Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 16
16
One due diligence check that did not appear to be applied was a consideration of...
Recommendation
One due diligence check that did not appear to be applied was a consideration of potential conflicts of interest on PPE referrals. The Department confirmed that when signing off on these PPE contracts the accounting officer did not normally have any information about the source of the referral.47 It also said that this process was the same regardless of whether the referrals came through the VIP lane or not.48 The very nature 38 Q22 39 C&AG’s report, para 3.12 40 Q84 41 Qq84, 87 42 For example, The Guardian, 29 April 2022 43 Q29 44 Q28 45 Q73 46 C&AG’s Report, para 1.6 47 Q84 48 Q85 Management of PPE contracts 13 of the VIP lane, however, meant that potential conflicts of interest were inherently more likely for VIP lane referrals. Turning again to the example of PPE Medpro, we asked the Department what additional checks were conducted on this company given that the health minister had previously said that the Department was aware of a link between the initial referrer, Baroness Mone, and PPE Medpro. The Department refused to be drawn on the specifics of this case but again reiterated the argument that there would have been no difference in the level of checks conducted between any of the contracts awarded.49 49 Qq84–86 14 Management of PPE contracts 3 The future of the PPE programme SCCL’s role going forward
Government Response
A response document is linked to this report, dated 8 November 2022. Response attribution to this conclusion has not been verified. Read the response document ↗