Skip to main content
Show full summary

Lord Tyler to ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Bethell on 26 October (HL8435), why the need to act with “extreme urgency” did not lead them to award a personal protective equipment (PPE) contract directly to the Chinese PPE manufacturers instead of to a company with no experience of an import on this scale, substantial losses in its most recently reported accounts, and significant net monetary liabilities at the time of the contract award.  HL9595

Question HL9595: tabled on 26 October 2020 and due for answer by 9 November 2020

This type of business sits within the Questions & Statements category.

This question has been answered by the relevant Government Department.

Question text

To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by {member id="4708" field="DisplayAs"}{/member} on 26 October (HL8435), why the need to act with “extreme urgency” did not lead them to award a personal protective equipment (PPE) contract directly to the Chinese PPE manufacturers instead of to a company with no experience of an import on this scale, substantial losses in its most recently reported accounts, and significant net monetary liabilities at the time of the contract award.
Legend for business item text
Item that is new or altered.
[I] Indicates that the member concerned has a relevant registered interest.
* Item is an oral question.
Numbers starting HL are unique identifiers for written questions, Bills or papers.

Member's Registered Interests

There are no interests to show.