A request by Baroness Michelle Mone and her husband Doug Barrowman to access documents and evidence related to personal protective equipment (PPE) deals during the Covid-19 pandemic has been rejected by the UK Covid-19 Inquiry.
The inquiry’s chairwoman, Baroness Heather Hallett, dismissed the couple’s application, stating that it had been submitted past the deadline and, regardless, she did not accept that they had played a “direct or significant” role in the decisions under investigation.
The decision comes as the UK Covid-19 Inquiry begins a four-week examination into how PPE contracts were awarded during the pandemic.
Mone and Barrowman’s controversial PPE contracts
Baroness Mone, 52, a Conservative peer, and her husband, Mr Barrowman, 59, have been at the centre of controversy regarding the “VIP lane” used by the government to award lucrative PPE contracts to select suppliers.
One such company, PPE Medpro, a consortium led by Mr Barrowman, received government contracts worth over £200 million after being personally recommended by Lady Mone to government ministers.
The couple submitted their application to be recognised as core participants on 27 February 2024, a staggering 468 days past the deadline of 17 November 2023.
Had their application been successful, it would have granted them special privileges, including:
- Access to confidential documents
- The ability to suggest questions
- Advance notice of the inquiry’s findings
However, Lady Hallett ruled against the request, stating:
“I do not accept that applicants have a direct or significant role in the matters to be investigated by the inquiry.
“Whilst Medpro was a significant supplier of PPE to the UK government, it was but one of a number of such suppliers, and there are several other contracts that the inquiry is investigating.”
Evidence about PPE medpro to be heard in private
The inquiry has already ruled that evidence concerning PPE Medpro will be heard in private, due to an ongoing police investigation into the company.
Lady Hallett stated that there would be a risk of prejudicing potential criminal proceedings if “sensitive evidence” was made public.
Bereaved families criticise inquiry’s decision
The inquiry’s decision has drawn sharp criticism from bereaved families, who believe that more transparency is needed.
Naomi Fulop, representing Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK, accused the inquiry of protecting corporations from public scrutiny, stating:
More Read
“The inquiry’s inexplicable decision to protect these corporations from public scrutiny smacks of a potential whitewash and makes achieving real justice for the Covid-19 bereaved families less likely.”
Covid-19 inquiry defends its position
Despite the criticism, the Covid-19 Inquiry has defended its approach, stating that its focus is on how the government handled PPE procurement, rather than investigating individual companies.
A spokesperson for the inquiry clarified:
“The inquiry does not need evidence from individual companies about specific orders of PPE to investigate this issue thoroughly.
“Its focus is on how the government responded to suppliers’ offers. Our role is not to pursue criminal investigations into individuals or suppliers – that is a matter for law enforcement.”
Ongoing investigations into PPE contracts
The VIP lane for PPE procurement, which saw companies with government connections fast-tracked for lucrative contracts, has been widely criticised.
It was later revealed that many of the PPE supplies acquired through these contracts were defective or unusable, resulting in wasted public funds amounting to billions of pounds.
The UK government continues to face scrutiny over the transparency and fairness of its pandemic procurement process, with the Covid-19 Inquiry set to shed further light on decision-making failures in the coming weeks.
The investigation into PPE Medpro and its contracts remains ongoing, with potential criminal proceedings still a possibility.
