, in his words, “a lot of money” by the Chancellor, particularly if they were running businesses, and were then able to indulge in buying yachts, to the point where they ran out of opportunities to do so. There was clearly something going on there.

My noble friend clearly knows more yacht owners than I do—I have not discussed this matter with any yacht owners—but I absolutely understand the point he is making about the amount of fraud and abuse that was rampant in the system. The fact that the previous Government decided not to pursue so many of those contracts is not acceptable, which is exactly why we have set up these systems.

My Lords, more seriously, wherever there is fraud in public life, it should be rooted out and punished. Does the Minister agree, therefore, that the best and wisest course is to wait for the outcome of the commissioner’s report, including any recommendations on whistleblowing? A lot was done in a hurry during Covid—some good, some less good. But the worst thing would have been to extend the lockdown for months, as favoured by Sir Keir Starmer.

The commissioner has clearly set out his programme of work. He will work in three phases: first, an assessment of the recovery efforts to date; secondly, a plan for further activity to drive additional recoveries; and thirdly, a consideration of lessons learned and recommendations for future government schemes. The noble Baroness says that we should wait for the outcome of his report; that is perfectly fair, but what I do not understand is why we inherited a recommendation from the previous Government that any attempt to reclaim money should be abandoned. That is surely unacceptable.

My Lords, has not a smokescreen been created here? Can my noble friend guarantee that the commissioner will carry out his full investigations and that, once he has done so, any criminal activity will be referred to the police to take the appropriate action?

I am grateful to my noble friend for his question, but obviously, I cannot say what criminal activity may be uncovered. Certain proceedings and investigations are already ongoing. We would not want to prejudice those proceedings, and nor would the commissioner, but my noble friend is right to say that the commissioner should be allowed to do his work.

My Lords, does the Minister agree that the person investigating must have as much transparency as possible? During this sorry affair, whenever we asked questions, the last Government kept coming back to commercial sensitivity. That excuse should not be used: the public should know how their taxes are being used.

I completely agree with the noble Lord. The underlying point he is making is that we should be able to understand where taxpayers’ money has gone and to recover as much of that as possible, so that it is not lining the fraudsters’ pockets but is funding our public services. That is absolutely what the commissioner’s work is about: identifying where that money has gone and trying to recover as much of it as possible.

Does the Minister agree that the root cause of the fraud was our lack of preparedness for the epidemic, which caused people to rush into contracts? What assurance can he give the House that if there is another pandemic—heaven forbid—even this year, we are ready and would not be open to fraud again?

I am grateful to the noble Baroness for her question. It was certainly one reason; I do not know whether it was the main reason. A pandemic remains the top risk facing the UK, as outlined in the national risk register, and ensuring that the UK is prepared for a future pandemic is a top priority for the Government. We are embedding the lessons learned from the Covid-19 pandemic within our approach to pandemic preparedness. As I understand it, it is clear that the UK did not have enough PPE, for example, in stock when the pandemic hit, and at the Budget we invested £460 million to strengthen the UK’s pandemic preparedness and health protection capabilities. There is also a forthcoming Department of Health and Social Care pandemic preparedness strategy. It will include a new UK-wide respiratory pandemic response plan, which will be tested later this year in a tier 1 national exercise.

My Lords, what inquiries are the Government making into the fraud that the Chinese Communist Government sought to perpetrate, along with certain members of the international medical establishment, to the effect that the Covid virus did not originate in a laboratory in Wuhan?

To be honest, I am not aware of any such investigations.

My Lords, I wish the Government well in their counter-fraud investigations into Covid, because public money is of course of the utmost importance, but there is a clear and present daily problem with government procurement. Some years ago, I did a piece of work with the TaxPayers’ Alliance, looking at the price of photocopy paper across public institutions. It was vastly different: from £1.99 to £5.33 for a ream, within a health trust on the south coast. Can the Minister assure me that work is being done to maximise procurement gains throughout the system?

Yes, I can, and I agree with the noble Lord. At the Budget, the Chancellor launched the Office for Value for Money, which will assess where and how to root out waste and inefficiency and to unlock value-for-money studies in specific high-risk areas of cross-departmental spending, and scrutinise investment proposals to ensure that they offer value for money.